even money blackjack? comon here.

[la_dee_daa]

i haven't been counting long only hit the casinos 3 days but i have noticed that every ploppy will take even money on their blackjack, i have once but the count forced me to lol. But these same people don't take insurance.

what is going through their heads don't they realize they are still just taking insruance ???

 

[WRX]

Yeah, it's pretty dumb until you're playing Blackjack Switch, you get BJ, the dealer has an ace, and she asks you if you want even money!

 

[ihate17]

Extremely common everywhere

i haven't been counting long only hit the casinos 3 days but i have noticed that every ploppy will take even money on their blackjack, i have once but the count forced me to lol. But these same people don't take insurance.

what is going through their heads don't they realize they are still just taking insruance ???

These players would need an explaination which would take you hours and you would probably fail when trying to tell them that insurance and even money are the same thing.
They see even money as a guaranteed win, and insurance as risking 50% of your bet, and in the case where the dealer does not have blackjack losing both the insurance bet and their regular bet.
They are also influenced by the habits that dealers pick up. The dealers often pull out the chips and are already pushing them towards you as they ask you if you want even money. Probably because everyone always takes or perhaps because the casino encourages this action.

I have been questioned by curious dealers as to why I do not take even money generally but then sometimes I do. My answer may be bought by most dealers but a good surviellance type or pit would know better. I just tell them I gamble on my small bet blackjacks but when I have a big bet out, I want to make sure I get paid.

The big problem with insurance for counters is when you have not taken insurance for a long period and now you have a stiff against a dealer ace and you take it. The pit understands a guy who insures his 20 or 11 vs an ace, but a guy who does not buy insurance suddenly insuring a 15 vs ace should bring some heat. Generally after a move like this, win or lose, it just might be time to move to the next casino.

ihate17

 

[sagefr0g]

........

I have been questioned by curious dealers as to why I do not take even money generally but then sometimes I do. My answer may be bought by most dealers but a good surviellance type or pit would know better. I just tell them I gamble on my small bet blackjacks but when I have a big bet out, I want to make sure I get paid.

that's a good one.

The big problem with insurance for counters is when you have not taken insurance for a long period and now you have a stiff against a dealer ace and you take it. The pit understands a guy who insures his 20 or 11 vs an ace, but a guy who does not buy insurance suddenly insuring a 15 vs ace should bring some heat. Generally after a move like this, win or lose, it just might be time to move to the next casino.

ihate17

lol right or if there is late surrender where you take surrender after losing the insurance bet.

 

[shadroch]

In the course of a normal session,you get a BJ every 21 hands or so.In the long run,you'll get a BJ against a dealers Ace once every 13 BJs that you get.
We are talking a hand that occurs perhaps once every two hundred and fifty hands,give or take a few.Taking even money on every hand will not really put much of a dent in a weeks worth of playing.
Say you are betting $10 a hand.Lets see what happens against every possible dealer upcard. Even money on thirteen BJs will give you $130.Not taking even money will see you winning $15 9 times,and getting zero 4 times when you push,for a total win of $135.You have won an extra half a bet,but its over about 250 hands.Playing 60 hands an hour,you gain a one unit advantage over the course of 8 hours.I'd rather take the even money and be mistaken for a ploppy. Its one of the least costly camoflauge moves I've found. Establishing that you take even money on BJs also gives you wiggle room on the much more frequent insurance decisions

 

[jack.jackson]

In the course of a normal session,you get a BJ every 21 hands or so.In the long run,you'll get a BJ against a dealers Ace once every 13 BJs that you get.
We are talking a hand that occurs perhaps once every two hundred and fifty hands,give or take a few.Taking even money on every hand will not really put much of a dent in a weeks worth of playing.
Say you are betting $10 a hand.Lets see what happens against every possible dealer upcard. Even money on thirteen BJs will give you $130.Not taking even money will see you winning $15 9 times,and getting zero 4 times when you push,for a total win of $135.You have won an extra half a bet,but its over about 250 hands.Playing 60 hands an hour,you gain a one unit advantage over the course of 8 hours.I'd rather take the even money and be mistaken for a ploppy. Its one of the least costly camoflauge moves I've found. Establishing that you take even money on BJs also gives you wiggle room on the much more frequent insurance decisions

Maybe its the Tequila Talking, but, I can live with that!

