chazley123
• Posts: 2
Joined: May 13, 2015
May 13th, 2015 at 9:27:38 AM permalink
Single deck
S17
No surrender
DAS
Split upto 4 times
Double 9-11
Dealer has one card till end of game
Blackjack pays 3:2
Can resplit Aces
Can hit split aces

I made £1000 of it last week. Is there something I'm forgetting or is this practically odds in your favour? The website says RTP is 99.91%, but doesn't specify if played with perfect strategy. Can someone explain? :D
beachbumbabs
• Posts: 14268
Joined: May 21, 2013
May 13th, 2015 at 9:45:58 AM permalink
Quote: chazley123

Single deck
S17
No surrender
DAS
Split upto 4 times
Double 9-11
No peak
Blackjack pays 3:2
Can resplit Aces
Can hit split aces

I made £1000 of it last week. Is there something I'm forgetting or is this practically odds in your favour? The website says RTP is 99.91%, but doesn't specify if played with perfect strategy. Can someone explain? :D

If they publish a HE number or an RTP number, that's the return on perfect strategy, pretty much by definition. There's a little bit of difference in how those numbers are calculated. The RTP number usually compares how a game plays when accounting for additional betting during the hand (ie splits, doubles, insurance, surrender in BJ) vs. a game where there is no decision point (ie roulette or baccarat). An HE calculation doesn't account for those hands.

So, "no peak" (I'm guessing you mean no peek for BJ, or no hole card dealt before players have resolved their hands) in this game means they will collect all wagers on a losing double or split hand against dealer BJ, right?

The Wizard's BJ calculator shows HE of -0.08419% for this game with optimal play (if I did it right). So that seems to me to be a pretty good game. The odd thing was, when I changed Player loses only original bet against dealer BJ: No Yes from "yes" to "no", it improved the return. I would've thought it was better for the player for them only to take the original bet, but I'm guessing I don't understand the impact of that rule on the play.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
chazley123
• Posts: 2
Joined: May 13, 2015
May 13th, 2015 at 9:55:48 AM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

If they publish a HE number or an RTP number, that's the return on perfect strategy, pretty much by definition. There's a little bit of difference in how those numbers are calculated. The RTP number usually compares how a game plays when accounting for additional betting during the hand (ie splits, doubles, insurance, surrender in BJ) vs. a game where there is no decision point (ie roulette or baccarat). An HE calculation doesn't account for those hands.

So, "no peak" (I'm guessing you mean no peek for BJ, or no hole card dealt before players have resolved their hands) in this game means they will collect all wagers on a losing double or split hand against dealer BJ, right?

The Wizard's BJ calculator shows HE of -0.08419% for this game with optimal play (if I did it right). So that seems to me to be a pretty good game. The odd thing was, when I changed Player loses only original bet against dealer BJ: No Yes from "yes" to "no", it improved the return. I would've thought it was better for the player for them only to take the original bet, but I'm guessing I don't understand the impact of that rule on the play.

Sorry, I'm new to all the blackjack talk ! Haha.

What I mean by no peak or whatever is that the dealer has one card till everyone is finished playing, then draws a card for the dealers two cards. I dont know if this impacts the game or not. But I thought it was a good game, I'm surprised they even have it. With them odds that means the game makes you money in the long term right? I find this website to be all about giving people tips and help on where to find good games and so on so forth, so I thought I'd mention it :)
Venthus
• Posts: 1125
Joined: Dec 10, 2012
May 13th, 2015 at 10:01:48 AM permalink
Out of curiosity, I dropped those specs into a different calculator and got -0.043%. On that calculator, the return works as you'd expect if all bets are lost on a dealer BJ.

Quote: chazley123

What I mean by no peak or whatever is that the dealer has one card till everyone is finished playing, then draws a card for the dealers two cards. I dont know if this impacts the game or not. But I thought it was a good game, I'm surprised they even have it. With them odds that means the game makes you money in the long term right? I find this website to be all about giving people tips and help on where to find good games and so on so forth, so I thought I'd mention it :)

In most cases, this rule means that if you split/double, then you lose those bets if the dealer has a BJ. There's a few places where you only lose the first, original bet though. (Fairly evident that losing only the original bet is better for the player, though as pointed out above, something weird seems to be going on in one of the edge calculators.)

Assuming that everything is accurate and it's a fair game, then perfect strategy would yield a positive return (though the exact amount differs a bit). Keep in mind that variance can always club you over the head though.
JB
• Posts: 2089
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
May 13th, 2015 at 12:32:37 PM permalink
Quote: chazley123

Single deck
S17
No surrender
DAS
Split upto 4 times
Double 9-11
Dealer has one card till end of game
Blackjack pays 3:2
Can resplit Aces
Can hit split aces

I made £1000 of it last week. Is there something I'm forgetting or is this practically odds in your favour? The website says RTP is 99.91%, but doesn't specify if played with perfect strategy. Can someone explain? :D

This is Microgaming's Classic Blackjack game. I think you have the two rules in red above incorrect, with the actual rules being:

1) You are not allowed to double after splitting
2) You are only allowed to split once (no re-splitting any pairs)

This puts the house edge at 0.09%, which means it returns 99.91% (when optimal strategy is used at all times).
AceTwo
• Posts: 359
Joined: Mar 13, 2012
May 14th, 2015 at 1:30:50 PM permalink
I assume the -0,09% Optimal Strategy Ev relates to Total Dependent Strategy.
Composition Dependent strategy for single deck would probably make sufficient change to turn this into positive terittory.
JB
• Posts: 2089
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
May 14th, 2015 at 2:09:50 PM permalink
Quote: AceTwo

I assume the -0,09% Optimal Strategy Ev relates to Total Dependent Strategy.
Composition Dependent strategy for single deck would probably make sufficient change to turn this into positive terittory.

The 0.09% house edge is based on composition-dependent strategy.
MattUK