Dumbest thing I've heard said at the table
- Thread starter Preston
- Start date
i have read about 5 or 6 books on blackjack, and i have done over 100 hours reading online.. i am aware you stand on a 16 vs 10 when the count is +1+ but if the count is 0 or negative you stand.. are you sure your talking about EIGHT DECKS?.. also, you must be older than 30 kaiser, otherwise you wud know that typing like this is calling pronounciation shorthand, aka, WELCOME TO THE INTERNET.. this isnt a book report.. on the other hand, ppl who talk like this: i tlk lk ths its fstr, are fn retarded
Last edited:
These are the hands I think where one will lose less by standing rather than hitting in an 8D S17 game with a 4 card 16 vs 10 off the top of shoe.
A59A
A942
A933
A852
A843
A7A7
A753
A744
A654
a555
8422
7522
8332
7432
6532
5542
6442
7333
6433
5533
5344
4444
The other 7 or 8 u will lose less by hitting than standing.
A59A
A942
A933
A852
A843
A7A7
A753
A744
A654
a555
8422
7522
8332
7432
6532
5542
6442
7333
6433
5533
5344
4444
The other 7 or 8 u will lose less by hitting than standing.
I wasn't being literal or exact, not really caring to figure it all out.
I just meant that the difference in EV between standing and hitting might be to the 4th decimal in some cases.
And given the frequency that one gets a 4-card 16 vs 10 out of all hands played, it just seems the difference is not worth worrying about from a practical point of view.
Certainly not enough to proclaim someone a ploppy because they might play it differently than you. (See - spelled it out just for you lol. Maybe it wasn't u, can't remember lol).
So if u want to hit all 4-card 16's vs 10, call it "cover" so it seems u know what u r doing
I just meant that the difference in EV between standing and hitting might be to the 4th decimal in some cases.
And given the frequency that one gets a 4-card 16 vs 10 out of all hands played, it just seems the difference is not worth worrying about from a practical point of view.
Certainly not enough to proclaim someone a ploppy because they might play it differently than you. (See - spelled it out just for you lol. Maybe it wasn't u, can't remember lol).
So if u want to hit all 4-card 16's vs 10, call it "cover" so it seems u know what u r doing
How old are you, 16?
The proper composition dependent strategy is to stand on a multi-card 16. I agree with the poster who said you should read more before you come off as a know it all. It'd be wise to just sit back, chill out, and read some of the posts here. There are people posting here with far more experience and knowledge than you, and it's probably best not to get into confrontations with them from the start.
The proper composition dependent strategy is to stand on a multi-card 16. I agree with the poster who said you should read more before you come off as a know it all. It'd be wise to just sit back, chill out, and read some of the posts here. There are people posting here with far more experience and knowledge than you, and it's probably best not to get into confrontations with them from the start.
Kasi said:
I wasn't being literal or exact, not really caring to figure it all out.
I just meant that the difference in EV between standing and hitting might be to the 4th decimal in some cases.
And given the frequency that one gets a 4-card 16 vs 10 out of all hands played, it just seems the difference is not worth worrying about from a practical point of view.
Certainly not enough to proclaim someone a ploppy because they might play it differently than you. (See - spelled it out just for you lol. Maybe it wasn't u, can't remember lol).
So if u want to hit all 4-card 16's vs 10, call it "cover" so it seems u know what u r doing
I just meant that the difference in EV between standing and hitting might be to the 4th decimal in some cases.
And given the frequency that one gets a 4-card 16 vs 10 out of all hands played, it just seems the difference is not worth worrying about from a practical point of view.
Certainly not enough to proclaim someone a ploppy because they might play it differently than you. (See - spelled it out just for you lol. Maybe it wasn't u, can't remember lol).
So if u want to hit all 4-card 16's vs 10, call it "cover" so it seems u know what u r doing
Last edited:
im 23 (your not too smart if you think im 16, as 16 year olds cant gamble), and i have read A LOT, and 90% of the things ive said on here are correct, its just that this is one of those small things, and ive been playing by total dependent strategy not composition dependent, and if you havent noticed, there are a lot of people on here that have NO IDEA what they are doing, and asking things like "can dealers split or double down?", thus i assumed that this was another one of those crazy things that is completely wrong that som1 pulled out of their ass, but then when others started agreeing, i looked it up, but its not big deal.. and your supposed to act like a know it all on this site, wtf do u think ppl are doing when they tell som1 they are wrong? or when som1 asks for advice and they come back with a super detailed post?
Last edited:
Keep in mind Basic Strategy (total-dependent) is just that and based on as if the dealer card and your 2 cards are the first dealt off the top of the shoe.
