To 6D or not 6D?
- Thread starter BJFan
- Start date
Lonesome Gambler
Well-Known Member
No, although I have actually played that game! The reason why, to clarify, is because you're not playing a complete 52-card deck once you hit the last 52 cards; you're playing 52 cards randomly selected from a total of 312 cards total.
Blue Efficacy
Well-Known Member
Also let us not forget that SD basic strategy is different for an important reason. BS is based on a neutral deck before the deal. In SD, you have 4,4 vs. dealer 6, you already have TC of +3, and you double down.
However in six deck the same hand would yield a true count of less than 1.
Because BS accounts for the current deal, it is not truly based on a TC of zero when it is time to act.
However in six deck the same hand would yield a true count of less than 1.
Because BS accounts for the current deal, it is not truly based on a TC of zero when it is time to act.
Last edited:
Not with five decks already in the tray.
Blue Efficacy
Well-Known Member
I am talking about Basic Strategy. Basic strategy assumes no card counting information has been obtained. Basic strategy never changes, but more advanced strategies that require more information might cause one to deviate from it.
blackjack avenger
Well-Known Member
How About This
Last deck you switch to 1 deck strategy with indices? The TC theorem tells us that the last deck would be an average of the remaining cards. So it would be closer to a 1 deck in distribution then the 6 pack would be.:joker::whip:
There is composition dependent multi deck strategy, not worth much. So the fact that SD strategy is composition dependent may not matter much.:joker::whip:
But, it still does not necessarily mean you should play it as 1 deck.:joker::whip:
Considering the effort involved in learning different strategies for different shoe depths and the questinable value, it's probably not worth it. Overall indice differences of 1 or 2 TCs don't make much difference anyway and these differences is what you have in multi vs single deck indices.
Also, probably the value for BS differences for the different games (single or multi) are very close plays to each other, so again not much in extra EV here.
Last deck you switch to 1 deck strategy with indices? The TC theorem tells us that the last deck would be an average of the remaining cards. So it would be closer to a 1 deck in distribution then the 6 pack would be.:joker::whip:
There is composition dependent multi deck strategy, not worth much. So the fact that SD strategy is composition dependent may not matter much.:joker::whip:
But, it still does not necessarily mean you should play it as 1 deck.:joker::whip:
Considering the effort involved in learning different strategies for different shoe depths and the questinable value, it's probably not worth it. Overall indice differences of 1 or 2 TCs don't make much difference anyway and these differences is what you have in multi vs single deck indices.
Also, probably the value for BS differences for the different games (single or multi) are very close plays to each other, so again not much in extra EV here.
Last edited:
One of the biggest reasons why BS is different for 1 deck than it is for 6 decks is because; in a six deck game,the effect of removal of each individual card is less important than single deck. For this reason; if you're counting cards then there is a TINY bit of truth to your hypothesis. But if you're counting cards, you won't be playing BS anyway; you'll be using your play indexes.
Example: Off the top of a six deck shoe (TC and RC is 0)you're dealt a pair of fives, dealer has a 10 upcard. You hit & get a six. BS and your count strategy tells you to hit again.
Now let's suppose five decks have been played, and the count is 0. If you're NOW dealt this hand, these 3 small cards in your hand have NOW changed the TC enough to enable someone who's counting cards, to stand.
But like I said, there is really only a tiny bit of truth to this. The GENERAL answer to your question is: No - BASIC strategy shouldn't change.
Example: Off the top of a six deck shoe (TC and RC is 0)you're dealt a pair of fives, dealer has a 10 upcard. You hit & get a six. BS and your count strategy tells you to hit again.
Now let's suppose five decks have been played, and the count is 0. If you're NOW dealt this hand, these 3 small cards in your hand have NOW changed the TC enough to enable someone who's counting cards, to stand.
But like I said, there is really only a tiny bit of truth to this. The GENERAL answer to your question is: No - BASIC strategy shouldn't change.
I would stand here because BS says to stand with a 3-card 16 vs T!
If you haven't seen and accounted for the five decks already in the tray, then reaching the last deck in a 6 deck shoe is very very different than starting with a single deck. You WOULD NOT double 44v6 (assuming nDAS) upon reaching the last deck in a 6 deck shoe UNLESS you knew that the TC was 0 before being dealt your hand. If you haven't accounted for the prior 5 decks, then who cares if this is the first hand out of the shoe or the 34th hand out of the shoe.
Quick example. 77vT is a STAND in SD. This is because YOU KNOW that there are now FAR FAR less 7s in the remaining deck than there ought to be, since you used a full 50% of them to make your hand.
Now assume you're dealt 77vT during the last deck of a 6D game. Unless you've been tracking 7s, you now have no such knowledge of how many remaining 7s there are in the deck. As such, you need to hit. (Assuming you haven't hit the TC index for surrendering or standing)