Did Wizard count wrong?

According to Wizard said PHARAOH'S PALACE RULES house edge is 0, I'm confused that is it possible casino would offer a house edge is 0 game for player? and the rules I've confirmed that it's allowed to choose half win even splitting, it ain't like the wizard described, and I hopefully Wizard could solve my problem that I've confused all the time.

Quote: bqhsnir

http://wizardofmacau.com/games/blackjack.html

According to Wizard said PHARAOH'S PALACE RULES house edge is 0, I'm confused that is it possible casino would offer a house edge is 0 game for player? and the rules I've confirmed that it's allowed to choose half win even splitting, it ain't like the wizard described, and I hopefully Wizard could solve my problem that I've confused all the time.

Possible? Yes, 0 HE or even a player advantage is possible, depending on the rules of play.

Do the casinos change the rules with no notice? Frequently.

You're quoting what was an unconfirmed report the Wizard had as to the rules the Palace is/was using. If you've checked into it, and one or more of those rules is incorrect or has been changed somehow, that will change the HE. (I don't understand what rules you claim are different, comparing what you said to what the Wizard listed.)

Be as specific as possible in explaining what's different, since each individual rule of play has an effect on the HE, positive or negative. It would probably be helpful if you can confirm those that ARE being used, as well as what's different.

For years, Slot O Fun had a single deck game with +EV off the top of the deck.

Thanks for answering, the rules you didn't understand what's different between Wizard described is this one.
"The player may choose to win half his bet with any five-card hand, except against a dealer ace. This option is not available after splitting."
As I've confirmed, player may choose to half win after splitting ain't like Wizard described, maybe like you said the rules have changed somehow.
And second, in my opinion, to a gambling industry, a zero-sum game is really a tragedy to the company which they have to hire guys for dealing the game 24-7 and without any profit generates, so I'm confused that is the house edge really 0 or the company is out of their mind?

Quote: bqhsnir

Thanks for answering, the rules you didn't understand what's different between Wizard described is this one.
"The player may choose to win half his bet with any five-card hand, except against a dealer ace. This option is not available after splitting."
As I've confirmed, player may choose to half win after splitting ain't like Wizard described, maybe like you said the rules have changed somehow.
And second, in my opinion, to a gambling industry, a zero-sum game is really a tragedy to the company which they have to hire guys for dealing the game 24-7 and without any profit generates, so I'm confused that is the house edge really 0 or the company is out of their mind?

Well, logically, if you can do this after splitting, and it's the best move available on certain 5 card hands, that would make some amount more of those hands (probably a pretty small number), and would raise the player's edge slightly more positive (probably a VERY small amount). He'd have to tell you exactly how much.

It's one thing to issue a juicy HE with perfect strategy. It's another entirely for any significant number of people to play perfect strategy flawlessly on every hand. The casino monitors how much the table is taking in ("drop"), and of that, how much they keep ("hold") on a daily/weekly/monthly basis, and if they're losing money on it, I'd guess they'd change the rules or pull out the game. Players routinely give away 2-4% or more with bad decisions for whatever reason; the Wizard wrote a bit about blackjack myths and what they cost the player, but they persist. Things like "never hit if you can bust", "play the same as the dealer", "play as if the dealer always has a 10 underneath/coming" cost a lot. So your sympathy might be misplaced. :)

Click here to read about what players give away by playing the 3 bad strategies I mentioned above.

I played this game personally at the Lisboa and as I recall they did not allow the half-win after a split. If the Pharaoh's Palace does, then that would push the odds to the player's favor, marginally.

The reason this game has survived for years I'm sure is because of player errors. My calculations assume a perfect basic strategy player. The caliber of blackjack play is pretty awful in Macau. So, if players don't know blackjack, they certainly won't know this game.

For years, the Barona in California had a blackjack game with a 0.01% house edge. Between comps and/or the tiniest bit of counting could swing that game towards the player.

Quote: Wizard

I played this game personally at the Lisboa and as I recall they did not allow the half-win after a split. If the Pharaoh's Palace does, then that would push the odds to the player's favor, marginally.

The reason this game has survived for years I'm sure is because of player errors. My calculations assume a perfect basic strategy player. The caliber of blackjack play is pretty awful in Macau. So, if players don't know blackjack, they certainly won't know this game.

For years, the Barona in California had a blackjack game with a 0.01% edge. Between comps and/or the tiniest bit of counting could swing that game towards the player.

Thank you Wizard, I really appreciate you answered my question with your precious time.
And your explanation was clear and what you pointed out is absolutely right, the game could survive because there's a lot of terrible BJ players in Macau to improve the house edge even this is a zero-sum game.

Thank you all the guys above

Quote: Wizard

For years, the Barona in California had a blackjack game with a 0.01% edge. Between comps and/or the tiniest bit of counting could swing that game towards the player.

That was their $50 min. single deck, which was 1D, DOA, S17. With a few composition dependent plays, you could get that 0.01% edge. I played it a couple of times back in the day.

Quote: teliot

That was their $50 min. single deck, which was 1D, DOA, S17. With a few composition dependent plays, you could get that 0.01% edge. I played it a couple of times back in the day.

Yes, but it was a $100 minimum. Also, I meant a 0.01% house edge. When I played they usually dealt only two rounds. I doubled my bet in a positive count and otherwise stayed the same. Although I heard they watch that game like hawks, I never had a problem. Then again, they may have just been humoring me to let me keep playing, knowing who I am.

Quote: Wizard

Yes, but it was a $100 minimum. Also, I meant a 0.01% house edge. When I played they usually dealt only two rounds. I doubled my bet in a positive count and otherwise stayed the same. Although I heard they watch that game like hawks, I never had a problem. Then again, they may have just been humoring me to let me keep playing, knowing who I am.

Oh, you're right, it was a $100 min. Long time ago ...

Do you agree that 1D, S17, DOA gives a microscopic player edge with a few composition dependent plays -- some of which may even be considered "basic strategy" - like standing on 7-7 vs. T?

as i went to PHARAOH'S PALACE about 3 months ago, there was no backjack table anymore.

and guessed macao casino is not winning money by house edge for 99.9% chinese people. if so, people shouldn't play side bet on baccarat. and sic bo shouldn't so popular.

if i could say more on blackjack in Macao: about 20% players will take even money when BL to dealer's 10... 99% is not playing by basic strategy.
in 2014, all casinos in Macao, by blackjack, they make 2,933 million macao dollars.(1usd=7.9760 macao dollars), while roulette: 1,028 million, bacarrat floor: 106,527
bacarrat vip room: 212,535 million

and now all are csm.6 decks, minium bet, sands, mgm, wynn: 300 HKD=USD38.7, some smaller casions: 200 HKD.