 

[Bojack1]

In the course of a normal session,you get a BJ every 21 hands or so.In the long run,you'll get a BJ against a dealers Ace once every 13 BJs that you get.
We are talking a hand that occurs perhaps once every two hundred and fifty hands,give or take a few.Taking even money on every hand will not really put much of a dent in a weeks worth of playing.
Say you are betting $10 a hand.Lets see what happens against every possible dealer upcard. Even money on thirteen BJs will give you $130.Not taking even money will see you winning $15 9 times,and getting zero 4 times when you push,for a total win of $135.You have won an extra half a bet,but its over about 250 hands.Playing 60 hands an hour,you gain a one unit advantage over the course of 8 hours.I'd rather take the even money and be mistaken for a ploppy. Its one of the least costly camoflauge moves I've found. Establishing that you take even money on BJs also gives you wiggle room on the much more frequent insurance decisions

If you talk about long run, then no I would not take even money if the count doesn't call for it. What is that gets ingrained into a counters head, you will lose more hands then you win but if you bet properly with an advantage, your blackjacks, doubles and splits should make you a winner. And if taking even money on a blackjack is not so bad of a move, why is 6:5 blackjack so hated by most counters. If a game where you get 20% more than your original bet for blackjack is unbeatable to most counters, what does it make a game where you turn the game into blackjacks paying 1:1. No I don't like that one bit. Shadroch you are a master of comps so you may be able to make something positve out of it although I'm sure it wouldn't be easy. Let me ask you this, how many true AP's would sit down and play a game where the rules were that blackjacks paid even money. I'd hope the answer would be not many.

 

[21forme]

Let me ask you this, how many true AP's would sit down and play a game where the rules were that blackjacks paid even money.

Shhh! Don't give the casinos any ideas :grin:

 

[sagefr0g]

Shhh! Don't give the casinos any ideas :grin:

stalker say's 6:5 blackjack is the best thing since apple pie. :whip:

 

[21forme]

stalker say's 6:5 blackjack is the best thing since apple pie. :whip:

I know. Every time I pass a 6:5 game in AC, I watch the dealer for a bit, but have yet to find any hole card opportunities.

 

[shadroch]

If you talk about long run, then no I would not take even money if the count doesn't call for it. What is that gets ingrained into a counters head, you will lose more hands then you win but if you bet properly with an advantage, your blackjacks, doubles and splits should make you a winner. And if taking even money on a blackjack is not so bad of a move, why is 6:5 blackjack so hated by most counters. If a game where you get 20% more than your original bet for blackjack is unbeatable to most counters, what does it make a game where you turn the game into blackjacks paying 1:1. No I don't like that one bit. Shadroch you are a master of comps so you may be able to make something positve out of it although I'm sure it wouldn't be easy. Let me ask you this, how many true AP's would sit down and play a game where the rules were that blackjacks paid even money. I'd hope the answer would be not many.

But how many hands are we talking about,is my point. 12 out of 13 player BJs,this never comes into discussion. It is the one out of 13 BJs that a dealer is showing an Ace that this even becomes an issue.Your BJs do not pay 1-1,except for 1/13th of them.
If I take even money on every BJ that the dealer showqs an Ace,and you never take even money,here are the results.Assuming a BJ against any possible dealer card
Me- 12 BJ paying 3-2 on a $10 bet=160$ The 13th BJ,the dealer has an Ace,so I take even money.Total winnings for my 13 BJs is $170.
You -12 BJs pay 3-2 ,and you win $160,same as me.
Here is where your results start to differ. When the dealer shows an Ace,instead of taking even money,you gamble on(or play on,however you wish to term it). The dealer has 13 possible down cards that will result in 9 wins of $135,and four pushs where you win nothing.
End result of the two after 169 player BJs follows.
Shadroch 169 Naturals,156 pay 3/2=2340,and 13 pay even money=130 for a total of $2470
Bojack1 169 Naturals,156 pay 3/2 for $2340. Nine additional BJ pay $135,but four end up as pushs. Total winnings are $2475
If we are talking $100 a bet,I win $24,700,Bojack1 wins $24,750.
Bojack1 is a half unit ahead after the time is takes for a player to get 169 player BJs.
This for a BS player who isn't counting. A counter can vary this a bit,by using camo. If the count is quite low,he can skip the even money saying the dealer had BJ the last time,he can't be so lucky this time,or if the count is elevated,you'll be wanting to take even money anyway.
Its not about changing a three to two advantage into an even money situation. Its about playing a game that pays two and twelve thirteenths to two. For a ploppy,I don't think its that big a deal. For a counter,I think it might end up helping in the long run.

If my math is run,please correct me,and please let me know if you think I'm off base here.

 

[EasyRhino]

I didn't follow the details of the math, but the gist of it, that you get a guaranteed 1:1 payout, is why even money "only" costs as much as an insurance decision, and why it isn't as horrible as a 6:5 table (where you can still tie, after all).

Insurance and even money, to a non-counter, is a lot like regular insurance. It can reduce your risk, but it's going to cost the house less to offer it than they make in "insurance premiums", otherwise they wouldn't offer it.

 

[bj bob]

On the fence

You gentlemen are certainly bringing up an interesting arguement, the basis of which I have pondered myself. By cutting through the rhetoric I must admit both sides of this arguement have value. First, Shad I agree with your math and the fact that this situation arises so infrequently that the play can be used as cover for relatively little loss of EV, viz. one unit in 8 hours.
On the other hand, Bojack is correct in saying that the play does cost EV in the long run, and so it does. If one uses the premise that the decent card counter expects 2U/ hour, then the loss of EV boils down to 1/16 or about 6% loss of EV over the long run.
Hence the rub.
One has to evaluate the situation as always. Shad's premise makes a whole lot of sense at your local store where one plays 5-10 hours/ week and they know you by name, on the other hand I would tend to disregard this tactic on a 2-3 time per year jaunt to Vegas where it would matter very little.

