Blackjack in Ct.
Thread Rating:
Fortunately, there is an alternative. You can play in the Newport room at Foxwoods or the high stakes pit in the MGM Grand at a 6 deck game. I've observed the penetration in the Newport room to be at least 75%. The table minimums are $50 so it's not for everyone and I'm not sure if they stay that low on the weekends.
I believe all the games can be beaten with the proper spread, Wonging, and indices but if you are a green chipper Foxwoods is worth looking at. The only difference in rules that I can think of is in pair splitting. At Foxwoods it's up to 4 hands and at MS it's unlimited. Unlike Mohegan Sun, Foxwoods allows splitting 10's, but be careful it could get you unwanted attention.
I have it on good authority that MS has reduced comp points for BJ again. I'm not posting the new percentages but if someone wants to know, I'll share what I heard. It's not great.
Foxwoods had a promo that would exchange one comp point for $1.00 cash up to $1000.00 on Saturday's through October 30th, but it has been postponed according to their website.
Quote: sabreEvery foxwoods backoff I've ever heard of has involved play in the high limit rooms.
Two summers ago I was flat bet one hand only at a $15 table. Fortunately, I didn't give my card because a friend was using it at the $5 slots. I stayed away for six months and all was well.
Call me old fashioned, but it just didn't look right. It makes me wonder why the $20 table has been avoided by most casinos.
Quote: benbakdoffI stopped in at Foxwoods yesterday afternoon and saw something I've never seen there before. Mixed in with the $10-$25 BJ tables in the Grand Pequot Casino were a couple of tables with $20 minimums. I thought it was a mistake on the electronic table sign but it wasn't.
Call me old fashioned, but it just didn't look right. It makes me wonder why the $20 table has been avoided by most casinos.
Probably has been avoided because it would just be too many red chips.
$20 is the common unit in Bacarrat (I'm sure you checked and made sure that it wasn't a couple of Bac tables?), but the game uses (yellow?) chips specific to that game. I've been at a BJ table where someone came from Bac and put the yellows in play. The dealer took them out of the game after a loss or replaced them after a win. When I cashed out, he gave them to me so I'd bring them back to the cage. They like to keep the units specific
Quote: cclub79Probably has been avoided because it would just be too many red chips.
$20 is the common unit in Bacarrat (I'm sure you checked and made sure that it wasn't a couple of Bac tables?), but the game uses (yellow?) chips specific to that game. I've been at a BJ table where someone came from Bac and put the yellows in play. The dealer took them out of the game after a loss or replaced them after a win. When I cashed out, he gave them to me so I'd bring them back to the cage. They like to keep the units specific
Definitely blackjack. One of the games was dead and I had a chance to speak with the dealer who was just as surprised as I was.
Quote: cclub79Probably has been avoided because it would just be too many red chips.
$20 is the common unit in Bacarrat (I'm sure you checked and made sure that it wasn't a couple of Bac tables?), but the game uses (yellow?) chips specific to that game. I've been at a BJ table where someone came from Bac and put the yellows in play. The dealer took them out of the game after a loss or replaced them after a win. When I cashed out, he gave them to me so I'd bring them back to the cage. They like to keep the units specific
Those yellow chips (sometimes more like tan, to differentiate from yellow $1k chips) are also pretty common in Pai Gow Poker where bets in multiples of $20 are common, to accommodate the vig.
I've always wondered why $15 was a fairly common BJ denomination but not $20. $20 would be pretty easy to keep neat, just pay in green and tap off $5 every time if necessary.
Within the past couple of weeks, these 12 tables have been outfitted with continuous shuffle machines. As we've learned from the Wizard, the house edge is slightly decreased, however the hands per hour are increased with these machines. MS has assigned it's fastest dealers to these tables and the hands per hour have increased way beyond the expected 20%.
Looking at total money wagered, it may be better in some cases to play at the S17 tables at a $10 minimum than to speed through these $5 tables. Granted there's a lot of variables but it's something to think about.
By the way, I check out these H17 tables periodically and have yet to see anyone use proper basic strategy. I've never played these tables nor would I especially now.
Quote: bgriffinWait, Mohegan allows *unlimited* pair splitting? Seriously? I mean, obviously it wouldn't come up very often, but still, that's pretty unusual; I've never heard of any other casino allowing unlimited splits.
