Author |
Topic: Surrendering in Blackjack (Read 292 times) |
|
James Lu
Guest
|
I have been looking at blackjack tables online (tables that tell you whether to hit, stand, double, split, or surrender given any possible combination of cards you are dealt vs the dealer's face up card). One thing is really puzzling me and I was wondering if anyone here can provide explanation.
Note: Anytime I say surrender I mean late surrendering.
Some casinos allow LATE surrendering. This basically means instead of hitting or standing or whatever, you immediately concede but also get half of your bet back. If the dealer has an ace, you are only given the option to surrender AFTER the dealer checks to see if he has blackjack already.
1) According to the tables, if you have 11, you should double down on all situations except when the dealer has an ace.
2) According to the tables, if you have a 10, you should double down on all situations except when the dealer has a 10 or an ace.
3) From 1 and 2, I can conclude that when the dealer has an ace, it's worse for the player than when the dealer has a 10. This is because sometimes you double down on 10, but you never double down on ace.
4) Basic strategy according to the tables tells you to hit if you are dealt anything equal to 16 or less if the dealer has 17 or greater (if no surrender option is available).
5) Basic strategy according to the tables tells you to surrender if you are dealt a 16 when the dealer shows a 9, 10, or ace. If the dealer has a 7 or 8, you hit.
6) Basic strategy according to the tables tells you to surrender if you are dealt a 15 when the dealer shows a 10 only! If the dealer has a 7, 8, 9, or ace, you hit.
Someone explain 5 please? Why would you only surrender on the 10 and not on the ace if you are dealt 15? This makes no sense. According to 3 above, if ace is better for the dealer than 10, why would you not include ace if you're going to surrender on 10 anyway.
From the above, it seems to imply that when deciding to double down or not, going against an ace is worse for the player than going against a 10. However, when deciding whether to surrender or hit when dealt a 15, going against a 10 is worse for the player than going against an ace. How can this be? If I'm not going to surrender vs an ace, intuitively I would think I would not surrender vs a 10 also. But that is not the case apparently...
Thanks.
James
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
James Lu
Guest
|
 |
Re: Surrendering in Blackjack
« Reply #1 on: Oct 16th, 2003, 8:37am » |
 Quote  Modify
 Remove
|
Sorry, please revise the below from:
4) Basic strategy according to the tables tells you to hit if you are dealt anything equal to 16 or less if the dealer has 17 or greater (if no surrender option is available).
to:
4) Basic strategy according to the tables tells you to hit if you are dealt anything equal to 16 or less if the dealer has 7 or greater (if no surrender option is available) showing.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
visitor
Guest
|
|
Re: Surrendering in Blackjack
« Reply #2 on: Oct 16th, 2003, 10:06am » |
Quote Modify
Remove
|
I've never played casino blackjack, but I'm assuming that doubling down is done before the dealer checks his own hand for blackjack, while surrendering is done after. So you would never double down with the dealer showing an ace because there's roughly a 4/13 chance he has blackjack.
But surrendering comes after his check, so if you have 15 and he's showing an ace, you know he does not have a hidden face card, and an ace combined with any other card is not as good as a ten.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
James Lu
Guest
|
|
Re: Surrendering in Blackjack
« Reply #3 on: Oct 16th, 2003, 10:30am » |
Quote Modify
Remove
|
visitor,
Actually, the dealer checks for blackjack before anyone gets to do anything. So before you get the chance to surrender OR double down, the dealer will already check for blackjack.
Also, in response to your 2nd part, even if the dealer has a 10, he will also check for blackjack. So whether you are going against a 10 or an ace, the dealer will always check for blackjack and when given the chance to surrender, you know he does not have blackjack in either case.
I have considered all of this and I still find it extremely illogical or counter-intuitive that you would not surrender against an ace having been dealt a 15 when you would against a 10.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
RIDDLES SITE
WRITE MATH!
Home 
Help 
Search 
Members 
Login 
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print