Lucky 13s Blackjack

Normally I like to see some US placements of a game, preferably in Vegas, before writing about a game. However, game owner Vinny charmed me with his Australian accent at G2E and Raving that I made an exception in his case. Or maybe the reason is I felt the analysis was a fun challenge. You tell me.

The thrust of Lucky 13s blackjack is that it is pretty much the same as regular blackjack except it is spiced up with adding 11s, 12s, and 13s to the deck. It changes the strategy quite a bit. For example, lots of splitting and doubling against a 12 or 13.

Please check out my new page on Lucky 13s Blackjack. As always, I welcome comments, questions, and especially corrections.

You're also welcome to watch my Raving interview about the game.



The question for the poll is would you play Lucky 13s blackjack?

I don't think that game would be very popular. People won't like busting on their first 2 cards, especially when there's not even a choice (like a 10 and 12/13)

What % of hands result in an automatic loss for the player?

Also, the house edge for a sucker is probably going to be in the 5 - 10% range, maybe even higher.

Like other blackjack variants, even if the house edge is very low (like a good spanish 21 game), the suckers play so badly they make it a terrible game.

Quote: sc15

What % of hands result in an automatic loss for the player?

9.4%.

Quote:

Like other blackjack variants, even if the house edge is very low (like a good spanish 21 game), the suckers play so badly they make it a terrible game.

I mentioned this concern to the game owner and suggested supplying the basic strategy at the table. He said that when he does, players just ignore it.

This does not come as a surprise to me. Triple Attack Blackjack has a very unconventional strategy. They offer my own basic strategy at the table but when I've played I never see the players touch it.

Quote: sc15

I don't think that game would be very popular. People won't like busting on their first 2 cards, especially when there's not even a choice (like a 10 and 12/13)...

+1 Conspiracy theories sprout at regular BJ when the dealer gets a BJ. I can imagine the chatter when someone busts on the first two cards several times with a modified deck in use.

Quote: Wizard

I ... suggested supplying the basic strategy at the table. [The owner] said that when he does, players just ignore it.

People don't trust advise supplied by the casino when the casino's mission is to take your money. What a surprise.

Most variants offer a twist that the player can intuitively identify as an advantage for them. Free Bet offers a free bets, $1/ante offers low wagers, etc. The advantages to the casino are usually harder for the average player to evaluate. I don't see a compelling twist for this game to draw in the average player.

Your poll's joke choice actually brings up an interesting point.

Quote: Wizard

Why is there never a 13th floor in Vegas?

There may be players (perhaps LOTS of players) that will avoid this game simply because of the "13" issue. The "Lucky 13" name doesn't change the fact that "13" is generally considered unlucky.

And for the record, there are lots of buildings outside of Vegas that don't have a 13th floor either.

Regarding the WoO page, why are paired 12s vs Ace, and paired 13s vs Ace, 9 and 10 busts? I assume you mean that these hands aren't worth splitting. And, despite Vinny saying in the interview "Split or bust", perhaps you should use a different code/color to indicate "Fold" - and address that in the text. (On a side note, that purple is so dark, it's hard to see the "x" - at least on my screen. I'd go one step further. Make it black with white text.)

The interview doesn't mention, nor is it indicated on the felt in the video, the Pairs bet.

I think the most telling thing about this game was the reaction by the attendees at Raving. At the keynote/awards luncheon, a Lucky 13 deck was at every place setting, along with other swag. As I was leaving at the conclusion, I noticed that a lot of attendees took most of their swag, but left the Lucky 13 deck behind.


Would I play it? Possibly. But I'm not going out of my way to find it.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Regarding the WoO page, why are paired 12s vs Ace, and paired 13s vs Ace, 9 and 10 busts? I assume you mean that these hands aren't worth splitting. And, despite Vinny saying in the interview "Split or bust", perhaps you should use a different code/color to indicate "Fold" - and address that in the text. (On a side note, that purple is so dark, it's hard to see the "x" - at least on my screen. I'd go one step further. Make it black with white text.)

Those are labeled as busts because the player will lose more than on unit, on average, by splitting. Better to cut your losses at one unit. I think that "fold" is a poker term and would confuse my readers. What I mean to say with the X is "accept the bust." Point taken on the purple. On Vinny's flyer he has it in grey with a white X. Maybe I'll switch to that. It is like of like surrendering, which I traditionally put in white.

Quote:

The interview doesn't mention, nor is it indicated on the felt in the video, the Pairs bet.

His math report doesn't mention it either. Probably a late addition to the game.

Quote:

I think the most telling thing about this game was the reaction by the attendees at Raving. At the keynote/awards luncheon, a Lucky 13 deck was at every place setting, along with other swag. As I was leaving at the conclusion, I noticed that a lot of attendees took most of their swag, but left the Lucky 13 deck behind.

To be honest, I haven't touched my Lucky 13 deck, which I took home with me from G2E. I have enough playing cards to last me the rest of my life, but in the unlikely event I run low, I can always just remove the 11s to 13s from it and use it as a normal deck.

Quote:

Would I play it? Possibly. But I'm not going out of my way to find it.

You say that now, but the next thing you know you'll be camped out in Manchester, playing it all day.

Hey lads,

Just thought I'd pipe in with my two cents and as always appreciate any feedback on "Lucky 13s". I'll try and be brief as I've been known to drone on...

First of all I would like to mention that the wizardofodds site was the reason I was first interested in strategic play, particularly concerning blackjack. As in Australia all BJ is CSM, there was no point in counting, so essentially I'm a perfect BS player. I don't touch side bets... It's really nice to have Mike say such nice things about my game and would have to say I was more than a little starstruck meeting him ;)

Eventually I realised the only way to actually make money in the casino was to work there, and I dealt for a tick over ten years - outside of that I've studied statistics and psychology.