They sure do and they have since day one. My record is 7 hands and I've seen 8 a couple of times.
Aces can be split only once and 10s can never be split. Re-splitting aces doesn't add all that much to your edge by the way.
I KNOW I've split 8s to five hands on a Sun Cruise near Myrtle Beach, SC about 5 years ago....
Quote: benbakdoffRe-splitting aces doesn't add all that much to your edge by the way.
About 0.068% - not very little, about as much as late surrender option (0.07%)
I am too lazy to calculate for infinite resplitting, but the difference between no resplits at all and 4 hands is even less - ~0.054%. I think, the difference between 4 hands and infinite should be even less, because of low frequency of the hands that give you a chance to use that option (an opportunity to split to 5 hands is about once in 30,000 hands, not even taking into account that you don't always want to split a pair).
The naysayers and conspiracy theorists are out there, however, with the main concern being that cards could be removed or switched surreptitiously. While technically possible, I wouldn't be too concerned at this venue given its size and reputation.
In other Foxwoods news, the policy of backline betting allowed since 1992 has been rescinded effective July 12th. The official line is there were too many arguments between the players. The unofficial line is that savvy players were able to exploit it. Why it took almost 20 years for them to figure out either is beyond me.
MGM Grand at Foxwoods has 25 blackjack tables and only 2 of these are hit soft 17. Tables at Foxwoods have 6 player spots and MGM has an annoying 7 spots.
Penetration at both was good with dealers cutting out 1 1/4 decks from the 8 deck shoes.
Since this is breaking news, I'll keep an eye on it and post any updates or corrections.
Ben, can I ask where did you get this information from?
Quote: mgreicheThis sucks!
Ben, can I ask where did you get this information from?
There is a one page memo on the desk in every pit. I held one in my own hands and read it. I then went to the three main casinos in Foxwoods and verified it with the pit boss in each one. Not clear on MGM, I hiked it over there and verified it with their pit boss. I know three of the four bosses and they are straight shooters.
There must have been a lot of talk about it among the employees. I wouldn't normally expect them to know the extra house edge but they did. Many of them cited .2% and some even nailed the .22%.
These were beatable 8 deck games, but they're going to take a lot more work now. It's a lovely 8 mile ride from Foxwoods to Mohegan Sun.
I make the trip to Foxwoods about once a month. Since the Newport Room is a little out of my range, I won't be playing at Foxwoods now with a .65% house edge. Looks like the Sun will become my new home for BJ.
Thanks for the info.
Quote: mgreicheAs of now, the Foxwoods website indicates that for BJ, "Dealers must stand on all totals of 17 or higher". If they make the change to hit on S17 I hope they will update their website to reflect this change.
I make the trip to Foxwoods about once a month. Since the Newport Room is a little out of my range, I won't be playing at Foxwoods now with a .65% house edge. Looks like the Sun will become my new home for BJ.
Thanks for the info.
Don't expect them to advertise it on their website. I certainly wouldn't. This is a great opportunity for Mohegan Sun. They should be advertising their 6 deck S17 games and offering promotions aimed at luring players away from Foxwoods.
Quote: lucky13Thanks Ben. Good Info. Hopefully Mohegan sees it as a competitive advantage, rather than the duopoly. Was thinking about going this weekend to get my poker on. Has the poker room been busier since the online ban? (sorry, a bit off topic)[/q
Did you mean poker at Foxwoods or Mohegan Sun? I've met quite a few first timers at both casinos recently and some were very young. I never thought to associate it with the online problems. Many poker players enjoy a little blackjack to pass the time.
I will be at Foxwoods tomorrow morning to personally verify the change in the blackjack rules. I'll post my findings around this time tomorrow, so that anyone planning a weekend trip will have the information.
On April 22, Foxwoods announced the hiring of Frank Leone as Vice President, Table Games. Mr. Leone's last position was casino manager at Trump Taj Mahal. Prior to that he was assistant casino shift manager at Caesars Atlantic City and has over 20 years at Harrah's Entertainment. Speculation is that the new guy wants to shake things up.
Hitting soft 17 raises the house edge. If you are a basic strategy player, weekend player, or any type of casual player just there for fun - GO TO MOHEGAN SUN ! It's a no brainer. With 6 decks and S17 the house edge is lower, you will lose less and they will grandfather you- Foxwoods won't. Pit personnel have been instructed to downplay this change. Do not listen to them!
