What is the likelihood of this?

[winnington]

Unless I'm seeing something wrong you hit against the dealer 16 3 times, no way thats correct, sorry.

It is absolutely correct. I hit on a hard 16 versus the dealer showing an A, and twice against a 10. You only stay on a hard 16 when the dealer is showing 2-6.

Here's the strategy card for this particular casino:Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)

You will not find a strategy card anywhere that advises to stay on a hard 16 versus an Ace or 10, although it is a popular mistake that people make.

If you're a BJ player, I highly recommend you use a strategy card while playing until you get it memorized. These are calculated using the statistical odds of winning (preferably suited to the rules of the casino you're playing). I know you might not want to take advice from someone who just went on a terrible run, but I'm sure I'd be backed up on this.

 

[TOC]

Please I don't need a BJ lesson. Look your pics show you hitting 16 3 times, 7 9 card when you should have stayed at some point. I'm not saying you would have beat the house by doing this, just bad card playing. No hard feelings just pointing this out because you made the thread look like the casino was beating you up! I know the game, don't need links but thanks anyway.. The facts are your screen shots my friend. Why is everyone so defensive on this board? Relax..

 

[winnington]

Please I don't need a BJ lesson. Look your pics show you hitting 16 3 times, 7 9 card when you should have stayed at some point. I'm not saying you would have beat the house by doing this, just bad card playing. No hard feelings just pointing this out because you made the thread look like the casino was beating you up! I know the game, don't need links but thanks anyway.. The facts are your screen shots my friend. Why is everyone so defensive on this board? Relax..

Hey, when someone pointed out that I should have hit on a soft 18 vs. a 10, I didn't get defensive, I can man up and admit when I'm wrong...

Because when you're wrong, you're wrong... and staying on a 16 versus a 10 or A is the wrong thing to do. Doesn't matter if you hit 3 times on 16 and bust each time - hitting in that situation is statistically the right thing to do every time.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

Did I see soft 18 not doubled against a dealer's 3 upcard, just glanced at all though including posts

Maybe Eliot will come set the record straight on 16 or I could for most games,decks,rules.

OK!! General B.S. (Most Vegas Games)
If possible, surrender 7,9 and 6,10 against dealer's 9,10,A otherwise hit
Always split 8's (unless dealer hits soft 17, then surrender 8,8 against dealer's A--usually in 6 to 8 deck game)
7,9 and 6,10 against dealer's 2 thru 6, stay
7,9 and 6,10 against dealer's 7 or 8, hit
Soft 16 always hit but double against dealer's 4,5, or 6

A three or more card 16 against dealer's 10 that includes a 4 or 5 you can stay where you normally hit but the difference in expectation is very minimal.


LOL Cindy, Laughing Out Loud

 

[zap987]

Please I don't need a BJ lesson. Look your pics show you hitting 16 3 times, 7 9 card when you should have stayed at some point. I'm not saying you would have beat the house by doing this, just bad card playing. No hard feelings just pointing this out because you made the thread look like the casino was beating you up! I know the game, don't need links but thanks anyway.. The facts are your screen shots my friend. Why is everyone so defensive on this board? Relax..

It seems you do. Of course blackjack would be very easy if you could see both the dealers cards before deciding what to do, but for the rest of us hitting 15 vs dealer 9 is correct.

 

[jas2587]

Did I see soft 18 not doubled against a dealer's 3 upcard, just glanced at all though including posts

Maybe Eliot will come set the record straight on 16 or I could for most games,decks,rules.

OK!! General B.S. (Most Vegas Games)
If possible, surrender 7,9 and 6,10 against dealer's 9,10,A otherwise hit
Always split 8's (unless dealer hits soft 17, then surrender 8,8 against dealer's A--usually in 6 to 8 deck game)
7,9 and 6,10 against dealer's 2 thru 6, stay
7,9 and 6,10 against dealer's 7 or 8, hit
Soft 16 always hit but double against dealer's 4,5, or 6

A three or more card 16 against dealer's 10 that includes a 4 or 5 you can stay where you normally hit but the difference in expectation is very minimal.


LOL Cindy, Laughing Out Loud

smarty pants sigh

Cindy

 

[TOC]

Hey, when someone pointed out that I should have hit on a soft 18 vs. a 10, I didn't get defensive, I can man up and admit when I'm wrong...

