Here are all the comments posted on the site, with the most recent discussions listed first.
To participate in any of these discussions, you can reply on the article page.
So I believe I found the flaw, and it was in my calculations. I’m just going to put this here for anyone who stumbles across it that and has the same question. In my calculations for High Low, I factored in the disadvantage off the top (a generic .5% for te house) whereas I didn’t for the hi lo lite. That makes sense why the advantage was .5% off. Snyder isn’t quite as straight forward in his book about factoring in the advantage off the top into the true edge count as this website is, but I guess he leaves that up to the reader to assume.
First of all, if your aim is to minimise variance, then I would have to strongly suggest that you keep your money in the bank and never make any bets.
Secondly, although the bet is called an insurance bet, it has nothing to do with insurance. It does not “protect” a good hand. The insurance bet is purely a bet on the chance that the dealer has a ten as a hole-card when showing an ace. You win or lose the same amount on this bet regardless of the hand that you have. It makes no difference whether you have 16, 20 or even blackjack, the pay-off is the same.
So the decision to bet should be based purely on the mathematical expectation for the insurance bet. If you are not counting cards, then never buy insurance and never take even money. If you are using any count system, then follow the “rule” for that system to decide when to buy insurance. The most accurate count for deciding when to start buying insurance is the Archer 10 count. However, the Archer count is notoriously inaccurate for betting strategy and that’s where the most money is to be made.
Hey Ken. Quick question. I want to try out the casinos in my hometown ~ $5 minimum, 6 decks, H17, ds, late surrender ~ which (depending on which strategy engine I look at) gives the house odds of either 0.58% or 0.66%. Assuming the higher number (worst comes to worst), I calculated out the advantage with different counts, multiplied it by 0.76 as above, and calculated my optimum bet for each true count.
But here’s the problem! ~ you said a 6 deck BJ game can be beat with a 12:1 split, but using my calculations, the only time I get anywhere close to betting $60 a hand (12×5) is when the true count hits the 11-12 range, which I don’t see happening very often.
Plus there’s the fact that I might not have $3000 bankroll ~ $1500 is more likely.
So do you have any suggestions for what by betting spread should be? Thanks!
Something’s wrong with your calculations. Let’s look at a true count of +6. That’s roughly 3% added to the base edge of -0.66%. So, at TC+6, your edge is 2.34%. (These numbers aren’t precise enough to use two decimal digits, but I’m doing it anyway to make the process clear.) Multiply that by 0.76 and get 2.34 * 0.76 = 1.78% of your bank. With a $3000 bank, that’s a bet of $53.
Now, as for a smaller bank, you just can’t effectively play a six deck game with less than about $3000 you’re willing to devote to it. You can do two things: Back-count and play only positive counts until you build up your bank, or play anyway and just realize if you lose your $1500 you’ll need to wait until you build up more ammo.
Zippy is correct. The article is just plain wrong. The article should be amended, starting with this sentence at the end of the second paragraph:
“Even money should always be taken when the player has a blackjack against the dealers Ace up card. Doing this gives the player a guaranteed profit for the round.”
The above sentence should read:
The non-counting, non-hole-carding blackjack player should never take even money, and should never take insurance.
Thanks for hosting this forum. I found your logic and knowledge to be very informative. I’m sure if we ever sat down and chatted, we could have quite an interesting discussion on the game. I’m in Vegas about once a month.
Yeah, I’ve never agreed with this idea that you have to be super-fast to be successful. The GameMaster and I agree that you need to be accurate and relatively quick. But 40 seconds is quite reasonable in my opinion.
I’m confused… I thought, with all else being equal, your advantage is highest in a single deck game because the penetration is naturally better since you are already starting out with one deck. So why would you keep smaller spreads in a one deck game? That’s where the money’s at… right? I get that you’re referring to the spreads that are necessary to “beat” a particular game, but it just seems counterproductive because you’re missing out on an opportunity. Or am I way off…
The supposed reason is that the single and double deck games are more closely watched, and you won’t be able to play for long with a big spread. Although there is some truth in that, it’s also true that any spread at all is dangerous, so a bigger spread to crush the easier games is tempting. It all depends on the situation, and what you can really get away with.
Can someone post the correct basic strategy deviatons for a hard 10? I believe 10 vs 9 hits at -2 , 10 vs 10 Doubles at +4, 10 vs A doubles at +3. Someone please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks a lot!
