So basically just play how how you feel to play. For instance, i dont hit a 12 vs a 3 but do against a 2 and i am consistent with that. Players sometimes ask advice on those plays and i tell them what i do even though the book says to hit.

 

It's really close, but yes you will gain a few hundredths of a percent by always standing on a 3 card 16 vs 10. You can actually get much closer to the composition-dependent mathematically correct play for this hand by following the "rule of 45" though. It's pretty simple: always hit hard 16 vs a dealer 10 (regardless of the number of cards you have), unless your hand contains a 4 or 5, in which case you should stay.

Neither of these rules will make a large difference in the long term, so it isn't truly necessary to remember this after a long night of drinking and gambling. But if you can remember it, it will save you a few bucks long-term.

 

I saw that video. I don't like the splitting 8's vs a 9. Seems to me that doubling your bet to start with an 8 is not ideal. Am I way off?

 

You aren't way off, but you are off. From the

You must be a registered user with confirmed email address to view this content.
Register or Login

:

"...So hitting 8,8 against a dealer 9, 10 or ace increases the house edge by 0.019%, or about one bet every 5,300 hands played. If the player surrenders instead of hitting, the effect drops to 0.013%. So, it is not a significant mistake."

I always split my 8's, because even 1 extra bet every 5300 hands when I don't need to give it up is unacceptable to me. Over 5300 hands, you can expect to lose about 27 bets if you play perfect basic strategy. If you don't split your eights against 9, 10, or Ace, you'll lose about 28 bets instead. So it will increase your total lifetime blackjack losses by ~3%.

Basically, you can play this one by your gut without a huge penalty should you choose, but just keep in mind that not splitting is still mathematically inferior to splitting. If you start combining this with other negative value basic strategy deviations though (as most people do), the percentage increase in losses will start rising pretty fast.

 

I agree, but it is my least favorite hand in all of BJ. Splitting 8's against a 10, get two 18's, and of course the dealer flips 20.

 

I use the 4 or 5 rule for hard-16 vs. a dealer 7-through-Ace...unless the remaining deck is extemely 'negative'....like minus 5 or greater.
I so rarely play games with surrender, but when I do, I will surrender 16s (and 15s) against any dealer 9, 10 or Ace, including when I get the dreaded 8-8.
I hate splitting 8s against a 9 or 10 too, but I will do it every time (except when surrender is permitted).
For me, it's not so much the miniscule percentage gained by playing this way - it's more just knowing that I'm taking advantage of the best way to play hard-16... not that I always do, mind you... but the vast majority of the time, I play each hand the way I'm supposed to.

When I vary from 'basic strategy', it's almost always based on what I think the impact of the count may be. I say "almost always" because I will soft-double A-3, A-4, & A-5 against a dealer 3, regardless of the count.
I realize that by doing so, I'm violating basic strategy on some hands, but I continue to do it because I continue to win more often than I lose by doing so...and this has been over the course of many years, and hundreds-of-thousands hands played.
So - even though I know that the "computer" says I should be losing more money with some of these soft-double plays, it hasn't happend yet. (We're supposed to just hit those against a dealer 3.)
Now - to be fair - I only do this on 2-deck games, so the number of possible outcome variations is somewhat reduced...and, there are certainly hands where, had I played "properly", the outcome would have been better, not only for me but for the entire table as well.
But, as with standing on hard-12 against a dealer 3, I am consistent with these plays.

(NOTE: cards that bust a dealer 13 = five. Cards that give his 13 a 16 or less = three. Assuming a 10-in-the-hole, 8 cards hurt him and 5 give him a hand - 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8. With a 9-hole, the numbers are the same. With a 2 or 3 hole card, he's still hitting to a probable 14, 15 or 16. So, of the possible hole-cards with his 3, most of the probabilities (7/13) give me an advantage. So - 7/13 of the time, I have an 8/13 chance to win, regardless of my draw on the double. There are also 10-of-13 hits I could draw on the double where I would stand anyway, doubling or not. For example - Only the Ace, 2 & 3 hit on the A-3 double would result in my missing a second hit.)

I do this using the hypothetical-advance-knowledge rule: If you knew ahead of time that the dealer would get a 3-up, would double your original bet? My answer is "yes".

 

Interesting discussion.
I always hit 12 vs.2 also but not 3.His video says you should hit it.

 

You must be a registered user with confirmed email address to view this content.
Register or Login

tells you the expected value of hitting, standing, or doubling in each possible situation. Standing on 12 against a 3 can cost you some money long term - looks like it lowers your expectation on that hand by roughly 2%, depending on rules, decks, and the specific 2 cards that you start with.

By themselves, any of these negative value strategy deviations won't hurt you too much. But if you do a few of them here and there, all of a sudden you are increasing your long term losses by quite a bit.