My adventure with Even Money

[Dyepaintball12]

I am at a table with my friend, and there is an elderly gentleman at the other end.

(My friend gets dealt a BJ against a dealers Ace)

Dealer to my friend: "Even Money?"
My Friend: "Oh no."
Man at other end: "Oh you should take it."
Dealer: "I totally agree!"
Man: "I was in Vegas once, and my friend told me that Even Money is the only sure bet in the house"

Me: "That's ridiculous"
Dealer: "No, he's right. I always take it."
Me: "You couldn't pay me to take Even Money"
Dealer: "Well put it this way; When you put a bet down, what are you trying to get paid?"
Me: "3:2"
Dealer: "No, you want 1 to 1."
Me: "No, I would enjoy getting 3:2"
Man: "That's greedy son. Why would you risk your sure payout for another small amount?"
Me: "I don't enjoy giving the house another 2% edge". (i dont know if this is accurate, but i said it anyway)
Man and Dealer: "mmmm"

(Dealer flips Blackjack)

Man: "Told you"
Me: "Looks like you're right"

(I leave)

 

[sagefr0g]

I am at a table with my friend, and there is an elderly gentleman at the other end.

(My friend gets dealt a BJ against a dealers Ace)

Dealer to my friend: "Even Money?"
My Friend: "Oh no."
Man at other end: "Oh you should take it."
Dealer: "I totally agree!"
Man: "I was in Vegas once, and my friend told me that Even Money is the only sure bet in the house"

Me: "That's ridiculous"
Dealer: "No, he's right. I always take it."
Me: "You couldn't pay me to take Even Money"
Dealer: "Well put it this way; When you put a bet down, what are you trying to get paid?"
Me: "3:2"
Dealer: "No, you want 1 to 1."
Me: "No, I would enjoy getting 3:2"
Man: "That's greedy son. Why would you risk your sure payout for another small amount?"
Me: "I don't enjoy giving the house another 2% edge". (i dont know if this is accurate, but i said it anyway)
Man and Dealer: "mmmm"

(Dealer flips Blackjack)

Man: "Told you"
Me: "Looks like you're right"

(I leave)

lol like they say you did the right thing..... so guess what you get your accollades now. GOOD JOB! :1st: :band:

 

[Unshake]

Taking even money on a dealer up card of an Ace isn't as bad of a play as most people think it is, it doesn't increase the house edge enormously. At least, I remember reading this somewhere, I'll see if I can find it.

 

[Mr. T]

Where I play everybody takes even money except me. They all think I am nuts. But it is a 3.8% house advantage according to the Wizard of Odds.
The way to solve this is to tell everyone on the table when this situation arises you would buy over their even money everytime. You can make some side money that way.

 

[mjbballar23]

Taking even money on a dealer up card of an Ace isn't as bad of a play as most people think it is, it doesn't increase the house edge enormously. At least, I remember reading this somewhere, I'll see if I can find it.

Even money is a cheap cover play because it occurs so infrequently. For those of you who own BJA3, p.99 shows that a $100 flat better playing 100 hands per hour will lose $1.35 more per hour by taking even money every time. A $100 flat bettor playing perfect basic strategy will loose around $50 per 100 hands so taking even money wont lower your win rate by much.

 

[creeping panther]

Dyepaint, WHY

do you say anything at all??

The best thing you can do is keep quiet in these situations, you never know where they will lead.

If you are a true AP you will know when the math says to take even money and or insurance, stop drawing attention to yourself.

Creeping Panther

 

[Unshake]

Where I play everybody takes even money except me. They all think I am nuts. But it is a 3.8% house advantage according to the Wizard of Odds.
The way to solve this is to tell everyone on the table when this situation arises you would buy over their even money everytime. You can make some side money that way.

edited

What dye is talking about is when they offer even money when you have a blackjack and the dealer has an Ace up. And as mj pointed out, it is a fairly infrequent occurrence so it is not a terrible cover play.

I sort of agree with creeping panther as well. If offered I usually decline saying I'm feeling lucky or want to gamble if the count calls for it. Also, the old you didn't have it last time so you won't this time.. or alternatively you had it last time so you won't this time is a good excuse.

 

[callipygian]

The Wizard of Odds calculations assumes that every blackjack pays 1 to 1.

I hope this is a typo.

Taking even money on a dealer up card of an Ace isn't as bad of a play as most people think it is, it doesn't increase the house edge enormously.

The house edge on even money is the same house edge on insurance. It's the same thing.

What you're probably remembering is a line from Snyder's books - he advocates taking even money, not because you will win more in the long run, but because it decreases your variance by quite a bit and gives you cover in return for a marginal decrease on EV.

You have to factor in the likelihood that when you get a blackjack, it's at high counts and you have large bets out. If you have a large percentage of your bankroll on the table (e.g. full Kelly betting), it's advantageous to take the sure +1.00 rather than gamble on +1.04.

 

[Unshake]

I hope this is a typo.

The house edge on even money is the same house edge on insurance. It's the same thing.

What you're probably remembering is a line from Snyder's books - he advocates taking even money, not because you will win more in the long run, but because it decreases your variance by quite a bit and gives you cover in return for a marginal decrease on EV.

You have to factor in the likelihood that when you get a blackjack, it's at high counts and you have large bets out. If you have a large percentage of your bankroll on the table (e.g. full Kelly betting), it's advantageous to take the sure +1.00 rather than gamble on +1.04.

