What are the mistakes players make?

I am trying to estimate the house edge at 6D, H17, DAS, DOA, NRSA, NLSR -- a 0.62% game if played correctly. I have a simulator that gets that value when I run it.

I want to modify the program to have a "common player" basic strategy, to get a sense of the edge most players play with. I know there are a number of basic mistakes players make -- so I'll include these:

Double on 9: 5, 6 only, not against 3, 4
Double on 10: 2-8, not against 9
Double on 11: 2-8, not against 9, T
Stand on 12 vs. 2 & 3
Stand on 16 vs. T
A-2: hit always
A-3: hit always
A-4: hit always
A-5: hit always
A-6: double against 5, 6 only
A-7: always stand
A-8: always stand
Splits: only split 8's and A's

With these errors, my simulated result for the house edge is still under 1% (0.89% on a simulation of 100M rounds). But, most casinos claim a house edge of about 2% for the average player. What else should I include? Standing on 15 v. 7? What kind of errors do most players make that are big enough to get edges well over 1%?

--Ms. D.

Should you be adding in tipping behavior?
Should you be adding in Taking Insurance?
Why do you include Standing on 12 vs. 2 and 3? I would think most players know to draw to 13 if dealer has 2 or 3, but have no evidence to support this.
A6: Double against 5,6 only?? Nope. Here again I would think the avg player would Not double at all, just stand because A6 is 17. Once again I have no evidence to support this but perhaps we have different views of what the average half-sloshed fanny-pack wearing player thinks like. (I don't want to claim expertise since I rarely wear a fanny pack but I guess I make up for that by being fully sloshed).

Would actual win rates from the gaming commission help you work backwards on this?

Quote: DorothyGale

I am trying to estimate the house edge at 6D, H17, DAS, DOA, NRSA, NLSR -- a 0.62% game if played correctly. I have a simulator that gets that value when I run it.

I want to modify the program to have a "common player" basic strategy, to get a sense of the edge most players play with. I know there are a number of basic mistakes players make -- so I'll include these:

Double on 9: 5, 6 only, not against 3, 4
Double on 10: 2-8, not against 9
Double on 11: 2-8, not against 9, T
Stand on 12 vs. 2 & 3
Stand on 16 vs. T
A-2: hit always
A-3: hit always
A-4: hit always
A-5: hit always
A-6: double against 5, 6 only
A-7: always stand
A-8: always stand
Splits: only split 8's and A's

With these errors, my simulated result for the house edge is still under 1% (0.89% on a simulation of 100M rounds). But, most casinos claim a house edge of about 2% for the average player. What else should I include? Standing on 15 v. 7? What kind of errors do most players make that are big enough to get edges well over 1%?

--Ms. D.

Taking insurance
Stand 15 against 7
Stand 16 against 7-T

I think a lot of players stand on 16 against 7s, 8s, and 9s as well. I know that 16 vs. T offers the least change to house edge, but 16 vs. 7 seems to be the play which is psychologically hardest to overcome. There are fewer ways that a 7 results in a pat hand for the dealer, forcing him/her to draw and possibly bust.

I am very interested to see your results. Even with all the errors you are currently simulating, the edge only changes by 0.27%. On average, this will only swing one hand out of 370, or one hand in about 4-5 hours of play.

If I add that the player stands on ALL 15 v. 7, 8, 9 T and ALL 16 v. 7, 8, 9, T, I get a house edge over 1.4%. But I can't believe this is what most players do. What subset of these are reasonable to include?

Almost NO players take insurance, though many will take even money (which is insurance 1/21 of the time). I'll wait until adding that one -- it would take re-programming.

--Ms. D.

Not doubling 10 versus ace.
Not doubling 11 versus ace.
Taking insurance.
Not splitting because of not enough bankroll
Not doubling because of not enough bankroll

Ok, I think a fair mix is to assume a player stands on 15 v. 7 and T, as well as 16 v. 7 and T. (but hit against 8 & 9). Adding those to my list above gives reasonable mixture of bad plays on the hard hands. If I include standing on all of 7, 8, 9 & T it is just too much to assume for the average player.

And, for the note above, almost all players stand on hard 12 against 2 & 3. It is not common knowledge at all to hit these hands -- and many players get yelled at when they do hit them.

Now we're at a house edged of 1.22%.

--Ms. D.

Quote: SOOPOO

Not doubling 10 versus ace.
Not doubling 11 versus ace.
Taking insurance.
Not splitting because of not enough bankroll
Not doubling because of not enough bankroll

No one doubles 10 v. A, or 11 v. A, and those are correct already.

Saying "not splitting/doubling" because of insufficient bankroll is not programmable, and is incidental to normal play.

Most players do NOT take insurance, which is correct.

But most DO take "even money" -- which is insurance when the player holds blackjack, which is approximately 1 out of 21 times the dealer has an A up. Since insurance gives up 3.9%, then taking even money is worth about 3.9/21 = 0.19%. I'll grant that extra 0.19% in my final analysis.

I am now at 1.40% after including the "even money" basic strategy variation.

--Ms. D.

I've wanted to post this thought for a while, but didn't really feel like starting a new thread to do it.

When I was in Vegas, I found a 2D table, S17, DAS, RSA 60% penetration (HE: .20%) table at a $25 min. Although I prefer to top out at a $15 minimum, I decided that the rules were about as favorable as I was going to find. After a $500 buy-in (20 bets), I was down those 20 bets within an hour. I could do absolutely NOTHING right, and I was playing with near perfect strategy. Eventually, I did stop doubling 11 against a 10 and some of the more risky plays, because frankly, it didn't make a difference; I would have just lost my money faster.

Out of boredom, and wanting to play $10 BJ on the strip (and get a drink), I found a nice dealer at a table by myself at PH, SD, H17, 6:5, DAS, RSA (HE: 1.52%). I bought in for $100 (10 bets), and walked away about an hour later with $180 (up 8 bets). I had maybe three BJS, which I used as tip money.

Now I realize that in the LONG run, I am going to last 7 times longer on the better rules table. But had I played $25 on the SD table, I would have won approximately $200.

What I'm getting at is while I try to play games with a low HA, if the cards are awful, it doesn't matter at that moment if you're playing a game with a player advantage. And winners can still exist on a game where BJ pays even money and the rules are terrible. Yes, in the LONG RUN with an unlimited bankroll (or at least a bankroll that can sustain the ups and downs), the lower HA game is the best option. But for this particular trip, it didn't matter.

My guess is that casinos kind of balance out the good players (who know proper strategy) against ones who throw it to the wind, average it out, and then round up. If the casino is that astute to a good player, they could always go back and fix the numbers appropriately.

Quote: DorothyGale

No one doubles 10 v. A, or 11 v. A, and those are correct already.

Double 11 against A is the correct play in a 6 deck H17 game, but most inexperienced players will deviate from that.