16 versus dealer 10

[[email protected]]

Hi, first post here. Many thanks to the insights offered here- I have learned quite a bit over the last few days. I am a pretty casual player, although I do keep a basic count.

A few weeks ago, I read a post over at Wizard of Odds about hitting a 16 versus the dealer 10 (I can't find it now). Is it correct to say that a player should hit a 16 versus dealer 10 only if the RUNNING count is 0 or less?

I have always hit a 16 against a 10 provided the true count was not +1 or greater, but I think I have been doing it wrong. I play at a casino that only offers 6D games, so I face 16 versus 10 quite a bit when the running count is positive but the true count is short of +1.

Many thanks for the advice!

 

[Albee]

Basic Strategy

Basic Strategy says to hit a 16 vs 10

A lot of ploppies don't, and in some cases I guess others don't.

It is a crappy hand, however it is proven that over the 'long run' it is correct to hit it.

Except if the true count is positive. Then the indice is to stay (and cross your fingers).

 

[FLASH1296]

• NEGATIVE Count = HIT
• NEUTRAL Count = HIT
• POSITIVE Count = STAND

The cost of misplaying this at True Counts between −1 and +1 is trivial.

As "cover" MANY Card Counters, employing "Counter Basic Strategy" STAND on all 16's.
This's always correct (in a game without late surrender) when your large bets are out;
So, you "lose" only a miniscule amount of "expectation" at negative True Counts with minimal bets.

 

[Sucker]

Depending upon your counting system, the actual number at which you'd stand is somewhere between +0.5 and +0.8. If you have the inkling to interpolate while at the table, then go for it. But as Flash said, the gain will be trivial. The amount of equity you'll save will probably be about 75 or 80 cents per year.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

Hi, first post here. Many thanks to the insights offered here- I have learned quite a bit over the last few days. I am a pretty casual player, although I do keep a basic count.

A few weeks ago, I read a post over at Wizard of Odds about hitting a 16 versus the dealer 10 (I can't find it now). Is it correct to say that a player should hit a 16 versus dealer 10 only if the RUNNING count is 0 or less?

I have always hit a 16 against a 10 provided the true count was not +1 or greater, but I think I have been doing it wrong. I play at a casino that only offers 6D games, so I face 16 versus 10 quite a bit when the running count is positive but the true count is short of +1.

Many thanks for the advice!

It's such a sensitive index, that even one extra high card in a shoe makes the right play to stand. This became an issue on this site where the correct strategy for 16 vs. 10 in a surrender game is to stand. The reason being that you would surrender a 2-card 16 vs. 10, but if you have 3 or more cards you must have at least 2 low cards so the right play would be to stand, assuming you were starting off a new shoe and had no other information.

 

[[email protected]]

Thanks to all for the replies.

 

[rukus]

Just to clarify: whether you hit or not at nuetral depends on whether you floor, round, truncate your indices, etc. You do NOT ALWAYS hit at a TC of 0.

• NEGATIVE Count = HIT
• NEUTRAL Count = HIT
• POSITIVE Count = STAND

The cost of misplaying this at True Counts between −1 and +1 is trivial.

As "cover" MANY Card Counters, employing "Counter Basic Strategy" STAND on all 16's.
This's always correct (in a game without late surrender) when your large bets are out;
So, you "lose" only a miniscule amount of "expectation" at negative True Counts with minimal bets.

 

[rrwoods]

Just to clarify: whether you hit or not at nuetral depends on whether you floor, round, truncate your indices, etc. You do NOT ALWAYS hit at a TC of 0.

Personally I don't even calculate a TC when playing 16v10. I just use the RC.