I've traveled to US and played a bit over there and I'm sure you agree that for the most part the average Joes play BJ pretty badly.

Well let me tell you that those average Joes look like Dustin Hoffman compared to the way BJ is played outside the US.

In my 10 years dealing I only ever dealt to two people who played basic strategy 100% of the time. I had my ways of trying to lead people to make the correct the strategic move (i.e. 16 v 7 "Ahhhhh... Go on - what's the worst that can happen?") but if I'd given them the strategy card they would have ignored it anyway.

So, with respect to everybody here in the US... I think some of the criticism regarding the house edge is a little wide of the mark. At 1.24% it's not a bad bet considering it's a low denomination table. Better than a pass line and in the same region as Baccarat.

Thing is that a lot of common "bad plays" in regular BJ are actually good strategy in Lucky 13s - eg: Standing against a 10... So believe it or not the novice player isn't really worse off... Plus they get dealt a lot more "no decision" hands like 17+ which even they can't screw up.


Let me tell you about my favorite bet... The Don't Pass... Well not for making friends but more in the construction and characteristics of the bet. Small % HA difference aside (from Pass Line)... I loved the feeling of knowing I was a favorite to win, as long as I survived a 7 or 11 on the come out roll. Made me a little more confident that the world wasn't against me.

Now a Lucky 13s BJ bet is a bit the same. If you survive the initial deal (which you will 9 times out of 10) then you are on average at a 8% advantage over the house. Yeah it's a bummer but so is rolling a 12 on the come out roll isn't it... In fact you'll crap out 1 time in 9 on the come out, so it's quite similar.


The reason the Pairs sidebet was not shown in US is that you guys are not as big on your sidebets and would have been suspicious should I have had it on there! It's actually one of the main features of the game where it is being played because Perfect Pairs is so popular. And now the player can win 5x odds if the Dealer has a 13 so that is one reason that people are attracted to the game.


Now I'm not the sort of guy that rams stuff down anyone's throat... I didn't put any decks on people's tables at Raving and I believe you may be confusing me with David Mahon which his "Full Color Decks" of 55 cards numbered 1-11 including negative cards! Just wanted to clarify that...


I actually prefer people actually have an emotion about the game, even if it's negative. It's got a better chance of surviving if half the people hate it and half the people love it, than if everybody was indifferent... I just like the fact that it's not like anything else out there and it's nice that it has a placement on the strength of having positive feedback when displayed in a New Games Showcase. There's a number 13 on the Roulette table by the way... Not expecting triskaidekaphobics to queue up though! The fact there's any attribution to the number 13 just adds a bit of an extra hook... If you're gambling you're trying to beat the odds anyway aren't you?! Anyway it's unlucky to be superstitious...


In a nutshell... To the strategic player, you sacrifice three quarters of a percentage point for a bit of an experience. Call me weird, but I find basic BJ strategy a little dull. 90% is stand against a weak card and draw against a strong card. After a while I felt like I'd seen it all.

In Lucky 13s the Dealer has an 11. Is it strong or weak? Well a third of the time it's 21, a third of the time it busts, and a third of the time it's something else. It's not strong or weak, just interesting (well to me at least).

Nothing's for free and yeah to play 200 hands at $5 a pop ($1000 handle) you'll cough up on average an extra 7 or 8 bucks. But to me there's value in that 7 or 8 bucks.

I guess I've come to learn that there's qualitative elements to the gaming scene and that it's not just the numbers that matter (although of course they play a major role).


I'm going to sum up with some of the cool things that can happen that contribute to what I call "the experience"
- Dealer showing 12 or 13 up (reminds me a bit of Double Exposure) - great time to double/split etc...
- Increase in Dealer Busts due to high value cards (being more confident when dealer has 15 that he's not going to sneak one on you)... Dealer busts = good atmosphere
- Dealer flipping 12 or 13 on top of their face card
- Having more than 16 and dealer paying you out on their 16 instead of sneaking a 5 on you like normal BJ
- Deciding whether to split "overpairs" - 11s/12s/13s or not.

And for side betters, the game has an appeal because of the green 13s and what happens if you can match two (a bit like a slot machine)... And the x5 Multiplier on payouts if Dealer has upcard 13. In practice, this creates an air of excitement as players receive their second card knowing the Dealer has a 13 and they stand to win more than normal.


Maybe the player benefits are a bit more subtle and not so in your face as things like Switch or Free Bet... But it's definitely noticeable that once players are in the hand they win more often, and dealer doesn't get as "lucky" as normal... Also, where the house gets it back is not as obvious as Push 22... It's on players busting their initial hand, but they did have an option to make a bet on that and almost all of them are taking that up so consider that a win.


Sad at it is - we on here are grossly in the minority when it comes to who is actually at the tables - especially outside the US and especially at the low end of the market. Instead of operators driving up minimums to make more money and forcing people to fork out more as a minimum bet, I hope I've created a product that can keep minimums low but still provide a good game for the players and house.

As a former Dealer, I'm glad that the feedback from Dealers is that although it's weird at first, it's kind of cool to do something completely different but totally the same to normal... They've been really great and picked up the game really quickly.


So I'm not expecting anyone on here to rush to their nearest Lucky 13s table and spend their hard earned but if you're curious why don't you go to the website and play a few hands and learn the strategy? The game was born out of me being curious about what the HA was when we were dealing blackjack with this weird deck of cards we had in our house... I analyzed it only because I wondered what the right thing was to do in these strange situations: (Split 12s against a 7?), and also I felt like the game was in the player's favor (turned out it was, if Dealer Hits 16 like normal BJ then the player is ahead over 2%... that's why I had to change that rule)...