Sorry for posting twice, but I think it would be very cool if your trainer didn’t play just by basic strategy for the game you’re playing but it also included all of the basic strategy deviations for the card counting system of the player’s choice ( Hi-lo first because it’s what most people use) when it corrects your play. I would like this because I was playing the App and stayed on 16 vs a dealer 10 in a high true count and it said my play was wrong. I think this would be a cool addition. Another cool thing would be allowing the player to choose how much penetration the game has. Thank you for listening!
Did you ever think, you may not know how to count! It is a fact, it works. Why do you think MIT (group) got banned from the casinos. Geeze where the fuck do these morons crawl under from.
Great comments. I agree with 90+ percent of your narrative and 100 percent agree on the heads up solo. The only thing I disagree on is surrender. My experience on hit & run using surrender to limit losses on poor percentage hands has worked pretty well. Maybe I’m just fortunate but I’m also not trying to retire every time I play. Thanks for the insight.
Ken Smith,
That was absolutely the finest description of blackjack life in the high limit room I ever read. I’ve been playing 37 years in casino’s and your narrative was spot on. Thanks for that!
In BlackJack 16 of 52 cards 31% have a value of ten and 4 of 52 cards 7% are aces. This means there is a 31% or 1/3 chance of getting a high card which is a pretty high chance.
EVERY THIRD CARD SHOULD BE A HIGH CARD.
Anyways my opinion is that no matter how many decks there are, blackjacks should be dealt 7 times out of every 100 cards in game play. Or to put it another way one of every 14 cards in play or about one in five hands of play could be a BlackJack because that is when an ace should appear. And that BlackJack could be for the player or for the dealer.
In H17 games (and 1-deck and 2-deck S17 games too), basic strategy does have the player double 11 vs Ace, so it’s a close call. In S17 games with more than 2 decks, where you should not double 11 vs Ace, the inability to draw again if you make a poor hand slightly outweighs the benefit of doubling the bet. (The dealer busts less often in those games, which probably explains most of the difference.) But as with most questions of basic strategy, it just is what it is. It’s not always intuitively obvious why one play is better than the other.
So I believe I found the flaw, and it was in my calculations. I’m just going to put this here for anyone who stumbles across it that and has the same question. In my calculations for High Low, I factored in the disadvantage off the top (a generic .5% for te house) whereas I didn’t for the hi lo lite. That makes sense why the advantage was .5% off. Snyder isn’t quite as straight forward in his book about factoring in the advantage off the top into the true edge count as this website is, but I guess he leaves that up to the reader to assume.
all chinese are crooked…never trust a chinamen…
I have to disagree with your advice.
First of all, if your aim is to minimise variance, then I would have to strongly suggest that you keep your money in the bank and never make any bets.
Secondly, although the bet is called an insurance bet, it has nothing to do with insurance. It does not “protect” a good hand. The insurance bet is purely a bet on the chance that the dealer has a ten as a hole-card when showing an ace. You win or lose the same amount on this bet regardless of the hand that you have. It makes no difference whether you have 16, 20 or even blackjack, the pay-off is the same.
So the decision to bet should be based purely on the mathematical expectation for the insurance bet. If you are not counting cards, then never buy insurance and never take even money. If you are using any count system, then follow the “rule” for that system to decide when to buy insurance. The most accurate count for deciding when to start buying insurance is the Archer 10 count. However, the Archer count is notoriously inaccurate for betting strategy and that’s where the most money is to be made.
Hey Ken. Quick question. I want to try out the casinos in my hometown ~ $5 minimum, 6 decks, H17, ds, late surrender ~ which (depending on which strategy engine I look at) gives the house odds of either 0.58% or 0.66%. Assuming the higher number (worst comes to worst), I calculated out the advantage with different counts, multiplied it by 0.76 as above, and calculated my optimum bet for each true count.
But here’s the problem! ~ you said a 6 deck BJ game can be beat with a 12:1 split, but using my calculations, the only time I get anywhere close to betting $60 a hand (12×5) is when the true count hits the 11-12 range, which I don’t see happening very often.
Plus there’s the fact that I might not have $3000 bankroll ~ $1500 is more likely.
So do you have any suggestions for what by betting spread should be? Thanks!
Something’s wrong with your calculations. Let’s look at a true count of +6. That’s roughly 3% added to the base edge of -0.66%. So, at TC+6, your edge is 2.34%. (These numbers aren’t precise enough to use two decimal digits, but I’m doing it anyway to make the process clear.) Multiply that by 0.76 and get 2.34 * 0.76 = 1.78% of your bank. With a $3000 bank, that’s a bet of $53.
