Double Down 11 vs Ace Basic Strategy Deviations

B

byski

New Member
First of all, I play in Alberta and I have never played anywhere else. So I don't know how different the rules are about DD 11 v A. Here, if you DD on a dealers Ace you lose only half your bet if the dealer turns up a blackjack. Does that happen everywhere?

The conditions of the game are; 6 Deck Shoe, hit soft 17, 1.25 deck penetration, 1-20 min to max bet spread, DD after split, Split AA X4 Max, Early Surrender, BJ 3-2.

According to some of my research basic strategy is to DD 11 v A and there is no deviation from that no matter what the count. In this situation, would anyone recommend otherwise?
 
What system are you using? There should be an Indice for that particular move.

With mine its double at an even game (TC of 1)

IF the dealer has a natural then you should get your double bet back which makes it worth the double every time, since in theory if you lose, you get your money back, if you win, you get paid your full double bet.
 
byski said:
First of all, I play in Alberta and I have never played anywhere else. So I don't know how different the rules are about DD 11 v A. Here, if you DD on a dealers Ace you lose only half your bet if the dealer turns up a blackjack. Does that happen everywhere?

The conditions of the game are; 6 Deck Shoe, hit soft 17, 1.25 deck penetration, 1-20 min to max bet spread, DD after split, Split AA X4 Max, Early Surrender, BJ 3-2.

According to some of my research basic strategy is to DD 11 v A and there is no deviation from that no matter what the count. In this situation, would anyone recommend otherwise?
Click to expand...

My HIOPT II index for this play is 0. Most american (US) casinos peek for blackjack. I don't know what count you use but if it is not ace neutral the count needs to be higher to double. HIOPT II is a level 2 count so indices are about twice that of a level 1 count.
 
Just do it

This is one of those plays that I will sometimes play (i.e., DD), regardless of the count. :eek:

I've been away from the game for a couple of years, so I forget the exact penalty for playing this way, but I believe it is minimal. Since it is the "wrong" move, you get a bit of benefit as camo.
 
The more negative the more you should not dd. You will then risk no twenty one while he gets higher chance of not breaking.
 
The system I am using is the simple high low. In Alberta the dealer does not take a card face down, nor is there any DD with a face down card. Everything is face up. The dealer only takes the card after all players have finished the action and there is at least one to draw against.
 
I think you mean there is no Hole card...?

In that case the correct BS is to HIT not double the 11. However if you get paid half your original bet then my point from earlier still stands.
 
NAP said:
I'm not following why that makes a difference.
Click to expand...

If the dealer doesn't have a hole card to check for BJ then you could inevitably double, get 21 and still lose if he hits it. In that case, I feel the strategy would definitely be just to hit it. In normal shoe games where the dealer peeks, it would all depend on the count, maybe at least TC +3 to double(Don't hold me to that estimation, I'm kinda basing it off of the Insurance play).
 
Terminology

AussiePlayer said:
Depends what ENHC rule you are playing.

http://www.qfit.com/blackjack-rules-card-variations.htm
Click to expand...
Can we reach a consensus on exactly what ENHC means?

I've argued before that my understanding has always been that the E in ENHC means that we are talking about the 'blackjack wins all' variation. That is, NHC would mean No Hole Card, and could be any of the variations listed on QFIT's site. ENHC means European No Hole Card, and the European way is to take away all our bets when we lose.

Is this distinction something of my own invention, or is it 'official'?
 
London Colin said:
Can we reach a consensus on exactly what ENHC means?

I've argued before that my understanding has always been that the E in ENHC means that we are talking about the 'blackjack wins all' variation. That is, NHC would mean No Hole Card, and could be any of the variations listed on QFIT's site. ENHC means European No Hole Card, and the European way is to take away all our bets when we lose.

Is this distinction something of my own invention, or is it 'official'?
Click to expand...

I've only ever heard them referred to as ENHC, but with suffixes:

ENHC-OBO
ENHC-OBBO
ENHC-Dealer BJ wins all

All casinos in Australia use one of the above rule and they all refer to it as ENHC (even though it's a hell of a long way from Europe)

Oddly enough, the ENHC-BB+1 that QFIT refers to as an Australian rule only, I have never seen (it might be an old/outdated rule).
 
Fair enough, then. I suppose for the avoidance of doubt we will always have to ask for clarification of what someone means if they don't provide a suffix.

I'm surpised casinos use the terminology at all. Over here you tend to just get printed rules which present the game from first principles, without any thought that you might already be familiar with different rule sets from around the world.

For what it's worth, I found a paragraph from Arnold Snyder in Blackbelt in Blackjack, contrasting no-peek and/or no-hole-card in the US and Canada with no-hole-card in Europe, which may have been where I got my notion of the meaning from -
No Hole Card

[...] but the European no-hole-card rule is different. In most European casinos, if the player doubles down or splits a pair, he wil lose all [...]
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top