Up to Date Basic Strategy
- Thread starter WorkIsPlay
- Start date
Some confusing posts on this thread. According to Wizard of Odds, hitting 12 v. 4 with "American rules" and 1 - 8 decks is never the total-dependent correct BS (either H17 or S17). http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/strategy/4deck.html
There are certainly many, many composition-dependent changes to BS, but who cares? The Wizard states that playing a perfect composition-dependent game "gives the player an extra 0.036% with a single deck. That will result in one extra bet about once every 2,800 hands. The benefit quickly tapers off after one deck." http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/appendix15.html
At 6 decks, the reduction in HA is not even one-tenth that. Id. Call it one bet in 30,000 hands. For me, and I play a lot, that's one bet per year. I'll give up one bet per year to avoid the brain damage of composition-dependent BS :grin:
There are certainly many, many composition-dependent changes to BS, but who cares? The Wizard states that playing a perfect composition-dependent game "gives the player an extra 0.036% with a single deck. That will result in one extra bet about once every 2,800 hands. The benefit quickly tapers off after one deck." http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/appendix15.html
At 6 decks, the reduction in HA is not even one-tenth that. Id. Call it one bet in 30,000 hands. For me, and I play a lot, that's one bet per year. I'll give up one bet per year to avoid the brain damage of composition-dependent BS :grin:
I don't believe so, Flash. Even in single deck if all 12s are considered using their weighted average then its best to stand on 12 versus 4. In other words if you were forced to pick one play for all 12 v 4 then stand is better than hit, even for single deck. That's why basic TD strategy for 12 v 4 is stand for any number of decks. Hitting T-2 is a composition dependent play which is an exception to total dependent basic strategy depending upon s17/h17/number of decks.
Blackjack Attack, 3rd ed. pp. 398
In Blackjack Attack, 3rd ed. pp. 398 gives Don Shlesinger's figures to 6 significant digits.
In Blackjack Attack, 3rd ed. pp. 398 gives Don Shlesinger's figures to 6 significant digits.
- Single Deck S17 HIT.
- Single Deck H17 HIT 10-2 only.
- DD H17 HIT.
- DD S17 HIT.
- 4 decks S17 HIT 10-2 only
- 4 decks H17 STAND
- 6 decks S17 HIT 10-2 only
- 6 decks H17 STAND
- 8 decks H17 or S17 STAND
I am in the middle of trying to develop an approach to learning basic strategy. It starts with a generic strategy, which is simply the best strategy for an overwhelming (or infinite) number of decks. This is total dependent strategy because any hand composition is insignificant. For multidecks generic basic is pretty close to best total dependent basic and the more decks the closer it is. For single deck, it's a little farther off but still a somewhat reasonable approximation. Once generic basic is learned then a player could learn the exceptions at his leisure since generic by itself is at least a reasonable approximation.
Anyway with regard to the hands you asked about, this is what I have. You would follow what is listed for generic strategy unless there is an exception for the rules/decks you want a strategy for. In my notation a strategy followed by an asterisk means that if doubling on any number of cards is allowed then the strategy preceding the asterisk should be replaced by h. For example d*h means double if possible and if not hit if doubling any number of cards is NOT allowed. If doubling any number of cards IS allowed then d*h simply means hit. This is because it is better to hit in order to get a hand that may then be doubled if doubling any number of cards is allowed.
Soft 13 v 5
Generic strategy = h (s17 & h17)
Exceptions
Decks = 1, strategy = dh (s17 & h17)
Decks = 2-8, strategy = d*h (s17)
Decks = 2-9, strategy = d*h (h17)
Soft 15 v 4
Generic strategy = h (s17)
Exceptions
Decks = 1, strategy = dh (s17)
Decks = 2-26, strategy = d*h (s17)
Generic strategy = d*h (h17)
Exceptions
Decks = 1-2, strategy = dh (h17)
Hard 8 v 5 or 6
Generic strategy = h (s17 & h17)
Decks = 1, strategy = d*h (s17 & h17)
Anyway with regard to the hands you asked about, this is what I have. You would follow what is listed for generic strategy unless there is an exception for the rules/decks you want a strategy for. In my notation a strategy followed by an asterisk means that if doubling on any number of cards is allowed then the strategy preceding the asterisk should be replaced by h. For example d*h means double if possible and if not hit if doubling any number of cards is NOT allowed. If doubling any number of cards IS allowed then d*h simply means hit. This is because it is better to hit in order to get a hand that may then be doubled if doubling any number of cards is allowed.
Soft 13 v 5
Generic strategy = h (s17 & h17)
Exceptions
Decks = 1, strategy = dh (s17 & h17)
Decks = 2-8, strategy = d*h (s17)
Decks = 2-9, strategy = d*h (h17)
Soft 15 v 4
Generic strategy = h (s17)
Exceptions
Decks = 1, strategy = dh (s17)
Decks = 2-26, strategy = d*h (s17)
Generic strategy = d*h (h17)
Exceptions
Decks = 1-2, strategy = dh (h17)
Hard 8 v 5 or 6
Generic strategy = h (s17 & h17)
Decks = 1, strategy = d*h (s17 & h17)
From a footnote in the WizardofOdds tables;
"A 2-card soft 18 vs A has an expected value of hitting is -0.100359, and of standing is −0.100502.
So with two cards it is very slightly better to hit. However, not all soft 18's are
composed of two cards.
The more the cards in the player's hand the more the odds favor standing.
Simulations show that if forced to always hit or always stand."
The expectation difference cited here is .0143%, or a bit over 1 ten thousandth
of the amount wagered (the original numbers are not percentages).
That makes a 1¢ difference on an initial bet of $69.93.
"A 2-card soft 18 vs A has an expected value of hitting is -0.100359, and of standing is −0.100502.
So with two cards it is very slightly better to hit. However, not all soft 18's are
composed of two cards.
The more the cards in the player's hand the more the odds favor standing.
Simulations show that if forced to always hit or always stand."
The expectation difference cited here is .0143%, or a bit over 1 ten thousandth
of the amount wagered (the original numbers are not percentages).
That makes a 1¢ difference on an initial bet of $69.93.
Most questions about comp dependent strategy can be answered piece meal by making inputs in this program and then clicking 'Compute'.
These are calculated values, not simulated. Also it's not necessary to stick with full shoe composition because the shoe's composition can be altered as desired. Just something else that can be done
When it comes to basic, most use total dependent strategy because there is simply too much to remember to use composition dependent strategy exclusively, but if you happen to know a composition dependent play you might as well use it if you're confident it is right.
These are calculated values, not simulated. Also it's not necessary to stick with full shoe composition because the shoe's composition can be altered as desired. Just something else that can be done
When it comes to basic, most use total dependent strategy because there is simply too much to remember to use composition dependent strategy exclusively, but if you happen to know a composition dependent play you might as well use it if you're confident it is right.
Last edited: