Risk-Averse Indices

[Sage]

In "Blackjack Attack" by Don Schlesinger he lists 7 indices that are considered Risk Averse. He calls them the Catch 22 Indices.
They are: 8v5, 8v6, 9v7, 10v10, 10vA, 10,10v5, 10,10v6,
Are their any more that should be considered?

 

[Southpaw]

In "Blackjack Attack" by Don Schlesinger he lists 7 indices that are considered Risk Averse. He calls them the Catch 22 Indices.
They are: 8v5, 8v6, 9v7, 10v10, 10vA, 10,10v5, 10,10v6,
Are their any more that should be considered?

When you disregard the infrequency of some soft-doubling plays, it may be worth it to change them as well. A lot of those low soft doubling plays against 3s, 4s (and even a 5 when considering A,2 vs. 5) are just no good from an RA perspective, and their RA indices should be a bit higher than EV-maximizing ones.

As mentioned before, though, soft-doubling plays are rather infrequent, so the benefit of changing your index may be small.

Spaw

 

[FLASH1296]

A-6 vs. Deuce can be considered a Risk Averse play.