Splitting 8s vs A

[smithj]

Hello, I remember that I put a comment the other day in another thread but I think nobody saw it So I decided to generate a new one...

"Yesterday I had $200 on each of two boxes (TC +6) and I was dealt 8, 8 on my right hand and 19 on the left; the dealer's card was an Ace (no surrender against A) and I took insurance to cover $300. After thinking for a while I decided to split the 8s (considering that if the dealer had bj I wouldn't have lost the split bet) and I got 18 in both. At the end the dealer had blackjack and I lost $100 (could have been worst)... I was thinking if I made the right move... "

Basic strategy tell us to always split 8s... BUT trying to analyze if this is a MUST... are there any exceptions? Would you have splitted those 8s against an A considering the high TC?

J.

 

[sabre]

There is no index for hitting/standing rather than splitting 88vA. There is an index for not splitting 88vT (stand at TC >+8?) In that case, the dealer can have a T in the hole. With 88vA, the dealer has already peeked.

I'd guess that the expected return for splitting 88vA goes up as the true count rises, while the expected return for hitting drops. I don't know that for sure, but it makes intuitive sense.

 

[bjcount]

There is no index for hitting/standing rather than splitting 88vA. There is an index for not splitting 88vT (stand at TC >+8?) In that case, the dealer can have a T in the hole. With 88vA, the dealer has already peeked.

I'd guess that the expected return for splitting 88vA goes up as the true count rises, while the expected return for hitting drops. I don't know that for sure, but it makes intuitive sense.

I don't use hilo but according to the tables I have for it:
hilo complete is spilt 8,8 vs A >=-12
so I'd hit if it was < -12

BJC

 

[sabre]

yeah, sorry, I was only considering the effect of high true counts

I sincerely hope that no counter in the history of time has ever needed to use that -12 index though.

 

[bjcount]

yeah, sorry, I was only considering the effect of high true counts

I sincerely hope that no counter in the history of time has ever needed to use that -12 index though.

I'm sure in good deeply dealt SD & DD, -12 is not very rare.

BJC

 

[sabre]

I'm sure in good deeply dealt SD & DD, -12 is not very rare.

BJC

But being dealt 88vA is rare to begin with, never mind at the -11 count you'd have to be at before getting it.

This is why pair splitting indices aren't anything to get hot over. Even the ones at reasonable true counts just don't happen often enough to make the knowledge of the proper index play that valuable.

 

[idontneedluck]

one question. In european blackjack, its no peek. So if the dealer gets BJ you lose bets from the splits and doubles. On such tables I dont think splitting 8s vs A is a good idea. Basic strategy says not to split.

Also, would this affect the illustrious 18 for 11 v A +1 ? I am thinking with no peek rule, you are less likely to put more money on the table when staring at an A.

 

[Blue Efficacy]

The original poster said that they would not lose the split bet if the dealer had BJ. I think this makes 8,8 an acceptable defensive split against a dealer's A.

 

[Meistro]

Why would you insure for less at TC +6?

 

[sharonestone]

yeah, sorry, I was only considering the effect of high true counts

I sincerely hope that no counter in the history of time has ever needed to use that -12 index though.

wrong.... can't always wong.

 

[sharonestone]

Hello, I remember that I put a comment the other day in another thread but I think nobody saw it So I decided to generate a new one...

"Yesterday I had $200 on each of two boxes (TC +6) and I was dealt 8, 8 on my right hand and 19 on the left; the dealer's card was an Ace (no surrender against A) and I took insurance to cover $300. After thinking for a while I decided to split the 8s (considering that if the dealer had bj I wouldn't have lost the split bet) and I got 18 in both. At the end the dealer had blackjack and I lost $100 (could have been worst)... I was thinking if I made the right move... "

Basic strategy tell us to always split 8s... BUT trying to analyze if this is a MUST... are there any exceptions? Would you have splitted those 8s against an A considering the high TC?

J.

Not sure I understand this... Why didn't you insure the whole thing? That would be the correct move. Then split the 8's if no dealer BJ. Would always split the 8's against an A. Many times in a high count if the Dealer does not have a BJ, he will end up with a weak hand or bust. Assuming you end up with 18s. He would have to have an 8 or 9 to beat you. If he has to hit, he's likley to bust. Of Course, were it offered, surrender would have been the correct play on the 8s. (after no BJ)