I'm not from a big company or big budget... I'm just a little guy who promised himself that he'd keep going with putting the game out there as long as it was warranted. I'm sure you know how difficult it is to get a game to any sort of live trial and the vast majority of games never do. I honestly thought I had a better game than what some of the big boys were putting out there, even though they had large marketing budgets and connections. It sounds weird when you describe Lucky 13s, but it flows and has the feel of blackjack... I'm not a huge fan of game that are really slow and stilted.

I live in the real world and I'm not expecting to be a gajillionaire out of Lucky 13s, but I am happy that the game has reached live play on its own merits. I hope that this brief history and explanation has been interesting and shows you my philosophy and approach to developing a table game product. Thanks those who have taken an interest no matter what your opinion!

Cheers
Vinny

I stumbled into the game at Coventry - thanks for the pack of cards, it was good to meet you have a chat. It was an enjoyable game to play and kind for a strategy card to be available. The thing I like is the in-built x% chance of losing before you even play, but thereafter you're at an advantage. This seems like a nice mechanism for a game.

Thanks for the insight, Vinny. If your game has a lower wager than surrounding games I think it will do just fine. Peruse this site and you'll see ploppies are having a feeding frenzy at $1 BJ, oblivious to the fact of the 25-cent ante resulting in a HA of +25%. (No, I didn't forget a decimal point in that number.) I'll try Lucky 13s if you get a table in New England, but like others that frequent this site the HA is the bottom line. I would flip coins if it had HA in my favor. Keep your pecker up!

Really interesting discussion, Vinny! I hope you find success with the game.

Welcome to the forum Vinny! There are lots of game inventors as members so I think you'll enjoy the company. I appreciate all the comments on your game and wish you nothing but success with it.

Welcome Vinny!!! I took a look at your game at G2E I believe and thanks for the history of how the game was developed.

My big drawback in playing the game demo was that it felt like more often than not, the game experience was to survive the initial deal, not take a hit card and then wait for the dealer to bust. I haven't analyzed the numbers or compared them to regular BJ, but the fact that it felt like I didn't get to hit very often made Lucky 13's seem less interactive than regular BJ. You likely know these numbers, but what is the percentage of hands that you hit or split in Lucky 13's and how does that frequency compare to regular BJ?

Not sure how a new deck will work with the auto shuffler machines out in the market these days. They won't be able to optically read your card deck without some significant customization. Using a completely new deck will be a problem in that regard.

In any event, I wish you good luck and with your game on the floor in the UK, you are going to get the only feedback that matters: from the players and the operator!

Quote: beachbumbabs

Really interesting discussion, Vinny! I hope you find success with the game.

Yes! I hope to see it do well.

Thanks everybody and hopefully the background is something many of you can relate to. As far as standing more often, from memory I think it's about 5% more often... But also that assumes players are standing correctly against a ten-value card, where most will hit and there's not much in it anyway. A lot of those stands are pat hands too. It kind of makes me giggle to myself a little bit because here we are analyzing the finer points of the blackjack strategy, when most of the players really treat the BJ bet as the side bet! The "real" game is trying to win a big payout against a Dealer 13, and once the BJ phase starts they're not to fussed what happens - let's get it over with and try to win the big money again!

But as discussed before - this is the world we live in! Will be good to get real data and feedback from players and operators trialling the game.

Cheers again guys - I'm on my way home to the sun now... Gonna hit the beach :)

I could see this pushing the typical double numbers from 9-10-11 down to something like 6-7-8 (just a slightly educated guess). I could see this being a fun game though, giving a lot more player decisions. More decisions means more of an advantage for the properly prepared player. I do think the house edge is a bit high for a "blackjack" variant... but lastly... AP or not, I would play any table where she was dealing =P. You did a phenomenal job presenting the game =D.

edit: Is there anywhere online we could play for free to check the game out, practice, get a feel for it, etc? I ask to ask and potentially give advice on spreading the game. I showed my dad the online MoneySuit31 game and he's counting the days down until it comes to a casino near us. Definitely good exposure to let people start playing it for fun/free to get a feel early on.

You can play the online demo at http://lucky13s.com.au/play-it/

Actually the doubling isn't that extreme of a difference...

Just need to be a bit more careful doubling on an 11... There's still plenty of ten-value cards in there though...

Doubling rules (Hard) in a nutshell:

Double anything 11 or less against a 12 or 13 (even a Hard 5!),
Double Hard 8 through Hard 11 against Dealer 5 or less
Double Hard 9 also against a 6,
Double Hard 10 also against a 6 or 7.

Although you can bust on a double and it hurts, it's really no different to getting an Ace on that Doubled 11 in BJ and then being blown away by a 20... Just stings a bit more with it being instant I admit!


Also meant to reply regarding shuffling machines... The decks don't pose a problem with the ShuffleMaster One2Six shufflers being used for trials in the UK... The machines can be programmed to shuffle any amount of cards (up to six standard decks) and there is no recognition of card values on these machines anyway.

Hopefully people find the experience fun and a little different which is what it's all about. Regarding the dealer you mention - she got told she wasn't on camera during the interview and told me that she should have at least looked busy... But I agree 100% that she can make any game look good - not just great looking but great dealer!


A final note on HA... An easy rule to bring HA down if that's what was desired (e.g. to lure strategic players, while still dining out on poor decisions from ploppies) is to reward a player BJ against a Dealer 13, much in the way the side bets pay out extra 5x...