Because when you're wrong, you're wrong... and staying on a 16 versus a 10 or A is the wrong thing to do. Doesn't matter if you hit 3 times on 16 and bust each time - hitting in that situation is statistically the right thing to do every time.

You are correct, my bad. I don't know what I was thinking, for some reason I was looking at 16 and not thinking that all you could see was the 7. I stand corrected, sorry about that. A 6 would have been a different story..

 

[aka23]

yw, btw,to clarify, that 1/30,000 number is the chance of winning exactly 5 hands out of 26. The more important number is probably the probility of winning 5 hands or less, which is about 1/24,000.

Treating it as a binomial chance (either win or don't win), the chance of 5 of fewer wins out of 26 hands is about 1 in 90... not 1 in 24 thousand. It is not beyond normal variance, especially considering that optimal strategy was not used for all hands. The "Are My Results Fair?" Calc/Sim in my signature may or may not be relevant, depending on how close your bet size was to fixed.

 

[aka23]

You are correct, my bad. I don't know what I was thinking, for some reason I was looking at 16 and not thinking that all you could see was the 7. I stand corrected, sorry about that. A 6 would have been a different story..

16 vs 10 is close enough that optimal strategy depends on the specific card composition of your hand. With 2-card 16, hit has higher EV. And with 3+ card 16, stand has higher EV. If you be even more precise, use the rules listed below for 3-card 16 vs 10s with multi-deck BJ instead of always standing/hitting. The lower number rules override the following rules.
1. Any hand with a 5 -- Stand
2. Any hand with a 6 or 10 -- Hit
3. All other hands -- Stand

 

[DaveG39]

Treating it as a binomial chance (either win or don't win), the chance of 5 of fewer wins out of 26 hands is about 1 in 90... not 1 in 24 thousand. It is not beyond normal variance, especially considering that optimal strategy was not used for all hands. The "Are My Results Fair?" Calc/Sim in my signature may or may not be relevant, depending on how close your bet size was to fixed.

I think you'll see I corrected my 1/24k in a later post, but only down to about 1/2500. I'd be interested to see the math behind the 1/90.

 

[aka23]

I think you'll see I corrected my 1/24k in a later post, but only down to about 1/2500. I'd be interested to see the math behind the 1/90.

One simple way to get numerical results is to use a binomial calc or Excel, entering the # wins, # hands played , with # chance of event. A good binomial calc is at Old / Expired Link . This page also summarizes the math behind the results. The 1 in 90 chance I listed is based on chance of 5 wins in 26 hands. However, reading the full thread, I see that the 26 hands is with ties removed. If you change it to 5 of fewer wins in 30 hands, then I get 1 in ~400... still within reasonable variance.

 

[DaveG39]

One simple way to get numerical results is to use a binomial calc or Excel, entering the # wins, # hands played , with # chance of event. A good binomial calc is at Old / Expired Link . This page also summarizes the math behind the results. The 1 in 90 chance I listed is based on chance of 5 wins in 26 hands. However, reading the full thread, I see that the 26 hands is with ties removed. If you change it to 5 of fewer wins in 30 hands, then I get 1 in ~400... still within reasonable variance.

I was leaving out ties in my calculations because no money changes hands, and, therefore, would seem irrelevant (sp.). However, if you treat ties as technical losses ("non-wins"), then yes 1/400 is correct. Reasonable though? Isn't .05 (1/20) and above considered reasonable, stats-wise? Then again, with a sample this small, the margin of error would be huge.

 

[aka23]

Reasonable though? Isn't .05 (1/20) and above considered reasonable, stats-wise? Then again, with a sample this small, the margin of error would be huge.

In stats, p-value varies depending on what you are trying to show. 0.05 might be appropriate for estimating whether certain experimental variables are correlated, but it is not rare enough to show unfair software, as questioned in the first post of this thread. Many people in this thread have played more than 20 sessions of BJ with Playtech software, so many are expected to have seen a result with odds rarer than 0.05 in a random distribution. Instead, you'd need a far rarer result (or combination of results) that should hardly ever occur in a random distribution. This is what I mean by "within reasonable variance".