It's not so cut and dry for card counters because there are other factors involved.
Me? I'll be going to Mohegan Sun.
BJ games just keep getting worse.
zero
Count me as part of the general public that doesn't know.Quote: teddysThe general public does not know the difference between S17 and H17 . . . .
In fact, there are TWO things I don't know.
I can never remember if S17 / H17 stands for Stand/Hit or Soft/Hard, although I realize it makes more sense to be the former.
But then I see comments like this, from the first post on this page:
Quote: mgreicheIf they make the change to hit on S17...
The other thing I can't figure out is why it's better if the dealer stands on soft 17.
I mean, if I don't hit a weak hand like a 15 because the dealer is showing a 6, don't I WANT him to hit if he's got an ace?
Quote: DJTeddyBear
The other thing I can't figure out is why it's better if the dealer stands on soft 17.
I mean, if I don't hit a weak hand like a 15 because the dealer is showing a 6, don't I WANT him to hit if he's got an ace?
As player, the hitting on a lot of the "softs" is not particularly intuitive. You pretty much hit or double with soft 18 against most dealer hands, for instance. So it would seem my gut feeling that hitting these hands is a path to disaster is not reliable.
And you never stand on soft 17. Evidently for Dealer there is advantage to hitting too; it's surprising how much it matters.
If I have 15 and the dealer is showing a 6, I expect him to take a hit. So hitting on soft 17 is what I expect. Further, if the hit card is 5-9, then his total is 12-16 and he's got a shot at busting, which is what you were hoping for all along.
Oh, sure, he's got a better chance that the hit card will give him a total of 17-21, or that the hit is 5-9 and the next hit gives him 17-21, but if I have 15, it's no different than if he stood on soft 17. Therefore, it seems to me, I'd want him to hit that soft 17.
---
The Wiz' strategy card has few differences for 4-8 decks between S17 and H17. One I find intriguing is soft 19 v 6. Stand on S17, double on H17.
In my mind, the reason for this difference is that the chance that he's got the ace makes it not worth it on a S17 table. But on a H17 table, the dealer has more chances to bust, so the double becomes worth it.
So, again, H17 seems preferable to me.
Please note:
I am NOT trying to refute the math that says S17 is better for the player than H17.
I'm just trying to point out why a member of the general public (like myself) may think that H17 is better.
>double on H17.
do you need to review? surely you never take another card on a hard 17?
That's what I'm saying.Quote: odiousgambitwell, one thing for sure, if you stand on 15 vs 6 , dealer turns over his cards, he's got soft 17, brother all of a sudden you like the new rule of must hit soft 17.
Sorry to be blunt, but you're the one who needs the review. "H17" means "Dealer HITS on Soft 17."Quote: odiousgambit> double on H17.
do you need to review? surely you never take another card on a hard 17?
The example I quoted was what the two strategy cards state when you have a soft 17 and the dealer is showing a 6.
That kinda also confirms my point. The general public will go on intuition, which may be counter to what the math says.Quote: teddysIt is counter-intuitive.
Another one is Ct. which is the abbreviation for Connecticut, but sometimes CT is used for Charles Town home of the Hollywood Casino in West Virginia.
Quote: DJTeddyBearI can never remember if S17 / H17 stands for Stand/Hit or Soft/Hard, although I realize it makes more sense to be the former.
Quote: DJTeddyBearThe Wiz' strategy card has few differences for 4-8 decks between S17 and H17. One I find intriguing is soft 19 v 6. Stand on S17, double on H17.
In my mind, the reason for this difference is that the chance that he's got the ace makes it not worth it on a S17 table. But on a H17 table, the dealer has more chances to bust, so the double becomes worth it.
So, again, H17 seems preferable to me.
Feel free to be blunt, but if I may also risk poster ire, I thought you were feeling free to mix the jargon up as per your first remark. I get it now.
It is also intriguing that the player now doubles on all 11's, even against dealer Ace, if in the H17 game. My mind can't handle the 'why' on that either. My gut says you'd go more conservative! So I also just accept that it is counter-intuitive.
