Betting On 16

I have a question for you guys.
While playing BJ you get a 10/J/Q/ or K and a 6.
Do you bet?
Now, what if you have multiple cards that total 16?
Do you bet?​

 

If you're question is do I hit? (Rather than "Do you bet") Yes I do John. Otherwise I don't understand the question "Do you bet?" Say Hi to the wife and boys. Have a good one.

 

Actually, that's a pretty good question that I also interpreted to ask whether one should bet when you have 16 and the dealer's showing a face card.

Cipher, though I have limited knowledge of how you play (from what I read here), would "seeding" or "dumping" have any effect on that decision?

Unless I've misunderstood the basic concept of those two words ...

 

Actuallly...that's exactly what I meant by "bet".
In either case, you're sayin that I should make the hit?
It seems that when ever I hit, in either case I lose.

Anyone know the odds on either play?

The boys dumped BJ and are now playing Texas Hold 'Em.
Matthew, as you may recall, is the bigger gambler of the two boys. Plus he's been playing a few months longer than Justin. Mid November to end of December Matthew net 22K+. That's not including the rake. Justin started to really get involved in December and he made $2500.00 plus the rake.

I just started to play with their help a week ago.

Hopefully, I'll be half as successful as my boys.
Thanks for asking.

 

Do I hit when I have 3+ card 16 against 7,8,9,10???

 

It could, but just remember Mac that seeding and dumping is normally spawned by the lesser valued cards (A,2,3,4,5) so anything in the lower range is more than likely going to make (in this case) the dealers 6.

Have a good one.

 

John - always hit a 2-card 16 vs 10 regardless of the number of decks or other rules. You'll be ahead in the long run if you do. Naturally, surrender the hand if you can. You can see the EV difference between hitting or standing for different decks and rules at You must register/login in order to see the link.

There are lots of 3-or-more-card 16's that one should stand on rather than hit against 7,8,9 or 10 depending on the number of the decks and whether the dealer stands on soft 17 or not. Even multi-card 15's vs 10, especially in single-deck (555, 654, 663 - easy to remember because 3 cards you could use are gone). You can go to You must register/login in order to see the link. and plug in the decks and rules there to see the right play if you want and develop your own tables. Also Appendix 3 by the Wiz has a list for multi-card single and double-deck exceptions to Basic Strategy.

For 8 decks some of the more common 3-card 16's vs 10 you should stand on are 952, 943, 87A, 853, 844, 772, 754, 655 & 105A. Yes, I get yelled at when I do this.

All of this of course is off the top of a freshly shuffled deck(s).

It's not like you'll get rich or anything making these plays

 

Thanks Clayman for all your help.
It's appreciated :notworthy ​

 

Anytime - when you learn how to play poker as good as your boys, you can return the favor by teaching me!

 

I can't see how it would ever be correct to stand on 16 v T off the top of a freshly shuffled 8-decker. Of course, I understand the strategy variations of single deck. Either way, a close play. But please point me to somewhere that says you should "stand on T5A off the top of an 8-decker." I'd like to see the support for your statement above, please.

 

Ok. I followed that link you provided. You must register/login in order to see the link.

I know 16 v T is close but I never knew it was close enough that you should stand on 5542 v T at the top of an 8-decker. Thanks for the link. I think I'll play with that a bit.

 

Thank You for the complement...

My son Matthew graduated top of his class Univ.of Illinois ... 4.0 GPA. Kids a genius.
Justin is still in college ... De Paul in Chicago. He's also, smart as a whip.
Both boys read tons of books. They've been reading books on poker. They live together and share their knowledge.
Blackjack and Poker put these two through college ... with the help of DAD, of course.

Dad, will never be as smart as them ... but, it'll be decades before they're as wise as me.

 

We already knew that

Thanks for sharing details of your family here!

 

That's OK - my wife never believes a thing I say either!

I usually just stand at any positive running count and hit at any negative running count when I'm playing. And, like Lanidar says, no matter which way I guess, it's always wrong anyway

 

Ok...Ok....
I know when I beat.... ​

 

wise as *I*

 

Well I would have bet 100 bucks that it was not correct ever at the top of an 8-decker. But apparently I am WRONG AGAIN.

Again, thanks for that link. I'm sure I will use that many times.

I like Ian Anderson's idea on 16 v T, in his Burning The Tables. He always stands on it. ALWAYS. It makes him look like someone who doesn't even know Basic Strategy and then when he's betting small, it doesn't cost that much, but when he's betting big with a possitive count it is actually correct.
Fascinating book.

 

I was born and raised in Brooklyn, N.Y.
And in Brooklyn it's "wise as me". ​

 

Don't feel bad - I would have lost my $100 too!

That is a great book - I have to get another copy since my brother-in-law never returned mine.

I liked that he always doubled a 10 vs 10 as a camouflage play for the reasons you mentioned. What pit boss wouldn't welcome his $100 minimum play with bozo plays like that? The cost of deviating from BS vs the expected gain in different plus counts with different bet multiples out is a very interesting area. If you are interested in that, Don Schlesinger is definitely the way to go. The guy is as nice as he is absolutely brilliant.
He posts regularly at You must register/login in order to see the link. . Any "system" talk there is prohibited, thank heaven.

 

Well thanks again. I've been doing this internet thing for a few years but as you can see I'm still a newbie to it.

I'll check that site out right away. What? No Martingales?