Fab 4
- Thread starter Tom007
- Start date
nightspirit
Well-Known Member
Surrender
14 v. 10 (+3)
15 v. 10 (0)
15 v. 9 (+2)
15 v. A (+1)
Good luck!
14 v. 10 (+3)
15 v. 10 (0)
15 v. 9 (+2)
15 v. A (+1)
Good luck!
sagefr0g
Well-Known Member
surrender 16vs9,10 or A is basic strategy for a six deck game offering late surrender.
not sure if there is a deviation for it at some negative count. but there isn't any deviation for zero or greater counts.
edit: looked it up
for 16v 9 don't surrender if tc<0
for 88v10 surrender tc>=1
for 88vA split don't surrender
for 88v9 surrender if tc>+7
for 16v10 don't surrender if tc<=-2
for 16vA don't surrender if tc<=-1
so in these cases you'd use generic basic strategy as if surrender wasn't offered.
these are for a s17 game.
Last edited:
jimbiggs
Well-Known Member
If the game is H17. It's surrender, don't split at all counts less than 4. If the count is >4, then you would split.
If the game is S17, then you would split at all counts.
Last edited:
I was just wondering if u got this from Schlesinger. He references Wong but in my book 15 vs A is +2 in S17 game.
Is it because Wong changed the way he calculated True Counts from one edition to the next? Like went from rounding to truncating?
There are other discrepancies too.
sagefr0g
Well-Known Member
good catch Kasi, i see the same discrepancy when cross referancing my editions of Professional Blackjack against Blackjack Attack as well.
haven't the foggiest as to what up with that
what are some of the other discrepancies you noted?
good catch Kasi, i see the same discrepancy when cross referancing my editions of Professional Blackjack against Blackjack Attack as well.
haven't the foggiest as to what up with that
what are some of the other discrepancies you noted?
Off the top of my head 13 vs 2, 12 vs 6 stuff like that. I don't have Wong's earlier edition but I think almost all of his negative counts increased by 1.
I'm pretty sure it's like u calc a TC+1.6 do you round up to 2 for an index play or truncate to TC+1? In his later edition it's all truncating. So don't make a TC+2 play with a TC+1.9.
On another subject, he also eliminated his side count of Aces because of their small effect on win rate.
So, I'm thinking TC+0.51 to TC + 1.49 used to all be TC+1. But now TC+0 to TC +0.9 is all TC0.
Maybe even TC-0.9 to TC+0.9 would all be 0 since I think that's how the negative number would truncate.
So the moral is know what your TC means!
nightspirit
Well-Known Member
Yes, they are from BJA3, p. 64. Sorry that I missed to name the source.
I don´t have Wongs books, shame on me
so I can´t compare whether his TC were truncated or rounded.Yes, they are from BJA3, p. 64. Sorry that I missed to name the source.
I don´t have Wongs books, shame on me
Well I don't think u have to site the source every time lol.
There isn't one thing I know about BJ that I have figured out myself.
Maybe that in 1998 bonuses were a good thing on the internet but that's about it.
And even then I cry every day thinking how much money I passed up wondering if it was really for real or not. Doubting myself, the random number generators, everything.
So sometimes I wonder why so many people seek advice here from anonymous people and how they choose whether the advice is good or bad.
Even here, 15 vs A, is it +1 or +2? What game is it for? S17 or H17? 1D or 8D?
How will u play a TC of 1.7? All kinds of different advice given and who knows what game he will be playing.
Oh well. A tempest in a teapot lol.