Quote: odiousgambitIt is also intriguing that the player now doubles on all 11's, even against dealer Ace, if in the H17 game. My mind can't handle the 'why' on that either. My gut says you'd go more conservative! So I also just accept that it is counter-intuitive.
The reasoning is similar to that of the other hands you'd double with H17 but not S17: It's because of one of the rules of doubling - since you can't draw more cards after doubling, the increased likelihood of a dealer bust helps mitigate those cases where you get stuck with a stiff hand after doubling (turning a borderline double/not double situation the other way). The other side of H17 - the dealer improving a 17 into an 18-21 - is not as important of a consideration with doubling since you wouldn't take anymore cards anyway if you had 17 or more.
I think we're in agreement here.Quote: odiousgambitFeel free to be blunt, but if I may also risk poster ire, I thought you were feeling free to mix the jargon up as per your first remark. I get it now.
It's the counter-intuitive stuff that screws with your head.
On an unrelated note, I generally do not hit on hard 16, unless the dealer is showing an ace. I've mentioned that in other threads, and the general response is that the math shows hitting to be better, but by such a slim margin that I'm not giving much away.
Slim margins: They can screw with your head too.
Quote: DJTeddyBearI think we're in agreement here.
It's the counter-intuitive stuff that screws with your head.
On an unrelated note, I generally do not hit on hard 16, unless the dealer is showing an ace. I've mentioned that in other threads, and the general response is that the math shows hitting to be better, but by such a slim margin that I'm not giving much away.
Slim margins: They can screw with your head too.
Staying on a hard 16 against a 10 is very close. Fortunately I have surrender available. Since I don't play in negative shoes all that much, I stay on 3 card 16's against a 10 quite often. It's not so close when you have 16 vs 7. You must hit and that IS counter-intuitive.
Even some of the "experts" have trouble with that one.
Right, well you can simply think about the dealer most likely has 17, and if you draw a small card, you have an excellent chance to beat them.Quote: benbakdoffStaying on a hard 16 against a 10 is very close. Fortunately I have surrender available. Since I don't play in negative shoes all that much, I stay on 3 card 16's against a 10 quite often. It's not so close when you have 16 vs 7. You must hit and that IS counter-intuitive.
Even some of the "experts" have trouble with that one.
If they have a ten up, your small card isn't going to help you (unless it's a 4 or a 5) against their 20.
I agree it is a little hard for some to grasp.
Quote: benbakdoffStaying on a hard 16 against a 10 is very close. Fortunately I have surrender available. Since I don't play in negative shoes all that much, I stay on 3 card 16's against a 10 quite often. It's not so close when you have 16 vs 7. You must hit and that IS counter-intuitive.
Even some of the "experts" have trouble with that one.
I think I have an explanation on why 16 vs. 7 is clearly a hit, while 16 vs. 10 is borderline:
With the former the most likely dealer final hand is 17, so if you manage to pull anything from a 2-5 the odds will then be strongly in your favor.
With the latter the most likely dealer final hand is 20, so even if you dodge busting you are less likely to end up ultimately winning; thus you become more inclined to stay and hope for a bust.
Here's a bit of interesting information that I once asked somewhere else: Overall, are you better off (independent of what your hand actually is) if the dealer shows a 2 or a 7?
Edit: I mentioned how teddys posted the same thing just before me in the next post which I made by accident.
Quote: KellynbnfI think I have an explanation on why 16 vs. 7 is clearly a hit, while 16 vs. 10 is borderline:
With the former the most likely dealer final hand is 17, so if you manage to pull anything from a 2-5 the odds will then be strongly in your favor.
With the latter the most likely dealer final hand is 20, so even if you dodge busting you are less likely to end up ultimately winning; thus you become more inclined to stay and hope for a bust.
Here's a bit of interesting information that I once asked somewhere else: Overall, are you better off (independent of what your hand actually is) if the dealer shows a 2 or a 7?
Edit: teddys beat me by a bit over a minute posting a similar explanation.
Edit again: I accidentally quoted my message instead of editing it.
Quote: KellynbnfHere's a bit of interesting information that I once asked somewhere else: Overall, are you better off (independent of what your hand actually is) if the dealer shows a 2 or a 7?
the WoO has a chart that will give the answer, but without looking at that, considering the typical Basic Strat. decision, I would have to guess 7 is worse.
