"Surrender" to basic strategy

[smithj]

Good morning,

I have been trying to analyze the best way to play a shoe (6 decks) when the true count is high and I would really like to read your comments about this. Let's say the TC>=4 and I am playing two boxes (most of the time I play heads-up against the dealer or with one other player), should I always stick to basic strategy? I am not talking about the split or double deviations, I am talking about surrendering a 12, 13, 14 or even a 17 against a 10, 9 or 8 when I seriously think that the dealer's hidden card is a 10. Moreover considering as an "strategy" (if I am not wrong of course) that using the surrender option I might not burn two face cards which I might use in the next hand in a better situation. Also if I have a 20 or blackjack in one box, I might have already gotten profit with this one so surrendering the other will not affect me. Of course the idea is to maximize but if the situation is not "the best"... at least getting some chips will be better.

Does this make sense?

Well as you can see I have a few ideas around my head right now. I would really appreciate if you guys can enlight me with your expertise.

J.

 

[johndoe]

What you are looking for are "index plays", and there are plenty to memorize if you wish, but only a few are that important ("illustrious 18 and fab 4"). Take a look at the FAQs here or some of the popular books (such as Wong's).

As for surrendering specifically, in Hi-Lo you would surrender a 14v10 at +3, 15v9 at +2, 15v10 at 0, and 15vA at +1.

Don't worry about saving a couple of cards though, that's of very minor consequence.

And play your two hands independently. It doesn't affect strategy.

 

[FLASH1296]

You said:

"… when I seriously think that the dealer's hidden card is a 10."

I suspect that you have not thought this through.

At what True Count would the density of 10's exceed 50% ?

This is NOT a rhetorical question.

If you need to avoid the arithmetic, grab a deck of cards and experiment.

 

[smithj]

Hi John, I read the "illustrious 18 and fab 4" link but it just refers to stand or hit situations. By the way, while having a negative running count I prefer to stick to basic strategy, specially because at that moment I will be playing the table minimum, which is not my important bet. Anyways thanks for the info and the other advice... I agree with surrendering 14v10 at +3, 15v9 at +2 but not sure about playing my two hands independently because it might affect my "bankroll" in a positive or negative way.

Flash I don't think I understood your point. Could you please clarify?

J.

 

[sabre]

Also if I have a 20 or blackjack in one box, I might have already gotten profit with this one so surrendering the other will not affect me.

So if I have a blackjack on one hand and I have a hard 20 on the other, hitting the 20 doesn't affect me since I already profited from the blackjack?

The amount you've won during the round is meaningless. You're trying to maximize your EV on every hand, and that happens by playing the hand correctly, using index plays to supersede basic strategy when appropriate.

 

[sabre]

Moreover considering as an "strategy" (if I am not wrong of course) that using the surrender option I might not burn two face cards which I might use in the next hand in a better situation.

For extremely close situations, you might select the -EV play that doesn't burn an extra card, in order to increase your chance of getting in another round. This would only happen when you're near the cut card.

However, the loss in EV from the hand you are intentionally playing wrong must be made up by the addition of another round in a +EV situation.

So for example, say you make a wrong play with a $50 bet out that costs you 10% of the bet, but this play increases your chance by 50% of getting another 2 hands of $500 out next round, at an advantage of 3%. In this case

-$50*.1 + .5 * $1000*.03 = +$12.50.

So this would be a good play.

In practice though, I think you'll rarely see situations where you even need to consider this.

 

[sabre]

when I seriously think that the dealer's hidden card is a 10.

When you have valid reason to think the card is a 10, all sorts of surrenders become correct. However, valid reasons include things like catching a glimpse of the card, or card steering. Without such knowledge, then the dealer chance of having a T down is directly proportional to the current true count. Your index plays have already taken this into account.

 

[johndoe]

Hi John, I read the "illustrious 18 and fab 4" link but it just refers to stand or hit situations.

.

No they don't; re-read it. Many are doubles, and the Fab 4 is all surrenders. A couple are splits!

 

[smithj]

So if I have a blackjack on one hand and I have a hard 20 on the other, hitting the 20 doesn't affect me since I already profited from the blackjack?

The amount you've won during the round is meaningless. You're trying to maximize your EV on every hand, and that happens by playing the hand correctly, using index plays to supersede basic strategy when appropriate.

Hi sabre, first of all thank you for your replies... On this one I think you missed my point... of course I will never surrender a hard 20 independently of having a blackjack on the other hand... I will always try to maximize my EV on both hands but if I have a 17 against an 8, 9 or 10 and the TC is high (let's say +5), I will seriously consider the surrender option, specially if I already had profit on the other hand with the bj. That was and is my point of view (maybe I am wrong, for that reason I asked for your opinions which I really respect).

 

[smithj]

For extremely close situations, you might select the -EV play that doesn't burn an extra card, in order to increase your chance of getting in another round. This would only happen when you're near the cut card.

However, the loss in EV from the hand you are intentionally playing wrong must be made up by the addition of another round in a +EV situation.

So for example, say you make a wrong play with a $50 bet out that costs you 10% of the bet, but this play increases your chance by 50% of getting another 2 hands of $500 out next round, at an advantage of 3%. In this case

-$50*.1 + .5 * $1000*.03 = +$12.50.

So this would be a good play.

In practice though, I think you'll rarely see situations where you even need to consider this.

I agree with you and I think the key here is "when you're near the cut card".

When you have valid reason to think the card is a 10, all sorts of surrenders become correct.

That was my point!

No they don't; re-read it. Many are doubles, and the Fab 4 is all surrenders. A couple are splits!

Maybe I read the wrong link or thread, could you please give me the direct link?

 

[sabre]

Maximizing your EV on the net result of two hands is the same as maximizing your EV on each individual hand. When you are dealt a blackjack and a 17 vs a dealer 8, you could guarantee a net profit on that hand by surrendering the 17, but guaranteeing that net profit comes at the expense of sacrificing EV. You'll win less money in the long run by intentionally playing hands incorrectly.

What's the difference between playing 2 hands at a time, getting a BJ and 17v8 each time, vs playing 1 hand at a time, being dealt alternating blackjacks and 17s, with the dealer always getting an 8. Both scenarios produce the exact same result. In both cases, you are pissing away money by intentionally playing badly if you surrender the 17v8 because you want to "lock up a net win on that round".

 

[FLASH1296]

smithj,

Your post implied that you have times when you think that the dealer is more likely than not to have a Ten Value card face down.