The power of surrender

Dopple

Well-Known Member
#1
I will have a lot of surrendering opportunities in the near future so I ran CVCX for 10K 1-20 spread H17 DAS LS vs w/o LS and saw an advantage of like $34 vs. $44 per hour approx. I bet most of the power comes from 15,16 vs A,9 or 10. Surrender could draw heat though. I think I will bone up no the departure #s for my trip. Surrender and insure I think is valid but does that stand out?
 

DSchles

Well-Known Member
#2
You don't mention number of decks or penetration. In any event, see BJA3, pp. 232-33 for other possibilities. I think the improvement for surrender ought to be even more than you indicate. In any event, if you play a game with surrender, what's the sense in worrying about making the plays? It's one of the most profitable options in the game, so if you're going to be scared to use it, what's the point?

Don
 

Dopple

Well-Known Member
#3
No I would not be afraid to use it, I have in the past and love it. I will look it up in the book, I think I left it in the car. Not to divulge too much but I would think that being ballpark on most of the indices across the board ie hit.stand double would give you most of the value similar to the effect of the I18 Fab4. I was using 4.5 pen 6D 4 player. Don thank you.
 

KewlJ

Well-Known Member
#4
Don is correct in that surrender is one of the most profitable options in the game. BUT, that doesn't mean you shouldn't use it with some caution because in my experience, surrender plays do stand out or draw attention, just as Dopple said. Part of that is just ignorance on the part of the pit as most pit people will know the BS surrender plays at most (if any at all), and if they see anything other than that will just jump to the conclusion that you are an expert or very knowledgeable player. For this reason, I limit my surrender plays, right along with all index plays. I play a combination of Illustrious 18 and counter's basic strategy.

Now understand that I am about longevity. I often say I am in the shearer camp in the shear vs slaughter approach. I think ZG used a slightly different analogy last week, I forget...Milking vs skinning maybe. o_O

Anyway everything I do is about that. Don's basis of the illustrious18 plays right into that. If I can get say 80% of advantage using 20% of the plays, that is the way I want to go because each strategy change play draws attention.

Even basic strategy: I use a counters basic strategy because strategy change plays draw attention. In particular playing one way at times and differently other times and that includes surrendering a hand sometimes and not surrendering others.

I am not saying I never use any strategy change plays or numbers (indices), but the fewer the better. I would rather play a hand wrong some of the time when I have minimum bet out and play it right when I have my max bet out, all the while playing it the same way both time. And again, this includes surrender plays.

Yeah there is a cost to this style of play. But if you are giving up say 20% of the advantage gained by strategy change plays, and it allows you to play 5, 10 times longer at that location, maybe more....Yeah that's a pretty good trade off for me. Especially since the total advantage from strategy change is only a small fraction of the total advantage in most (shoe) games I play. Shoe game most of the advantage comes from bet spread alone. So yeah, again, if minimizing some of these strategy change plays, including surrender index plays, allows you to increase longevity by 10 fold....it's not even close.
 

Meistro

Well-Known Member
#5
Remember that 17 v A behaves different than other surrender indexes. Usually, with surrender, you are more inclined to surrender as the count gets higher. With 17 v A this is not the case.
 

DSchles

Well-Known Member
#6
Here's the thing: the BS surrenders can and do occur with zero or negative indices, primarily for 16 vs. 9, 10, and ace, but almost all of the other very important ones, including, of course, the Fab 4, are all positive, where you have out larger bets. You really should not be sacrificing accuracy at these moments; it can cost a lot.

For more years than I can count (no pun intended!), I absolutely FEASTED on surrender games at Caesars, Riviera, and Maxim. They were among the best games on the planet. I used a great many surrender indices, and truth be told, I don't think they called any undue attention to my play. I also understand that that was then (the incomparable '70s and '80s) and this is now.

