+52 count can be bad?

[Dabucci]

If you are playing a six deck shoe, and you reach the approx. final deck with an amazing count of +52. This will mean that all that is left are A and 10s. So you would basically push against the dealer everytime, maybe get blackjack, and maybe lose to the dealers blackjack.

What I'm trying to get at is this.. is it possible for a count to get too high that the shoe is unplayable, or is that just a ridiculous thought?? :grin:

 

[shadroch]

If you are doing a side count of aces,playing 1on1,and the count is plus 8 with 8 cards left,push out a table max bet and be sure the pitboss watchs the next couple of hands.When they are done,ask for a comp to the steakhouse.

 

[Canceler]

If you are playing a six deck shoe, and you reach the approx. final deck with an amazing count of +52. This will mean that all that is left are A and 10s. So you would basically push against the dealer everytime, maybe get blackjack, and maybe lose to the dealers blackjack.

What I'm trying to get at is this.. is it possible for a count to get too high that the shoe is unplayable, or is that just a ridiculous thought?? :grin:

The situation you describe would be a gold mine, since you get paid 3:2 for your blackjacks, but the dealer only gets even money for his.

 

[bj bob]

If you are playing a six deck shoe, and you reach the approx. final deck with an amazing count of +52. This will mean that all that is left are A and 10s. So you would basically push against the dealer everytime, maybe get blackjack, and maybe lose to the dealers blackjack.

What I'm trying to get at is this.. is it possible for a count to get too high that the shoe is unplayable, or is that just a ridiculous thought?? :grin:

In the highly unlikely event as you described, your advantage would be tremendous. Although you would push a lot, you would, as you've said, get paid 3:2 on BJ's AND would be able to split aces (at least once).

 

[Sonny]

If you are playing a six deck shoe, and you reach the approx. final deck with an amazing count of +52. This will mean that all that is left are A and 10s. So you would basically push against the dealer everytime, maybe get blackjack, and maybe lose to the dealers blackjack.

That sounds like a good game to me! If I lose then I lose 1 unit, but if I win I either win 1 unit or 1.5 units. It’s like a coin toss where I lose 1 unit on heads but win 1.25 units on tails.

What I'm trying to get at is this.. is it possible for a count to get too high that the shoe is unplayable, or is that just a ridiculous thought?? :grin:

When the count gets super high it might be worth less than at a lower count, but it is still profitable. For example, a +13 may be worth more than a +14, but they are both very worthwhile. Here’s a chart that shows the EV at most true counts:

http://blackjackincolor.com/truecount2.htm

-Sonny-

 

[Dabucci]

you get paid 3:2 for your blackjacks, but the dealer only gets even money for his.

Unless the dealer got all the blackjacks and you got all the 20s.

But my situation was just using the extremes, and shad, do you mean let the pit boss watch you so he offers you free stuff, like a high roller ??

 

[Guynoire]

Sounds great to me just keep splitting those 20's.

 

[Dabucci]

I've heard that some casinos have the horrible rules that the dealer wins all draws, is that correct??

 

[Sonny]

Sounds great to me just keep splitting those 20's.

And resplit those aces!

-Sonny-

 

[ChefJJ]

I've heard that some casinos have the horrible rules that the dealer wins all draws, is that correct??

I've never played somewhere like that, but holy crap that's gotta be bad :flame: Considering that about 6-7% of your hands will be pushes (I think), you're looking at a considerable kick in the pants.:whip:

Or maybe I'm making a big deal out of nothing...

 

[bj bob]

One more angle

If you took ins. on every ace and the dealer didn't have BJ, it would mean he has another Ace in the hole and, de facto (sorry Easy) could not beat your 20, so split like hell and let the good times roll!!:cool2: :cool2:

 

[Dyepaintball12]

Usually only Charity Games will have the house win all pushes. This rule pretty much insures that they will win money the night they have the game.

But yeah, if it was a regular casino, that is pretty much the worst rule you could play against.

 

[Ferretnparrot]

Usually only Charity Games will have the house win all pushes. This rule pretty much insures that they will win money the night they have the game.

But yeah, if it was a regular casino, that is pretty much the worst rule you could play against.

Isnt there a rule where the dealer pushes a bust on 22? which also has enormous reprecussions

 

[moo321]

Let's not forget that you can insure against a dealer's ace upcard, as well. His blackjack have to be ace down to even win money off of you.

 

[Mimosine]

I've never played somewhere like that, but holy crap that's gotta be bad :flame: Considering that about 6-7% of your hands will be pushes (I think), you're looking at a considerable kick in the pants.:whip:

Or maybe I'm making a big deal out of nothing...

it add something on the order of 8% to the house edge if i recall.

 

[zengrifter]

it add something on the order of 8% to the house edge if i recall.

How high does the count need to be to overcome it? zg

 

[dangeroso]

Wouldn't this be essentially similar to playing with a pinochle deck at that point? I seem to recall reading the house odds of playing BJ with a pinochle deck once being an astonomically high player advantage.

 

[k_c]

Dear casino, Please use pinochle deck - Thanks

Wouldn't this be essentially similar to playing with a pinochle deck at that point? I seem to recall reading the house odds of playing BJ with a pinochle deck once being an astonomically high player advantage.

In case anyone is interested:
Create single pincohle deck from 2 decks by removing all (2-8)

Player expected value for a single pinochle deck:
Using 2 deck total dependent Basic strategy: EV = + 12.53%
Using best strategy: EV = +22.92%

k_c

 

[rukus]

is it possible the guy thinking casinos win pushes just witnessed a game of double exposure?