So the overall "correct play" is based on all 2-card combinations put together.
So, while even in a 6D, S17 game it might be correct to hit a 10,2 vs 4 but not a 9,3 or 7,5 or 8,4 vs 4, overall you are better off standing on all 12 totals vs 4 in that game.
I'm sure if you saw someone hit a 10,2 vs 4 in an 8D game, u'd be screaming at them for making the "wrong" play. But, in that case, you'd be "wrong" by maybe 1/10000 of your bet (I think!).
As far as your 16 vs 10 goes, it's basically the same thing. Afterall, if you were dealt an 853 vs 10 in an 8D game your RC would be +1 and your TC would be positive if u card-counted. So, just like card-counting says, you would stand. Not always quite that simple though but it might give you an idea. Basically, over all the 3-card combinations of 16 vs 10, though some of them one should hit and some of them one should stand, if one wants to amend "Basic Strategy" to say "always hit all 3-card 16/s vs 10 in an 8D S17 game", one would be "correct" and that's fine.
If one wanted to learn which of those 3-card combinations were hits and which weren't, one would be "more correct".
Just that it doesn't make a practical difference - although I would recommend learning a few comp-dependent plays in one and two deck games because the difference is greater.
Moral - it might be helpful to know the "really close" plays that while, "correct", just don't mean a whole lot. One, it might be good for potential cover and also for knowing it's really not worth "correcting" someone because they made the "wrong" play.
So the overall "correct play" is based on all 2-card combinations put together.
So, while even in a 6D, S17 game it might be correct to hit a 10,2 vs 4 but not a 9,3 or 7,5 or 8,4 vs 4, overall you are better off standing on all 12 totals vs 4 in that game.
I'm sure if you saw someone hit a 10,2 vs 4 in an 8D game, u'd be screaming at them for making the "wrong" play. But, in that case, you'd be "wrong" by maybe 1/10000 of your bet (I think!).
As far as your 16 vs 10 goes, it's basically the same thing. Afterall, if you were dealt an 853 vs 10 in an 8D game your RC would be +1 and your TC would be positive if u card-counted. So, just like card-counting says, you would stand. Not always quite that simple though but it might give you an idea. Basically, over all the 3-card combinations of 16 vs 10, though some of them one should hit and some of them one should stand, if one wants to amend "Basic Strategy" to say "always hit all 3-card 16/s vs 10 in an 8D S17 game", one would be "correct" and that's fine.
If one wanted to learn which of those 3-card combinations were hits and which weren't, one would be "more correct".
Just that it doesn't make a practical difference - although I would recommend learning a few comp-dependent plays in one and two deck games because the difference is greater.
Moral - it might be helpful to know the "really close" plays that while, "correct", just don't mean a whole lot. One, it might be good for potential cover and also for knowing it's really not worth "correcting" someone because they made the "wrong" play.
If 90% of what you've said here is correct,it means 10% of what you've said is wrong.A ploppy playing BJ for the first time will get about 95% of the plays right,but we laugh at him for being wrong 5% of the time. You are twice his mistake level by your own admission.
If you want to learn,this is a great site. But if you want to tell us how much you know,yet are wrong 10% of the time,don't waste our time.
If you want to learn,this is a great site. But if you want to tell us how much you know,yet are wrong 10% of the time,don't waste our time.
do you think im a ploppy? it doesnt matter what others do at the table, so the person who accuses others at the table is wrong, regardless of the move made (but depending on the move, it can make the person look twice as stupid).. also, i know what dependent and composition strategies are, no need to explain.. and in 1-2 decks the difference is huge, and you must play by composition bs, otherwise you are losing out bigtime, and im surprised bs engines like the one on this site dont have at least a simple composition based strategy for at least 1 deck games
Sorry for explaining - I just thought when you said "its just that i cant believe in like 5 books i didnt see that talked about once.. im guessing the reason why is because its a really really small difference, but from now on are you saying i should stand if my hand is a 3+ card 16?" that you hadn't heard too much about it.
And, by the way, the difference in gain in 1-2 decks of employing comp-dependent strategy, while more than in shoes, is still very small.
But one girlfriend's "huge" is another's "very small" lol.
I don't even know what a ploppy is. If anything I think you're a young guy trying to learn more about BJ. Nothing wrong with that.
And, by the way, the difference in gain in 1-2 decks of employing comp-dependent strategy, while more than in shoes, is still very small.
But one girlfriend's "huge" is another's "very small" lol.
I don't even know what a ploppy is. If anything I think you're a young guy trying to learn more about BJ. Nothing wrong with that.
