Interesting and Novel Rule Variations

[StudiodeKadent]

Blackjack is a complex and interesting card game.

In this spirit, I suggest this thread as a way to come up with interesting new ideas for Blackjack games.

I was thinking... what would the effect (on the house edge) be if there was a rule where "suited wins (i.e. any winning hand where all the cards were of the same suit) pay 11:10" is?

Ideally, I would like players to use this thread as a way of suggesting novel rule variations to blackjack. Ideally, these would also be variants that accomodated the requirements of all both basic strategy and advantage players whilst still allowing the house to make a profit over the long run.

Any ideas?

 

[Renzey]

I suggest this thread as a way to come up with interesting new ideas for Blackjack games.

I was thinking... what would the effect (on the house edge) be if there was a rule where "suited wins (i.e. any winning hand where all the cards were of the same suit) pay 11:10" is?

I don't think an 11-to-10 payout is something that would interest most players, since they tend to be "fortune hunters". It's the same reason why a 6-to-5 payoff on blackjack doesn't seem to bother so many of them. It's small stuff in their eyes. Nevertheless, it seems such a rule would automatically pay an extra 10% on an awful lot of hands and be too punitive to the casino -- just guessing.

I prefer rule options where proper play will glean a player benefit and improper play will just cost more. Those characteristics could justify the existence of such a rule to casino management. Late Surrender is a good example. Soft doubling down is another.

One rule option I've thought of that would also fall into that category would be a "Soft Triple Down", whereby the player could triple down with any two card soft hand. Ironically, many players would do it with hands they shouldn't, and pass up the ones they should. Yet, a cursory run thru the numbers indicates that proper soft tripling down would gain a basic strategy player about 0.24% in flat bet EV.

Rules with these "give/take" characteristics would increase the skill content of blackjack.

 

[bj bob]

I prefer rule options where proper play will glean a player benefit and improper play will just cost more. Those characteristics could justify the existence of such a rule to casino management. Late Surrender is a good example. Soft doubling down is another.

One rule option I've thought of that would also fall into that category would be a "Soft Triple Down", whereby the player could triple down with any two card soft hand. Ironically, many players would do it with hands they shouldn't, and pass up the ones they should. Yet, a cursory run thru the numbers indicates that proper soft tripling down would gain a basic strategy player about 0.24% in flat bet EV.

Rules with these "give/take" characteristics would increase the skill content of blackjack.

Fred, when you say these give/take characteristics etc. do you mean any rules which give the average ploppy more rope to hang himself if played incorrectly, e.g. DAS/ surrender while giving the AP an extra edge?

 

[Automatic Monkey]

How about "Superinsurance," that you can take when the dealer shows a 10 and it pays 10:1 on a natural? All they'd have to do is add an extra note to the Insurance bar on the felt. Ploppies would take it, AP's who can sidecount aces would rake it.

 

[actuary]

How about "Superinsurance," that you can take when the dealer shows a 10 and it pays 10:1 on a natural? All they'd have to do is add an extra note to the Insurance bar on the felt. Ploppies would take it, AP's who can sidecount aces would rake it.

I've seen this before, but I can't remember where... It was 10:1 as well.

 

[callipygian]

What about being able to split unpaired cards under certain circumstances (e.g. if the two cards are suited; if the dealer has A/T showing; if you put a non-refundable ante down before the cards are dealt)?

The last option intrigues me the most - give players an option to put in an ante for an option to do a potentially profitable move.

 

[EasyRhino]

I like "superinsurance" mainly because the name has "super" in it.

Maybe "supersurrender". Giving up more than half of the bet for some benefit. Like turning it into early surrender, or being able to push your next two hands free or something.

 

[Renzey]

How about "Superinsurance," that you can take when the dealer shows a 10 and it pays 10:1 on a natural? All they'd have to do is add an extra note to the Insurance bar on the felt. Ploppies would take it, AP's who can sidecount aces would rake it.