Now, as for a smaller bank, you just can’t effectively play a six deck game with less than about $3000 you’re willing to devote to it. You can do two things: Back-count and play only positive counts until you build up your bank, or play anyway and just realize if you lose your $1500 you’ll need to wait until you build up more ammo.
Roger that. Thanks Ken!
Do you think you could do a lesson on Hi-Lo vs. KO vs. RE-KO? I’d love to know how the systems statistically compare in different circumstances.
Zippy is correct. The article is just plain wrong. The article should be amended, starting with this sentence at the end of the second paragraph:
“Even money should always be taken when the player has a blackjack against the dealers Ace up card. Doing this gives the player a guaranteed profit for the round.”
The above sentence should read:
The non-counting, non-hole-carding blackjack player should never take even money, and should never take insurance.
And that should end the article.
Ken Smith,
Thanks for hosting this forum. I found your logic and knowledge to be very informative. I’m sure if we ever sat down and chatted, we could have quite an interesting discussion on the game. I’m in Vegas about once a month.
Hey Ken,
No disrespect, but 10 seconds… really? Like 52 cards? I couldn’t even turn over a whole deck in 20 seconds.
I just went through a deck in two’s and then in three’s both in 40 seconds… Am I ready to hit a table?
Yeah, I’ve never agreed with this idea that you have to be super-fast to be successful. The GameMaster and I agree that you need to be accurate and relatively quick. But 40 seconds is quite reasonable in my opinion.
Hey Ken,
I’m confused… I thought, with all else being equal, your advantage is highest in a single deck game because the penetration is naturally better since you are already starting out with one deck. So why would you keep smaller spreads in a one deck game? That’s where the money’s at… right? I get that you’re referring to the spreads that are necessary to “beat” a particular game, but it just seems counterproductive because you’re missing out on an opportunity. Or am I way off…
The supposed reason is that the single and double deck games are more closely watched, and you won’t be able to play for long with a big spread. Although there is some truth in that, it’s also true that any spread at all is dangerous, so a bigger spread to crush the easier games is tempting. It all depends on the situation, and what you can really get away with.
Can someone post the correct basic strategy deviatons for a hard 10? I believe 10 vs 9 hits at -2 , 10 vs 10 Doubles at +4, 10 vs A doubles at +3. Someone please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks a lot!
Sorry for posting twice, but I think it would be very cool if your trainer didn’t play just by basic strategy for the game you’re playing but it also included all of the basic strategy deviations for the card counting system of the player’s choice ( Hi-lo first because it’s what most people use) when it corrects your play. I would like this because I was playing the App and stayed on 16 vs a dealer 10 in a high true count and it said my play was wrong. I think this would be a cool addition. Another cool thing would be allowing the player to choose how much penetration the game has. Thank you for listening!
Did you ever think, you may not know how to count! It is a fact, it works. Why do you think MIT (group) got banned from the casinos. Geeze where the fuck do these morons crawl under from.
Mike Gunter,
Great comments. I agree with 90+ percent of your narrative and 100 percent agree on the heads up solo. The only thing I disagree on is surrender. My experience on hit & run using surrender to limit losses on poor percentage hands has worked pretty well. Maybe I’m just fortunate but I’m also not trying to retire every time I play. Thanks for the insight.
Ken Smith,
That was absolutely the finest description of blackjack life in the high limit room I ever read. I’ve been playing 37 years in casino’s and your narrative was spot on. Thanks for that!
In BlackJack 16 of 52 cards 31% have a value of ten and 4 of 52 cards 7% are aces. This means there is a 31% or 1/3 chance of getting a high card which is a pretty high chance.
EVERY THIRD CARD SHOULD BE A HIGH CARD.
Anyways my opinion is that no matter how many decks there are, blackjacks should be dealt 7 times out of every 100 cards in game play. Or to put it another way one of every 14 cards in play or about one in five hands of play could be a BlackJack because that is when an ace should appear. And that BlackJack could be for the player or for the dealer.
In H17 games (and 1-deck and 2-deck S17 games too), basic strategy does have the player double 11 vs Ace, so it’s a close call. In S17 games with more than 2 decks, where you should not double 11 vs Ace, the inability to draw again if you make a poor hand slightly outweighs the benefit of doubling the bet. (The dealer busts less often in those games, which probably explains most of the difference.) But as with most questions of basic strategy, it just is what it is. It’s not always intuitively obvious why one play is better than the other.