If my calculations are correct:
Player BJ against dealer 13 pays 5 to 1 --> HA 0.55%
Player BJ against dealer 13 pays 7.5 to 1 (five times as much as usual) --> HA 0.07%


Look forward to hearing about your experience Romes

"I live in the real world and I'm not expecting to be a gajillionaire out of Lucky 13s, but I am happy that the game has reached live play on its own merits."

And it's certainly something to be proud of!

Good Luck Bud! Looking forward to the updates from over there.

Yeah, the problem with this game, is the biggest advantage is facing a dealer 12 or 13 upcard, but most players will fail to realize that and won't capitalize on it.

Unlike free bet blackjack, where the advantage is to always take a free bet, and it's very obvious to always do so, the average sucker won't know how to take advantage of a dealer 12/13.

As far as most buildings lacking a 13th floor, that's purely business.

It costs maybe $5 in extra labor to skip having a 13th floor in a $100 million building. Totally worth the cost to avoid the risk that some retard actually refuses to rent an open apartment/office because it's on the 13th floor.

Quote: 13s

You can play the online demo at http://lucky13s.com.au/play-it/
...
Look forward to hearing about your experience Romes

It has my interest. I, of course, start thinking of different strategies/etc for the game. One thing I'm curious on... I had a 14 to dealers ace. This seems to play European style where the dealer doesn't take a hole card. I drew a 7 for 21, dealer drew a 10 for blackjack. I would hope 21 pushed at least, but I lost my bet =/. Admittedly being greed to European style blackjack, is this typical to lose even with 21? For some reason I thought it would result in a push.

I also think it a bit odd that aces can be an 11, thus a blackjack on A-J... but 11-J is just a 21, and not a 'blackjack'. It hurts my feelings just slgihtly to get dealt a 2 card 21 and not call it a blackjack =/.

Oh my how things can quickly change lol...


I like it though. Lots to consider and think about!

Overall a lot of fun and more importantly (in my opinion) a new take on the game... One that doesn't involve removing 10's from the deck, letting the dealer push on a bust hand (22), etc. Adding more unique cards for more unique player decisions makes it more fun, in my opinion.

Edit: I believe I also whitnessed a glitch in the game. I was down to $112.50, so I bet $100... I won (dealer busted, no change of push), and after the hand I still only had $112.50. Even after clicking "new" to try to reset the chips in my stack, still only had $112.50.

So where is the game available besides Australia? Are games dealt from a shoe?

Quote: Avincow

So where is the game available besides Australia? Are games dealt from a shoe?

According to facebook it's going live in the UK. I'm guessing, like other Blackjack variants, Grosvenor will give it a three month trial. Northampton (ex Gala) is a smaller casino, but the one in Manchester is reasonably sized - so it will be interesting to see how it fairs.

Quote: https://www.facebook.com/Lucky13sBlackjack

Exciting times for Lucky 13s Blackjack, with live games beginning Friday February 6 at Grosvenor Northampton and Grosvenor Bury New Road Manchester!

Quote: 13s

An easy rule to bring HA down if that's what was desired (e.g. to lure strategic players, while still dining out on poor decisions from ploppies) is to reward a player BJ against a Dealer 13, much in the way the side bets pay out extra 5x...

If my calculations are correct:
Player BJ against dealer 13 pays 5 to 1 --> HA 0.55%
Player BJ against dealer 13 pays 7.5 to 1 (five times as much as usual) --> HA 0.07%

I would play Lucky 13s if the HA were 0.55% for optimal play.

Wizard, can you calculate house edge if someone were to play the following strategy (this is how I think a typical sucker would play):

Basic hit/stand for hard hands:
Hit anything 11 or under vs 2 - 6, 12, 13
Hit anything 16 or under vs A, 7-11

For soft hands:
Hit any soft 17 or under, stand on all soft 18s.

Double downs:
Double 10 vs 2 - 9, 12, 13
Double 11 vs everything except A or 11
Double 9 vs 12/13
Double any soft hand 17 or under vs 4 - 6, 12, 13

Splits:
Always split aces
Follow blackjack split strategy for all other splits for A - T (except never split 9s)
Split anything except 5s and 10s vs 12/13
Always split 11s, 12s, and 13s EXCEPT 12/13 vs A

Hi sc15,

The Wizard is a busy man so I'm sure he's happy that I've taken the liberty of putting those values in to my system and it returned a HA of 3.09%.

Funnily enough - I had constructed a couple of player profiles myself a while back:

I had my one called "Seasoned Campaigner" who pretty much refused to deviate from BJ Basic Strategy at 3.13%.

And another called "Typical Weekend Punter" who I couldn't imagine playing much worse which returned a HA of 4.18%.
This player refused to double soft hands at all, wasn't averse to splitting tens if the mood struck them and would pretty much hit 14 or less without looking at the dealer's card. And they took even money! I'm sure we all know this player, they're normally sitting on your right at a normal BJ table (and although we tell ourselves it doesn't affect our chances one way or the other, you'd have to be a total robot to not have some kind of physiological response!)


I don't think these values stack up too badly against bad players in regular BJ...

Hey Romes,

Your response to European No Hole Card seems exactly the opposite of how I feel when I play American Hole Card Rules!

I'm like "Whoa cool - so I know the dealer doesn't have a BJ!"... The main BS differences I have to incorporate into my game are Doubling 11 v 10 instead of just hitting and splitting 8s against a 10.


The demo has ENHC rules because that's where the first placements are. If the game is picked up in the US or any place where it is getting dealt with a hole card, then it will still be dealt with a hole card. If the dealer has a BJ then only original bets are lost (OBBO).