I misread/misunderstood what he posted. I was assuming he meant that it changes the house edge of the game as a whole to 3.8% by taking even money each time. I didn't know he meant a 3.8% edge on just that bet. Sorry, my fault.

 

[Renzey]

I misread/misunderstood what he posted. I was assuming he meant that it changes the house edge of the game as a whole to 3.8% by taking even money each time. I didn't know he meant a 3.8% edge on just that bet. Sorry, my fault.

The 3.8% figure is the amount of your original bet you give back on that particular hand, that particular time. It's true that it won't cost you much over time to take Even Money consistently -- but it won't cost you much over time to make any one reasonable misplay consistently! Not hitting A/7 vs. 10 also costs 3.8% and it comes up just about as often as the Even Money opportunity -- but would you want to give that up too? It can get pretty unhealthy making one 3% or 4% camo play after another!

When making camo plays, there are plenty of them that will keep your "give-back" on each play down under 1.5% of your bet. I think it's those you'd want to focus on.

In place of taking Even Money, why not take Insurance on any hand -- particularly bad ones, for say, one tenth of your bet? The cost is 0.75% of your original bet. You'll have 20 times as many opportunities from which to select the most visible times to do it. Mix those in with lots of other much smaller mistakes, like hitting 12 against a 4, or 13 against a deuce, or standing with A/7 vs. A (w/S17 only), or splitting 7/7 vs. 8, and I think you'll be better off.

 

[Blue Efficacy]

It almost isn't worth taking when I've had so many dealers talk to me like I'm retarded for not taking it. Fortunately, It seems to be those very same dealers who never have a ten in the hole when I get BJ...

 

[callipygian]

dealers talk to me like I'm retarded for not taking it.

Say this:

"Taking even money is the safe route. But I'm not here to play it safe, I'm here to gamble. If I wanted to play it safe, I would have stayed at home and put my money into a bank to earn interest. That's safe - I came to a casino to gamble."

I've never had a dealer say anything else to me for the rest of the session after I said that.:grin:

 

[shadroch]

A/7 vs 10 has to come up a heck of a lot more often than player BJ vs Ace.
For one thing,there are four times as many tens in the deck as their are Aces.
I'd love hear Mr Renzey explain his statement.

 

[Renzey]

A/7 vs 10 has to come up a heck of a lot more often than player BJ vs Ace.
For one thing,there are four times as many tens in the deck as their are Aces.
I'd love hear Mr Renzey explain his statement.

Shad -- A/7 vs. 10 comes up:
(24/312) x (24/311) x 2 x (96/310) = .00367, or once every 272 hands.

A/10 vs. A comes up:
(24/312) x (96/311) x 2 x (23/310) = .00352, or once every 284 hands.

Both hands involve one 10 and two non-10's. The reason they're not exactly the same is that A/10 vs. A involves a second A, making it slightly rarer.

 

[Blue Efficacy]

Shad -- A/7 vs. 10 comes up:
(24/312) x (24/311) x 2 x (96/310) = .00367, or once every 272 hands.

A/10 vs. A comes up:
(24/312) x (96/311) x 2 x (23/310) = .00352, or once every 284 hands.

Both hands involve one 10 and two non-10's. The reason they're not exactly the same is that A/10 vs. A involves a second A, making it slightly rarer.

Don't forget you also have things like A, 4, 3 vs 10, etc which makes this a much more common situation.

 

[callipygian]

Don't forget you also have things like A, 4, 3 vs 10, etc which makes this a much more common situation.

I wouldn't say "much" more, since 4-card probabilities are small compared to 3-card probabilities.

A34 vs. 10 is only going to come up 1/13 as likely as A7 vs. 10. The different possibilities will add up - A25, A34, A43, A52, A6A, A2A4, A223, etc, etc - but what you'll see is a 50% increase in frequency, not a 500% increase in frequency.

 

[Blue Efficacy]

I wouldn't say "much" more, since 4-card probabilities are small compared to 3-card probabilities.

A34 vs. 10 is only going to come up 1/13 as likely as A7 vs. 10. The different possibilities will add up - A25, A34, A43, A52, A6A, A2A4, A223, etc, etc - but what you'll see is a 50% increase in frequency, not a 500% increase in frequency.

I'm just saying all those add up to make Soft 18 v 10 (and you should hit s18 v 9 and A too...) a much more common scenario than even money.

 

[Renzey]

Don't forget you also have things like A, 4, 3 vs 10, etc which makes this a much more common situation.

Blue -- You're right there! Wong's "initial hands" frequency chart vs. his "initial + built-up hands" chart from Professional Blackjack shows the A/7 vs. 10 decision as being a 1-in-294 shot (rather than 1-in-272 due to the occasional 10-up blackjack), where as the "all variety of soft 18 vs. playable 10" situation is listed as a 1-in-180 shot.

The straightaway Even Money opportunity remains at 1-in-284.

I apologize for the oversight.

 

[Mr. T]

Since we have Mr. Renzey here I would like to take the opportunity to ask him what is the correct play for 16 vs the Ace in the European BJ game.

The Wizard of Odds has shown a BS devaition for surrendering 14 against the 10 in the European BJ game. This I can understand as the dealer has the added possiblity of getting a BJ.

However for European BJ since the dealer has a 4 in 13 chance of getting a BJ when he has an Ace, so should I just stand on 16 instead of busting most of the time when I hit the 16.

 

[Mr. T]

Does Sonny or anybody else know the answer here.