Which game is favorable?

[pooptarts92]

Ok so the majority of the games found in my city are ES10, but NO surrender ace. This is mostly due to NO HOLE CARD. But, there is an indian reservation casino that was built by some Las Vegas casino designer and they offer LS and have a hole card. So what are my odds better with in the long term? Surrendering early against a 10 but never being able to surrender on an ace, or being able to surrender after the dealer checks the hole card? The decks used are mainly 6, and the pen is the same all around, 1 deck cutoff.

 

[FLASH1296]

The ES10 game is better, BUT that presumes that the games are otherwise equal in all other respects.

The loss to the No Hole Card Rule is modest (just a few Basic Strategy differences), and there is NO cost at all — if splits and doubles are returned to you when the dealer has a blackjack.

If that game is crowded than the other is better.

If that game has worse penetration then it is inferior as well.

 

[pooptarts92]

The ES10 game is better, BUT that presumes that the games are otherwise equal in all other respects.

The loss to the No Hole Card Rule is modest (just a few Basic Strategy differences), and there is NO cost at all — if splits and doubles are returned to you when the dealer has a blackjack.

If that game is crowded than the other is better.

If that game has worse penetration then it is inferior as well.

Yeah they both have these same rules:
H17
DAS
DA2
No RSA
Split aces only get 1 card each (no drawing/doubling)
split 3 ways

The ES10 (or no hole card) game has the rule where you lose only your ORIGINAL bet when dealer has blackjack.
I ran the no peek rule in the BS engine and found that aces are a hit vs an ace as the only difference. But how am I supposed to know when this is a split? I use wong halves btw.

 

[Sucker]

The ES10 (or no hole card) game has the rule where you lose only your ORIGINAL bet when dealer has blackjack.
I ran the no peek rule in the BS engine and found that aces are a hit vs an ace as the only difference. But how am I supposed to know when this is a split? I use wong halves btw.

Even though the dealer doesn't peek under his aces, that's not what no-peek actually means. As far as the basic strategy engine is concerned (and the BS engine IS rather confusing on this issue), no-peek actually means that if the dealer has blackjack, you lose BOTH bets in the case of doubles and splits.
So in your example, the game is NOT considered no-peek; and AA vs. A is DEFINITELY a split.

 

[Roscoe99]

Sorry to post hop but...

I am new to the game of blackjack however, I play on a cell phone an Ericsson.
My dealer stands on all 16s and they claim that the rules of the game go according to "Standard American Blackjack".

Could someone please alert me to if this is a commonality in Blackjack would be much appreciated.

 

[Sucker]

There are only TWO ways that blackjack is played throughout the WORLD.
1) Dealer stands on ALL 17s.
2) Dealer hits soft 17 and stands on all other 17s.

Soft 17 is defined as any hand which contains an ace and can be counted as either 7 or 17.

There are NO casinos ANYWHERE in which the dealer EVER stands on 16, and even if there ever WERE any; they would've been bankrupted in very short order.

 

[Roscoe99]

Well it has to be the phone. Once the dealer reaches 16 he stands and I either win or push.

I think the game cheats though because it's ridiculous the way I almost always get 20s and 21s pushed not to mention lose the majority of time on 17, 18, 19 after the game's dealer drwas 3 or 4 cards to 20 or 21...lame!

 

[johndoe]

Games like this played for amusement often do skew the odds to make it more fun, and to let people win more.

But so what? It's a game on your phone.