I believe the SuperInsurance bet would probably be limited to one-tenth your wager, so as to "push" on the dual transaction. Might slow the game down a little though, since the play would be available 30% of the time. At 10-to-1 payoff odds, the normal house edge would be 15% on a bet one-tenth the size of your hand.

 

[Renzey]

Fred, when you say these give/take characteristics etc. do you mean any rules which give the average ploppy more rope to hang himself if played incorrectly, e.g. DAS/ surrender while giving the AP an extra edge?

Yes -- exactly.

 

[Martin Gayle]

Superinsurance

I've seen this before, but I can't remember where... It was 10:1 as well.

CBJN doesn't mention anything of the sort. I am not implying that you didn't see this but did you see this recently? Was it in the US?

This is an intriguing rule.

 

[EasyRhino]

How about an option to change the rules on a per hand basis? Play a small ante, and all of the sudden you and the dealer are playing to 22 instead of 21.

Or pushes win, or suited cards don't bust, or fours don't count, or the dealer draws cards first... basically just take a fundamental rule of blackjack and throw it out the window. That might be fun.

 

[shadroch]

I like the double down on any three cards rule they have at the Longhorn. In about twenty hours of play, I think I've only used it less than a dozen times, but its a fun rule.

 

[actuary]

CBJN doesn't mention anything of the sort. I am not implying that you didn't see this but did you see this recently? Was it in the US?

This is an intriguing rule.

No, this was a long time ago. I can't remember if it was a charity casino or a temporary casino in Canada, or maybe it was in Australia. It could be gone now, but I definitely remember the bet and going to the bar to figure out at what count to play it.

 

[shadroch]

Somebody discussed it here not so long ago. I think it was being offered in Macau or someplace similar.

 

[Mr. T]

I think " rules variations" is a mute point since the vast majority of players don't play BS BJ. In my opinion about 10% plays a semblance of BS and about 1% plays perfect BS.

It is not the guy who doesn't double his 11 against the 10 or split his 4's against 6 or surrender his 16 against the 10. These are passable plays to me. It is the guy who doesn't double his 11 against the 6 or split his 8's against the 8 or surrender his 12 against the 8.

Where I play just about everybody takes even money BJ against the Ace. According to the Wizard of Odds this gives the House a 3.8% advantage. Players cannot see this difference in actual play so I don' know what the very bad play would increase the house advantage.

I am sure you have seen worst play than what I mentioned above. So these are the guys who keep the casinos open for us. Maybe Fred could tell us what the house advantage would be for these very bad play taken together. Is it more than 10% or 20%.

 

[Katweezel]

Jokers wild

There are 3 wild jokers in a 6-deck shoe. A sidebet is if you score all 3 in your hand, that pays 7,500/1. If you score 2, 1,200/1. If you score 1, 25/1.
THEN, one wild joker as your first or second card is whatever you nominate it to be, and can be doubled down. If the dealer scores one joker, errr... I'm thinking more on that one... :cat:

 

[Geoff Hall]

There are 3 wild jokers in a 6-deck shoe. A sidebet is if you score all 3 in your hand, that pays 7,500/1. If you score 2, 1,200/1. If you score 1, 25/1.
THEN, one wild joker as your first or second card is whatever you nominate it to be, and can be doubled down. If the dealer scores one joker, errr... I'm thinking more on that one... :cat:

It would have to be a CSM or it would be highly countable (and easy to do too).

 

[StudiodeKadent]

Here's one...

A player suited blackjack pays 2:1
A dealer suited blackjack means the dealer takes all bets including those for doubling and splitting (i.e. its original bets only against a non-suited dealer blackjack).

However, suited and unsuited blackjacks 'push' against eachother in the event of dealer/player ties (i.e. suited BJ doesn't beat unsuited BJ).

 

[EasyRhino]

You'd have to call it a superblackjack, because all the new rule variations are require to have "super" in the beginning.

 

[Guynoire]

How about a sidebet where you play casino war with your first card and the dealer's upcard only pushes actually push.