Countable sidebets?

My impression is that some sidebet outcomes are effected by the count.

An extreme count, either way, ought to improve the return on any matching sidebet, like Match the Dealer. An abundance of certain cards, high or low, ought to make the bet more attractive - another three more likely in a deck missing a lot of tens and aces. Or vice versa.

The Super 4 Progressive, needing a dealer blackjack in addition to tens and aces for the player, logically makes a high positive count a positive indicator.

I will often bet the Super 4 on a high positive count - heck, what's another $5 when my higher bets are out there anyway. My unscientific memory tells me that it's not working out that way, but I've read here that a high positive count coupled with a huge super bonus payout (anything over $500K) is a relatively "good" bet.

Any thoughts on Match the Dealer? I get a lot of comments because I NEVER play it (as if that matters - this is not a team game) but I started to wonder whether the odds improve on each extreme end of the count that might provide an excuse to occasionally place the bet even at pretty bad odds.

Match the dealer is mathematically countable.

However anything less than a computer perfect strategy is not worth very much (around $5/hr betting black chips).

An optimal strategy is too difficult to do in practice, even with a team, and would only be worth around $30/hr betting black chips.

Yes, some side bets correspond with the count, such as lucky ladies, and others are beatable through the use of a specialized count, such as lucky lucky.

Quote: racquet

Any thoughts on Match the Dealer? I get a lot of comments because I NEVER play it (as if that matters - this is not a team game) but I started to wonder whether the odds improve on each extreme end of the count that might provide an excuse to occasionally place the bet even at pretty bad odds.

Eliot Jacobson Ph. D. has, as usual, an in depth write up on it and shows the results after 100 million hands. He came up with three systems:

A "ranked count" (groups the cards into two subsets of six cards each [2,3,4,5,6,7=+1] and [8, 9,J,Q,K,A=-1]. The trigger would be a true count of -10 or lower [better chance for low pair] and +10 or higher [better chance for a high pair]). With a $100 max bet, heads up, 200 hands/shoe you can expect to earn $5.28/hr.

A "frequency count": this one he mentions is not "human-feasible". It basically keeps track of ALL of the cards in the shoe. Same metrics of $100 max, etc. you can expect to win $30.42/hr.

A "suit count": similar to the frequency count, but keeps track of the exact number of cards remaining from the most played suit and least played suit. Per Jacobson, "the suit count is essentially worthless". Same $100 max etc gets you a $0.008/hr.

Compare that against ~$25/hr simply counting cards on BJ, makes it really not worth it IMHO.

This is a quick, dirty, and simpleton (my level) summary of his research haha, but gives the numbers. He's got a lot of write ups on counting various side bets if you're interested.