Poll

2 votes (18.18%)
8 votes (72.72%)
1 vote (9.09%)

11 members have voted

nvr55xx
nvr55xx
Joined: Jan 28, 2014
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 87
September 15th, 2015 at 6:54:59 PM permalink
I have noticed that, except for taking "even money" with a Blackjack, players rarely take insurance these days. Wouldn't casinos save more time by getting rid of the insurance side bet? Hasn't word pretty much gotten out that insurance is a bad bet? While I know that AP's wouldn't want to see insurance go, I'm asking this from a casino management perspective. Isn't the time wasted asking for insurance every 13 hands more costly to the casino than the potential loss from not offering insurance?
What's YOUR opinion?
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 221
  • Posts: 11744
September 15th, 2015 at 7:12:46 PM permalink
I don't see it going until they get a better side bet to replace it. I don't think the time adds up to enough to cause losses elsewhere.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 178
  • Posts: 10232
September 15th, 2015 at 8:19:36 PM permalink
Ditto.

Plus, there are still people who don't understand the even money option, as well as people who will insure any hand.

Nope. It ain't going anywhere.
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
Greasyjohn
Greasyjohn
Joined: Dec 8, 2013
  • Threads: 130
  • Posts: 2129
September 15th, 2015 at 10:07:45 PM permalink
Not offering insurance will look to the general public like the casinos are taking away an option (whether they exercise the option or not). This would not be appreciated. Better to leave this long-standing tradition alone. Of course the 5.8% house advantage in the single-deck game and the 7.4% advantage in the six-deck game doesn't hurt either. It doesn't take long to offer the insurance option to the whole table.

And long live the pallet in Baccarat.
Romes
Romes
Joined: Jul 22, 2014
  • Threads: 27
  • Posts: 5488
September 16th, 2015 at 11:49:22 AM permalink
Quote: nvr55xx

.. Hasn't word pretty much gotten out that insurance is a bad bet?...


Disregarding that I'm an AP, and thinking from the casino management side from what I've seen in my experiences... I can not respectfully disagree with this statement more. I see people take insurance all the time in every kind of count. 90%+ of ploppies I've seen take even money when facing an ace, probably closer to 95%. These are all technically insurance bets as well. Insurance is also a very quick bet to make/resolve... A quick sweep of the hand, a peek, and that's that.

From a casino management perspective EVERY GAME of blackjack in the world should offer Surrender. Oh my lord do people love surrendering ANY hand 12-16. I've seen so much money be given away at inappropriate times with surrender I don't get how this isn't more profitable to the casino than offering a "HE reduction" to counters... of .08% none the less. The money they'd make from ploppies surrendering all the time has to be 100 folds that. Think about it. Card counters are what, 1% of the blackjack population, or less. These are pretty much the only people who will surrender properly. The other 99%+ will be donating money with surrender, or not use it all all (keeping their HE up .08% because they're not leveraging the surrender option).
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
1BB
1BB
Joined: Oct 10, 2011
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 5339
September 16th, 2015 at 1:21:34 PM permalink
How many of the 1% are successful?

When it comes to insurance many dealers are happy to guide the unsure player. Always take even money they say. It's the only sure thing in the game. Always insure a 20. I had a dealer the other day say that whenever this particular dealer, I don't want to identify this dealer's gender, gets a blackjack Match the Dealer will hit on the next hand and everyone should play it. The dealer actually seems to believe it. Darned if it didn't happen. Talk about psychic. :-)
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
Romes
Romes
Joined: Jul 22, 2014
  • Threads: 27
  • Posts: 5488
September 16th, 2015 at 2:24:45 PM permalink
Quote: 1BB

How many of the 1% are successful?...


I LOVE that you stated this. I bet 1% of the 1% are successful. I couldn't agree more which is another reason I could go on a tangent about why casinos should be so much less worrisome/paranoid about counters. So many counters that fall in that 1% (which we've even seen here on these boards) don't know their numbers and are actually playing a negative game. They either don't understand RoR, penetration, or one of the other things that guarantees they bust.

Sooooo many dealers preach whenever someone comes in or out of the game the Pair Square will hit. I'm not joking I've heard at least 50% of the dealers at the place say this. All the players of course agreed and I was wondering... Why not just sit out every other hand and pound away on the Pair Square bet then??? =P
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
nvr55xx
nvr55xx
Joined: Jan 28, 2014
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 87
September 16th, 2015 at 7:24:06 PM permalink
Quote: Romes


Sooooo many dealers preach whenever someone comes in or out of the game the Pair Square will hit. I'm not joking I've heard at least 50% of the dealers at the place say this. All the players of course agreed and I was wondering... Why not just sit out every other hand and pound away on the Pair Square bet then??? =P



Because if you sit out every other hand you'll "ruin the order of the cards". Related to this: most $5 blackjack games are now 6:5. However, 3:2 $10 games can still be found. Why not play $10 every other hand to cut your losses in half? Do you really think that you'll "ruin the order of the cards" so much that it will triple the house edge?

  • Jump to: