16 (three or more cards) vs 7 thru A; always hit?

[gobbledygeek]

I always hit on 16 (three or more cards) vs 7 thru A (even if I'm currently sitting with, for example, 2+3+2+2+2+2+2+A); is this the correct play for the following game?

- 6 decks
- dealer hits on soft 17
- I'm not counting cards

 

[gobbledygeek]

The basic strategy engine answered most of my questions; turns out I was playing a lot of hands wrong! With six decks, dealer hitting on soft 17 and no hole card (only original bets lost) I should be doing:

A8 vs 6 = double down (instead of standing)
A7 vs 2 = double down (instead of standing)
11 vs A = double down (instead of hitting)
88 vs 10,A = hit (instead of splitting)

Anyone have any contrary opinions on these hands?

Also, I've searched the forum and can't find the answer to my question regarding hitting on 16 (with three or more cards) vs 7 thru A (when not card counting). People always seem to frown at me when I do this, am I doing something wrong?

 

[Mikeaber]

The basic strategy engine answered most of my questions; turns out I was playing a lot of hands wrong! With six decks, dealer hitting on soft 17 and no hole card (only original bets lost) I should be doing:

A8 vs 6 = double down (instead of standing)
A7 vs 2 = double down (instead of standing)
11 vs A = double down (instead of hitting)
88 vs 10,A = hit (instead of splitting)

Anyone have any contrary opinions on these hands?

Also, I've searched the forum and can't find the answer to my question regarding hitting on 16 (with three or more cards) vs 7 thru A (when not card counting). People always seem to frown at me when I do this, am I doing something wrong?

The way I've always played those multicard hard 16's against a "made" hand by the dealer (7-A) is to hit them. A hard 16 is a hard 16 whether made up of 2 cards or 7 cards. However, as stated over and over again on the forum here, your odds are only 1% better if you hit any hard 16 than if you don't. That play is NOT going to make or break you no matter what you do.

 

[gobbledygeek]

Thanks for the response. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't playing like an idiot and screwing up the table; now that I know it is the correct play (albeit just slightly) at least I won't feel bad about it.

 

[KenSmith]

I'll add an exception that's easy to remember. With 16vT, stand if your hand has 3 cards or more. The 16vT hit/stand decision is a very close call, and this rule of thumb is quite effective in knowing when it is best to deviate from basic strategy (which says hit all 16s vs a ten).

So, you'd hit (Ten,6), but stand with (Ten,4,2).

 

[gobbledygeek]

I'll add an exception that's easy to remember. With 16vT, stand if your hand has 3 cards or more. The 16vT hit/stand decision is a very close call, and this rule of thumb is quite effective in knowing when it is best to deviate from basic strategy (which says hit all 16s vs a ten).

So, you'd hit (Ten,6), but stand with (Ten,4,2).

Is there actually any mathematical reason behind this move? If the odds dictate this move, no matter how small, then I'll do it; but otherwise I don't see the point.

 

[Mikeaber]

I'll add an exception that's easy to remember. With 16vT, stand if your hand has 3 cards or more. The 16vT hit/stand decision is a very close call, and this rule of thumb is quite effective in knowing when it is best to deviate from basic strategy (which says hit all 16s vs a ten).

So, you'd hit (Ten,6), but stand with (Ten,4,2).

Ken, does your rule of thumb on multiple card 16's apply only against a dealer T (ten?)

We did talk a little in another thread quite some time ago about a "rule of 45" meaning don't hit if your hand contains either a 4 or 5. Also mentioned was looking at the cards in play on the hand. If there are more faces on the table than low cards, hit, else stand. It's such a close call. You are going to lose the hand more times than not no matter what you do.

 

[KenSmith]

The rule only applies to 16vTen. Always hit 16v9, 16v8, 16v7 unless you are counting cards and use the appropriate index number to sometimes stand.

Yes gg, there's a mathematical basis for this 3-cards-in-the-hand rule. By definition, any 16 with 3 or more cards has at least one card in your hand that you'd like to be able to draw as the next card. That's enough to swing this very close call of 16vT.

 

[gobbledygeek]

The rule only applies to 16vTen. Always hit 16v9, 16v8, 16v7 unless you are counting cards and use the appropriate index number to sometimes stand.

Yes gg, there's a mathematical basis for this 3-cards-in-the-hand rule. By definition, any 16 with 3 or more cards has at least one card in your hand that you'd like to be able to draw as the next card. That's enough to swing this very close call of 16vT.

Does the math also apply to a 6 deck game? Do you have any stats or links to stats that back this play up?

Thanks for the info.

 

[KenSmith]

Here are numbers for a $10 bet in a 6-deck game:

With (Ten,6) vs dealer Ten:
Hitting loses $5.34707
Standing loses $5.40955
(Hitting is better)

With (Ten,4,2) vs dealer Ten:
Hitting loses $5.41356
Standing loses $5.41189
(Standing is better by less than 2/10ths of a cent.)

 

[E-town-guy]

The basic strategy engine answered most of my questions; turns out I was playing a lot of hands wrong! With six decks, dealer hitting on soft 17 and no hole card (only original bets lost) I should be doing:

88 vs 10,A = hit (instead of splitting)

Anyone have any contrary opinions on these hands?

QUOTE]

If you only lose your original bet against a dealer BJ the correct strategy is to split not hit. Even though there is no hole card only losing original bets means you should enter United States OBO into the hole card rule of the strategy engine.

 

[gobbledygeek]

Here are numbers for a $10 bet in a 6-deck game:

With (Ten,6) vs dealer Ten:
Hitting loses $5.34707
Standing loses $5.40955
(Hitting is better)

With (Ten,4,2) vs dealer Ten:
Hitting loses $5.41356
Standing loses $5.41189
(Standing is better by less than 2/10ths of a cent.)

Thanks for the info. I'll think I'll just continue to hit the 16's; the 2/10ths of a cent just ain't worth the frowns you sometimes get when you play your 16's differently each time!

 

[gobbledygeek]

The basic strategy engine answered most of my questions; turns out I was playing a lot of hands wrong! With six decks, dealer hitting on soft 17 and no hole card (only original bets lost) I should be doing:

88 vs 10,A = hit (instead of splitting)

Anyone have any contrary opinions on these hands?

QUOTE]

If you only lose your original bet against a dealer BJ the correct strategy is to split not hit. Even though there is no hole card only losing original bets means you should enter United States OBO into the hole card rule of the strategy engine.

I think I'm a little confused as to what original bet is; is that just your original single bet on the two card hand, or is that also including any split bets (but not double down bets)? I'm going to have to pay closer attention to exactly what our BC Casino's are doing. For now I think I'll continue to split 8's.

 

[Mikeaber]

I think I'm a little confused as to what original bet is; is that just your original single bet on the two card hand, or is that also including any split bets (but not double down bets)? I'm going to have to pay closer attention to exactly what our BC Casino's are doing. For now I think I'll continue to split 8's.

Yes, "original bets" are the initial bet you place in the betting circle. Any bets you make in doubling or splitting would be pushed back to you were the dealer to turn over a blackjack under American rules of OBO.

 

[E-town-guy]

Its only the original single bet you make before any cards are dealt. If you lose that plus your money from double downs and splits then you shouldn't split 8s and follow the ENHC on the strategy calculator.