The model of the game is that wherever possible, the game is dealt with the same house rules as regular BJ, only the cards are different - this is to minimise unnecessary dealer confusion. The game has the flexibility to allow this.

As far as splitting to receive A-10, in England they actually announce "Splitting Aces, no blackjack"... This is to remind players that a natural is only achieved if you can be dealt A-10 with your first two cards. I'm used to this (it's actually pretty common in regular BJ - the correct play is to split aces against a picture, and you can expect to receive two face cards on your aces and then the dealer pulls an ace on their ten and takes both your bets!).


For the record, according to my math report, playing Lucky 13s with a hole card reduces the edge by approx 0.11%, to 1.13% or so.

As far as the 2 card 21 not being blackjack unless including Ace, most people seem happy just to get a 21... They're also safe in the knowledge that their blackjack against a Dealer 11 is no threat to them and they'll collect their 3-2 instantly...

I toyed with treating every 2 card 21 as a blackjack but it was a little more confusing and it simply happens too often to be able to pay the 3 to 2. I just tell player's to treat it the same as receiving K-5-6 in normal blackjack and they understand.


A central feature of the game is that nothing's taken away overtly from the player... No Push 22, No BJ pays less than 3-2, no dealer wins ties or any of that stuff...

So although it might not have the obvious feature such as Free Bet, it also doesn't have the obvious takeaway...


I like your tagline "Playing it correctly means you've already won." It reminds me of why I play the game and why I get satisfaction from knowing the 13s strategy! (Especially when you can count the amount of people who know it in the world on one... err... finger)

Quote: mrsuit31

"I live in the real world and I'm not expecting to be a gajillionaire out of Lucky 13s, but I am happy that the game has reached live play on its own merits."

And it's certainly something to be proud of!

Good Luck Bud! Looking forward to the updates from over there.

Thanks Brent - good luck with your game too mate!

Quote: Avincow

So where is the game available besides Australia? Are games dealt from a shoe?

Hey Avincow,

At the moment the game is only live in UK and shortly will be on three Royal Caribbean Cruise ships.

The game is intended to be dealt out of a CSM and that's what's happening so far. Reason is (in case you hadn't worked it out) that a pre-schooler could count the side bet which pays out on two big cards... Especially 13s. (Anyone remember Over/Under 13?!)

But these days many markets have CSMs as standard and the players accept them.


Having said that, if there is no option but to deal gameout of a shoe, rules are cut card is placed half way, Protection bet is Maximum $25 and not allowed to exceed player's BJ bet.

Quote: 13s

Hi sc15,

The Wizard is a busy man so I'm sure he's happy that I've taken the liberty of putting those values in to my system and it returned a HA of 3.09%.

Funnily enough - I had constructed a couple of player profiles myself a while back:

I had my one called "Seasoned Campaigner" who pretty much refused to deviate from BJ Basic Strategy at 3.13%.

And another called "Typical Weekend Punter" who I couldn't imagine playing much worse which returned a HA of 4.18%.
This player refused to double soft hands at all, wasn't averse to splitting tens if the mood struck them and would pretty much hit 14 or less without looking at the dealer's card. And they took even money! I'm sure we all know this player, they're normally sitting on your right at a normal BJ table (and although we tell ourselves it doesn't affect our chances one way or the other, you'd have to be a total robot to not have some kind of physiological response!)


I don't think these values stack up too badly against bad players in regular BJ...

I'm surprised the edge is so low with such crappy play. I was thinking the house edge would be at least 5% with typical sucker play.

I mean hell, there's plenty of suckers who turn regular .5% HA blackjack into a 3%+ game.

Since you have a simulator for the game (I'm assuming), I'm curious..

What do the effects of removal look like for each card?

Quote: sc15

Since you have a simulator for the game (I'm assuming), I'm curious..

What do the effects of removal look like for each card?

I actually don't really have a simulator outside of the strategy worksheet...

But I did build a basic deck composition analyser that showed me what happens if the deck is out of proportion... Essentially it was an academic exercise as the game is dealt out of CSM due to side bet vulnerability...

I found in general that the basic principle of tens and aces being in deck was good for player as in traditional BJ... Probably because player BJs paid 3:2 so more chance of getting one.


Decks rich in small cards or 12/13s bad not surprisingly were not good for player. These cards help the dealer to make hands.


But effects were not dramatic and as an overall game I would suspect (in theory) that it would be a lot less desirable to count the BJ bet on this game as opposed to traditional BJ.

Part of this is the dimension of busting on first two cards. In BJ you want big cards in deck if counting, but in Lucky 13s, they can be too big and you're out!


Again though - I only did this to satisfy my curiousity!

Quote: sc15

I'm surprised the edge is so low with such crappy play. I was thinking the house edge would be at least 5% with typical sucker play.

I mean hell, there's plenty of suckers who turn regular .5% HA blackjack into a 3%+ game.

I think a lot of the reason suckers fair better is they're dealt a lot more pat hands... Even they can't screw up bring dealt an 18 or more right? With the bigger cards, there's more of these dealt so they have less scope to shoot themselves in the foot.

And a lot of the plays they will screw up (eg. Hitting v 10) are borderline plays anyway so don't ramp the HA too much if they make them.


I have my own favorite BS plays - Double A-7 against 10? Of course! :)

Split 5s against 12 or 13... Why not?!


Glad people are finding it fun even if it's just to make you think - that's what it's all about!

As a purely BS player myself I find it has another dimension which keeps me entertained...

That's true, you get a lot more hands that you can't screw up with the bigger cards.