 

[Bojack1]

But how many hands are we talking about,is my point. 12 out of 13 player BJs,this never comes into discussion. It is the one out of 13 BJs that a dealer is showing an Ace that this even becomes an issue.Your BJs do not pay 1-1,except for 1/13th of them.
If I take even money on every BJ that the dealer showqs an Ace,and you never take even money,here are the results.Assuming a BJ against any possible dealer card
Me- 12 BJ paying 3-2 on a $10 bet=160$ The 13th BJ,the dealer has an Ace,so I take even money.Total winnings for my 13 BJs is $170.
You -12 BJs pay 3-2 ,and you win $160,same as me.
Here is where your results start to differ. When the dealer shows an Ace,instead of taking even money,you gamble on(or play on,however you wish to term it). The dealer has 13 possible down cards that will result in 9 wins of $135,and four pushs where you win nothing.
End result of the two after 169 player BJs follows.
Shadroch 169 Naturals,156 pay 3/2=2340,and 13 pay even money=130 for a total of $2470
Bojack1 169 Naturals,156 pay 3/2 for $2340. Nine additional BJ pay $135,but four end up as pushs. Total winnings are $2475
If we are talking $100 a bet,I win $24,700,Bojack1 wins $24,750.
Bojack1 is a half unit ahead after the time is takes for a player to get 169 player BJs.
This for a BS player who isn't counting. A counter can vary this a bit,by using camo. If the count is quite low,he can skip the even money saying the dealer had BJ the last time,he can't be so lucky this time,or if the count is elevated,you'll be wanting to take even money anyway.
Its not about changing a three to two advantage into an even money situation. Its about playing a game that pays two and twelve thirteenths to two. For a ploppy,I don't think its that big a deal. For a counter,I think it might end up helping in the long run.

If my math is run,please correct me,and please let me know if you think I'm off base here.

Well shadroch I certainly understand your thinking now and will admit I stand corrected on my previous post. But it is still my opinion that as you point out, that having a blackjack vs ace is not that common of an occurance, that I would not feel the need to use a -E.V. cover play for it. The advantages with counting are not very big, I have never been the kind to do risk adverse cover plays. Timing my sessions appropriately and judging pit awareness has been more beneficial to my play. I do understand your point and it is well taken, but its just not for me.

 

[shadroch]

I wouldn't expect you or any real pro to practice this,but for amatuer players ,such as myself,it's really not that big a deal.Taking even money on your BJ vs a dealers Ace is far from taking insurance each time its offered.In the proper hands,it can be used constructively,imho.I'm glad I at least got you to understand my logic.For the sub-$25 a hand player,the short term difference is negligible,and since we amatuers tend to play much less frequently than pros,the long term effect isn't all that much either.

 

[sagefr0g]

it's driving me bonkers

i've been searching & searching and can't find this article or post where it's explained that it is sometimes wise to take insurance if you have a big bet out even if the count doesn't warrant it. although i can't for the life of me imagine why one would have a big bet out if the count wasn't at least +3 in the first place. but anyway anyone know the article i'm remmembering?

 

[Kasi]

If my math is run,please correct me,and please let me know if you think I'm off base here.

I completely agree with you that is a an extremely cheap cover play making you look very much like the normal idiot.

Your math is fine, more or less, but using your numbers, if you made this play every time you got it, for a BS player, it would cost .5units/13 BJ's times 1/250.

So while you lose 4% extra every time you get this situation, you only get it once every 250 hands or so, not thirteen times like maybe you were thinking - you might get 13 BJ's but they won't all be vs dealer Ace.

So that would be one unit every 6500 hands or 65 hours of play at 100/hr.

In actuality it may be even closer to a unit every 7500 hands.

I'm sure a counter could work this in and not take even-money when those rare +3 counts occur simultaneously with the situtaion lol.

 

[moo321]

Just tell them you take even money when you have a big bet out. Which generally correlates to having a high count, and makes sense.

 

[bj bob]

OK, but....

Just tell them you take even money when you have a big bet out. Which generally correlates to having a high count, and makes sense.

That line should work fine for the PB/ dealer, but don't forget the sky can't hear your excuse. They only observe bet sizes, patterns hand count.

 

[Kasi]

Just tell them you take even money when you have a big bet out. Which generally correlates to having a high count, and makes sense.

The point here is that, if you always take even money when the count does not call for it, it would be really stupid to take even money with a big bet out when the count actually calls for it.

You've been giving up 4% all this time (when it happens), taking even money when you're not supposed to so you look like an idiot, so why not actually make the +EV bet when it's called for by the count since it will be once in a moon's age to the camera that you apparently, for some odd reason, decided to actually bet insurance? I don't think they'll notice for hundreds of hours.