Don
 

BoSox

Well-Known Member
#8
KewlJ said:
So yeah, again, if minimizing some of these strategy change plays, including surrender index plays, allows you to increase longevity by 10 fold....it's not even close.
I think you are way overestimating this 10 fold longevity gain due to using some minimization of strategy change plays. Either way, it is impossible to put an actual number to any longevity gained in playing time due to that one aspect alone. More likely you are not giving enough credit to some of the other tough limitations you put upon yourself such as playing short sessions and only showing one max bet cycle per session/per house while also using self restrictions to bet sizes due to house tolerances.
 

Counting_Is_Fun

Well-Known Member
#9
KewlJ says "I play a combination of Illustrious 18 and counter's basic strategy"
I do the same and mostly agree with KewlJ.
If you are playing local for longevity...surrendering 17 etc well that is most definitely a big tell. This is not the '70s and '80s
 
Last edited:

KewlJ

Well-Known Member
#10
Counting_Is_Fun said:
If you are playing local for longevity...surrendering 17 etc well that is most definitely a big tell. This is not the '70s and '80s
Exactly! I only have a handful of surrender games in my rotation. And it so happens that 2 of them are at two of my better (6deck) games. I am talking very deep penetration. I don't want to lose these games. So I limit my surrender play to the common BS type plays, I just don't want to get into many index type plays surrendering a hand on certain counts but not others. I just think that is too much risk for this situation.
 
#11
but does surrendering something like 16 vs 8 really make you look like a sharp? You would know better than I would, but I don't think it would.
 

KewlJ

Well-Known Member
#12
JohnCrover said:
but does surrendering something like 16 vs 8 really make you look like a sharp? You would know better than I would, but I don't think it would.
I have no way to answer that...to know what different pit personnel think. But I look at it this way. Pay attention to the players that surrender. What do they surrender? 15/16 vs 9/10 maybe ace. Occasionally 14 vs 10. That is about it. I never see anybody surrender anything other than that. And that is my criteria. I don't want to be the player doing something that the pit rarely sees. That is what draws attention, in my mind.

Furthermore it isn't one single act or play that puts you in jeopardy. It is a package. I want to reduce those "tells" and the size of that package, especially when dealing with my top games. I want to protect those games at (just about) all costs.
 
#13
KewlJ said:
I have no way to answer that...to know what different pit personnel think. But I look at it this way. Pay attention to the players that surrender. What do they surrender? 15/16 vs 9/10 maybe ace. Occasionally 14 vs 10. That is about it. I never see anybody surrender anything other than that. And that is my criteria. I don't want to be the player doing something that the pit rarely sees. That is what draws attention, in my mind.

Furthermore it isn't one single act or play that puts you in jeopardy. It is a package. I want to reduce those "tells" and the size of that package, especially when dealing with my top games. I want to protect those games at (just about) all costs.
Agree. If you are playing locally for longevity then surrendering say 17 against anything these days...is similar to splitting tens or something like that.
Surrendering 15 or 16 well I do see ploppies doing that so no problem. To each their own I guess. But if you have a good game to play, then why the hell are you surrendering 17? You're going to get caught.
 
#14
Counting_Is_Fun said:
Agree. If you are playing locally for longevity then surrendering say 17 against anything these days...is similar to splitting tens or something like that.
Surrendering 15 or 16 well I do see ploppies doing that so no problem. To each their own I guess. But if you have a good game to play, then why the hell are you surrendering 17? You're going to get caught.
What is your opinion on surrendering 8,8 vs 10 in high counts? Obviously it is the correct play mathematically, but I’m thinking it may be kind of like splitting tens or surrendering a 17. I have a local casino with unicorn rules (6 deck, S17, DOA, DAS, LS, 83% pen) and longevity is paramount.
 
#15
RatherNotGiveMyRealName said:
What is your opinion on surrendering 8,8 vs 10 in high counts? Obviously it is the correct play mathematically, but I’m thinking it may be kind of like splitting tens or surrendering a 17. I have a local casino with unicorn rules (6 deck, S17, DOA, DAS, LS, 83% pen) and longevity is paramount.
In my opinion, surrendering 16 looks much different than 17.
I follow BS (some counter's BS) and the Illustrious 18...and Fab 4 for the most part, depending which casino I am in.
 
Last edited:
Top