And yeah.. the side bet would be vulnerable to a 13 = -14, all other cards = +1 count system, the protection bet even more so.

I would say that's going to be an issue if it needs to be dealt out of a CSM. Players don't like CSMs in general, and it also increases the cost of having a table since the casino needs to lease the shuffler.

Quote: sc15

That's true, you get a lot more hands that you can't screw up with the bigger cards.

And yeah.. the side bet would be vulnerable to a 13 = -14, all other cards = +1 count system, the protection bet even more so.

I would say that's going to be an issue if it needs to be dealt out of a CSM. Players don't like CSMs in general, and it also increases the cost of having a table since the casino needs to lease the shuffler.

Perhaps it's an issue - but normally the game is replacing a low limit BJ which was using one anyway... And would you believe it I dealt BJ here for over ten years without having to shuffle once! So depending on the market, players may have already adapted to acceptance of the evil shuffling machine...

At any rate, What do you think of the suggested measures for dealing out of shoe?

- deal only two of four decks (effectively size of 2.5 decks dealt)
- protection bet cannot exceed BJ bet (max $25)
- keep your eyes open


In the absence of in depth scientific data these seemed like practical and common sense measures to prevent players taking advantage of game? (No pun intended)

Quote: 13s

Perhaps it's an issue - but normally the game is replacing a low limit BJ which was using one anyway... And would you believe it I dealt BJ here for over ten years without having to shuffle once! So depending on the market, players may have already adapted to acceptance of the evil shuffling machine...

At any rate, What do you think of the suggested measures for dealing out of shoe?

- deal only two of four decks (effectively size of 2.5 decks dealt)
- protection bet cannot exceed BJ bet (max $25)
- keep your eyes open


In the absence of in depth scientific data these seemed like practical and common sense measures to prevent players taking advantage of game? (No pun intended)

I would say calculate what the EV is of counting the side bet betting table max (which is $25 for the side bet) on +EV opportunities dealing 7/8ths of the shoe.

If the house's exposure is something like $20 / hour or less then I would say deal out the majority of the shoe and don't bother worrying about AP play.

To put it in perspective, when I play we usually cost the house a few thousand / hour. A card counter can easily cost the house hundreds per hour for brazen play, and $50 - $100 / hour even if they're being somewhat careful about it.

I wouldn't sweat a $25 max side bet too much on a main game that would require a different count system and has a 1.2% house edge. I mean sure, you could have a team go hit up the game and have each member use a different count for the main game and the 2 side bets, but let's be realistic, a team with the intelligence to calculate that play and the coordination to have 3 people using different counts and sharing the information can do a much better play than this.

The Protection side bet is really countable. Here are the EoR's for a 4 deck game:

Card	Change in Player EV
A to 8	0.007829826
9	0.004279654
10	0.000690426
11	-0.002674476
12	-0.017031388
13	-0.049974103

Yes, the house edge goes up by almost 5% if you remove one 13!

I put put my Excel file here. It has both the Protection and Pairs side bets.

Quote: miplet

The Protection side bet is really countable. Here are the EoR's for a 4 deck game:

Card	Change in Player EV
A to 8	0.007829826
9	0.004279654
10	0.000690426
11	-0.002674476
12	-0.017031388
13	-0.049974103

Yes, the house edge goes up by almost 5% if you remove one 13!

I put put my Excel file here. It has both the Protection and Pairs side bets.

Thanks for those numbers Miplet... Will be useful in formulating things should the game ever be dealt out of a shoe for some reason.

Quote: 13s

...For the record, according to my math report, playing Lucky 13s with a hole card reduces the edge by approx 0.11%, to 1.13% or so.

So if you're playing a game where the dealer takes a whole card, what happens when the dealer gets 12-12, before any player decisions have happened? Does the dealer bust and pay anyone on the table whom also didn't bust?

Quote: 13s

As far as the 2 card 21 not being blackjack unless including Ace, most people seem happy just to get a 21... They're also safe in the knowledge that their blackjack against a Dealer 11 is no threat to them and they'll collect their 3-2 instantly...

I'm not too worried about the 3-2 payment... I was more focusing on the frustration of getting dealt, or hitting, to a 21... Then not even pushing when the dealer gets blackjack. I should think the 21 values would push at least. Otherwise it truly is a waste of time to play any hand against a dealer ace, or 10 that could pull an ace... because what's the point? Even if you do the best you can do (get 21) you still lose.

Quote: 13s

I toyed with treating every 2 card 21 as a blackjack but it was a little more confusing and it simply happens too often to be able to pay the 3 to 2. I just tell player's to treat it the same as receiving K-5-6 in normal blackjack and they understand.

This isn't the same... A K-5-6 in 'normal blackjack' would push against a dealer 21, not lose.

Quote: 13s

A central feature of the game is that nothing's taken away overtly from the player... No Push 22, No BJ pays less than 3-2, no dealer wins ties or any of that stuff...

So although it might not have the obvious feature such as Free Bet, it also doesn't have the obvious takeaway...


I like your tagline "Playing it correctly means you've already won." It reminds me of why I play the game and why I get satisfaction from knowing the 13s strategy! (Especially when you can count the amount of people who know it in the world on one... err... finger)

I agree one of the things I liked was no added rules 'against' the player (push 22, 6:5, etc). Overall a very fun game. Basic Strategy seems very very different (as it should be), but alas, just another chart to memorize =P.

You should be the only person in the world to know the basic strategy lol =)... unless you taught a friend/college!

Quote: 13s

Perhaps it's an issue - but normally the game is replacing a low limit BJ which was using one anyway... And would you believe it I dealt BJ here for over ten years without having to shuffle once! So depending on the market, players may have already adapted to acceptance of the evil shuffling machine...

I wouldn't play this game if it were on an continuous shuffler =(.

Quote: 13s

At any rate, What do you think of the suggested measures for dealing out of shoe?

- deal only two of four decks (effectively size of 2.5 decks dealt)
- protection bet cannot exceed BJ bet (max $25)
- keep your eyes open


In the absence of in depth scientific data these seemed like practical and common sense measures to prevent players taking advantage of game? (No pun intended)

It's not that the game can be taken advantage of, it's for how much. Like sc15 said, if it's something like $20/hour then anyone willing to put that work in has multiple other plays that would pay better. Plus, as you stated you can "keep your eyes open" just like PB's do for regular blackjack/counters. I would deal 6 decks from a shoe and max $25 on side bets. Use an ASM for quick shuffles.

Quote: miplet

The Protection side bet is really countable. Here are the EoR's for a 4 deck game:

Card	Change in Player EV
A to 8	0.007829826
9	0.004279654
10	0.000690426
11	-0.002674476
12	-0.017031388
13	-0.049974103

Yes, the house edge goes up by almost 5% if you remove one 13!

I put put my Excel file here. It has both the Protection and Pairs side bets.

can you upload that file to a google spreadsheet?

Quote: sc15

can you upload that file to a google spreadsheet?

yes

Quote: miplet

yes

Thanks.

Could you make cells B3 - E-18 editable to the public? That way anybody can change the values and see how it affects the returns.

Quote: sc15

Quote: miplet

yes

Thanks.

Could you make cells B3 - E-18 editable to the public? That way anybody can change the values and see how it affects the returns.

Ok I did. Never done that before.

Hey Romes,

Hole card/Dealer peek:
The hole card rules assume the dealer checks to see if they have a blackjack or not. They would only do so before the players have acted if there was an automatic peeker. Hence they don't know the value of their hand except if it's a blackjack or not. If manual peek is the go, then instead of checking before, the dealer only takes original and busted bets on dealer blackjack.

With respect to paying out automatically if they were to check and have busted, it actually detracts from the player experience as it deprives them the opportunity to split/double down against a 12 or a 13 which is one of the really fun aspects... If the dealer had checked and you knew that they hadn't busted yet, then you'd have to play this more cautiously.

Anyway it's a bit of a moot point because the dealer only checks for blackjack, and, much like current peekers, the dealer couldn't tell you if they had 20 or 15 or whatever if they wanted to, as they only know if it's a natural or isn't one.


K-5-6 = 21:
In ENHC, it's not unusual to make a 21 and lose, as the dealer only knows if they have a natural at the end of the hand. As such, this is the way I explain it to the folk in the UK. I put it simply to them... "A blackjack over there is a blackjack over here."


Seems like the ENHC might be throwing you a bit... All the time we have to play in fear against an Ace, although remember they won't make a BJ off an Ace 7 times out of 10 in normal BJ and 3 times out of 4 in Lucky 13s so not all is lost.

I actually feel ripped off when I play in the US and you guys scoop up all the money on a dealer natural before I've even had a chance to play my hand! Just depends what you grow up with I guess...


Continuous Shuffler:
Informed US player: "I won't play on a continuous shuffler"
Regular US player: "I'd rather not play on a continuous shuffler"
UK player: "I hate these shufflers... Change 100!"
Aussie player: "Do you have any Perfect Pairs tables where you don't have to also place a BJ bet?"


Advantage Play:
It's not rocket surgery to work out the side bet is countable so it's just how you manage it. To me it's a lot more important to gauge the game's popularity as a whole before stressing too much about AP. As you mention, there are a lot better plays out there and there's heaps that can be done easily to bring the Desirability Index down on a game security level.


Game Play:
Glad you find the game very fun overall. And I like it that the strategy although different still follows the principles of BJ strategy: there's more tens in the deck than anything else and this dictates the strategy to a large degree. There's the same proportion of tens in the deck as Spanish 21 (25%). Spanish 21: 3/12, Lucky 13s: 4/16.

Would you play online for fun if the HA was a bit lower? Say 0.55% for BJ against 13 pays 5-1?

Well for me, the dealer dealing a hole card means I could potentially catch the hole card.

If no hole card is dealt then there's nothing to work with.

Quote: 13s

...the [13-based] side bet is countable...

One idea might be a perfect pairs with different odds (not based on 13s etc.). Grosvenor have introduced http://www.ukcasinotablegames.info/blackjackbonuspairs.html so might consider a variation on it (unless they've already printed the cloths), but I think you can at least pay 10-1 for any pair.

fwiw Freebet has a higher HE than regular BJ, in the UK dealer stands on soft 17 and allows free splits of 4s (but not 10s), but I think it's less than 1%. The problem with having a BJ with too high HE is people might eventually [subconsciously] compare the longevity of their play and wonder whether the entertainment value is worth the extra cost.

Quote: charliepatrick

Quote: 13s

...the [13-based] side bet is countable...

One idea might be a perfect pairs with different odds (not based on 13s etc.). Grosvenor have introduced http://www.ukcasinotablegames.info/blackjackbonuspairs.html so might consider a variation on it (unless they've already printed the cloths), but I think you can at least pay 10-1 for any pair.

fwiw Freebet has a higher HE than regular BJ, in the UK dealer stands on soft 17 and allows free splits of 4s (but not 10s), but I think it's less than 1%. The problem with having a BJ with too high HE is people might eventually [subconsciously] compare the longevity of their play and wonder whether the entertainment value is worth the extra cost.

Funny you mention that - grosvenor have recently introduced "Bonus Pairs" to subvert having to pay royalties for Perfect Pairs.

It's exactly the same as Perfect Pairs but pays 5-1 extra if the Dealer's up card matches the pair (Trips Bonus)...

Their odds - 6 decks
Mixed Pair 5-1 (10-1 if trips)
Coloured Pair 10-1 (15-1 if trips)
Perfect (oops I mean "suited") Pair 30-1 (35-1 if trips bonus)


Plan is for Lucky 13s to follow this type of pair structure with the 5x if 13 showing... Would be more exciting and with CSM counting not really an issue...


Cheeky thing was that apparently they had TCS (owners of Perfect Pairs) to print their new "Bonus Pairs" layouts! Imagine that conversation!

My local is a Grosvenor so I knew why they'd done it! My concerns with using the payout based on 13s is the countability and the adverse risk of paying over (about) 50-1. Typically they are happy with allowing up to £200 bets on trial games that don't pay over 5-1 (i.e. similar to Blackjack where you might split/double a few times) - one game suffered because of the risk of a high payout. On new sidebets with high payouts they typically limit it to £25 (Top 3 90/180/260-1 has a limit of £10). Thus my recommendation is to keep it under 50-1. The other idea is whether 21+3 works.

Quote: 13s

I actually feel ripped off when I play in the US and you guys scoop up all the money on a dealer natural before I've even had a chance to play my hand! Just depends what you grow up with I guess...

How so? Even if you play your hand to 21 (the best you could do), you still lose on ENHC, correct? So it's pointless to play your hand if the dealer ends up with a BJ.

Quote: 13s

Would you play online for fun if the HA was a bit lower? Say 0.55% for BJ against 13 pays 5-1?

I don't play any games online as it's near impossible to prove they aren't rigged, even to the slightest percent. As a programmer I can make a game as random as possible, but then add in a line of code here or there, burred in 20,000-30,000 other lines of code no one would ever find that changes the outcome by half a percent, or something like that. No one could ever come back on the software as not being legit, figuring a half of a percent is within standard deviations of variance. All said and done, from my profession I'm aware online games can't ever be 100% trusted unless I've personally gone through the 30k lines of code (which would take forever and a day). Thus, not worth playing, in my opinion.

I have similar feelings about continuous shufflers (and even some thoughts about automatic shufflers). If either of them have a way of identifying cards at all, then the whole system could be compromised... but I don't know enough about their mechanics/programming to make an informed decision. Thus, I avoid CSM's.

I'm trying to work out the strategy, to compare with the website and wizard's versions and get a better feel for the quirks
http://lucky13s.com.au/ETG-Brochure.pdf https://wizardofodds.com/games/lucky-13s-blackjack/

Just wondering whether anyone else has tried as I get a couple of minor differences to the wizard's numbers using infinite deck.
(i) I don't have split 10s vs 12 or 13 (in the UK I think they may have to be a real pair). Given you weren't going to hit 20, if it's worth splitting then whether you can resplit shouldn't affect the decision (this isn't true when considering splitting Aces if you can't re-split for some reason). Thus should the decision be the same as doubling soft 20, although the difference might be larger because you can re-split? btw did you remember to add in the bust possibility when getting 12 or 13s (I forgot originally!)
(ii) Splitting 2s vs 4 is quite close, so I can imagine that decision changes for finite decks.

(i) I had 10,10 as a stand as well but maybe this is something to do with re-splitting that is over my head? You are quite right about normal UK splitting rules being they have to actually be a pair to be split, but for Lucky 13s this has been modified to allow any two ten-value cards to be split. Didn't actually notice this on the chart until you pointed it out!

(ii) Spot on: 2,2 v 4 is very very close


I'm waiting on some clarification on the 10,10 v 12 or 13... Instinctively splitting seems foolish - there is a 1/8 chance of busting with a single card on the ten... But then I play by the numbers not instinct so am happy to be corrected.

I also think the infinite deck analysis of Dealer's 13 card gives a slightly larger chance of busting than 6dx, for instance it will have the chances of 13-13 as 1/16 whereas it should be less. Ignoring what the player has I get the bust 57.535% 6dx and 57.666% on infinite, the other values (16-21) are almost equal. Thus if infinite decks says don't split, I should have thought finite decks given the cards gone are 13-Ten-Ten-any shouldn't (one bust card, two "makes 20" cards).

Mathematically I only work out whether it's worth splitting the first time (except now I realise that Aces need to be treated differently as you can only total St(A+x)).
Infinite deck.
(i) Let the [expected] value of starting on two cards be max {St(C+C),H(C+C),Dbl(C+C)}.
(ii) Initially assume you can only split once. The [expected] value of splitting two cards is 2 * C(C) - the value of starting with a card of rank C.
(iii) Work out all the outcomes of taking one card and the values {St(C+x),H(C+x),Dbl(C+x) - no Blackjacks}.
(iv) Total (iii) and divide by number of ranked cards in deck (in this case 16).
(v) You split if the value in (iv) is greater than the original value (i).
If it's worth re-splitting then the true value of splitting is even more as the max{St(C+C)....} in (iii) should be replaced by the split value - however I usually stop at this stage.

I actually get not splitting as quite a clear-cut decision.

Have I missed something? Thanks

btw imho if it's not worth splitting 10s then it might be easier to leave the decision whether to split different picture cards to the casino. I'm not sure why they have the rule over here, but it seems a fair one to protect the numpties. btw I think FreeBet (where you would pay to split) has the same issue (except you do double free-A9 vs 6).