Blasphemous Blackjack

Am I now to be an Apostate now in the Church of the Wizard?


I've considered this for a long time and now I'm going to do it. My next planned opportunity at BJ will be an 8 deck, dealer hits on all 17s game. In the past a $5 game has been available, but I think that has changed to $10. 


For -EV play, which is pretty much what I'm about , it's seemed to me for a long time that it is a reasonable thing to trade increasing the HE in return for greater variance, an un-Wizardly approach it must be admitted. In fact advocating this may actually horrify the Wizard. Yet I submit* for the negative expectation player, Variance can be more valuable than lower house edge, especially when it involves modest surrender of edge. In a game that is too low in variance like Blackjack [flat-betting], I think it may be the way to go, along with some precautions and some caveats. 


Previously I was happy with the idea that my BJ play and my Craps play, all I ever do anymore in table games, were about on the same level, i.e., against something around 0.5% HE. But I have really found that I enjoy the Craps play while the BJ? ... not so much. The difference I feel is pretty much around the difference in the Variance, high [because of free odds] in Craps and low [flat-betting] in BJ. 


To fix this in BJ, there are plenty of folks who have said to apply card counting techniques, and certainly doing that would be the end of flat-betting and low Variance. I have considered this and have gotten far enough long to have learned BS - but that's it, and not to the level of reflex either. The fact of the matter is that I don't put the time in at the casino like I'd have to, this for a number of reasons, including that I just don't live close enough to one. Yeah, there are ways to learn it outside a casino, but I'm going to say that won't work unless you combine it with casino time - it wouldn't work for me for sure. 


Randomly varying bet size on hunches or whatever would increase Variance too, but who is going to advocate that? Nope, not going down that road, even though I wonder if it makes more sense than flat-betting. 


I currently believe the way to increase the Variance is to increase doubling and splitting, though it is said that double, double means toil and trouble. Take those 'precautions' ? The cost in HE should be reasonably low. 


I used Wizard's table, see link, which views it from player's edge. I saved the number-crunching in a blog post titled 'Blasphemy'


I am changing BS in the following manner, indicating the cost on a $10 bet per each decision. 


*soft 13, doubling vs dealer 4, cost of 36 cents


*soft 14, doubling vs 4, cost of 15 cents, it's on!


*soft 19, doubling vs 5,  29 cents, a good qualifier


*doubling with 10 vs 10, 33 cents, likewise


*doubling with 9 vs 2,   9 cents,  yes indeed!! 


*doubling with 8 vs 6 ,  25 cents, qualifies


*splitting, das allowed, 4,4 vs 4, 40 cents 


*splitting, das allowed, 6,6 vs 7,  37 cents


So that is where I'm at for the moment and for the next anticipated circumstance. It gives me eight additional opportunities to increase my bet and thus the variance; I wish there were more but I do have to mind the cost. 


Further caveat has to be to limit amount of total action. Negative expectation betting just turns from 'no big deal' into foolishness. I am thinking I will do one shoe per day, and I hope it means increased enjoyment . I'll go so far with my blasphemy as to say I think every negative expectation player out there should double 9 against a dealer 2. I wish I could calculate EV/SD on this but I don't know what the change in Variance actually is. I'd really be impressed if someone knows. 


Your thoughts?


*I'm curious as to whether anyone has seen a bonafide gambling writer cover this topic


https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/expected-values/

Quote: odiousgambit

Am I now to be an Apostate now in the Church of the Wizard?

Your thoughts?


*I'm curious as to whether anyone has seen a bonafide gambling writer cover this topic


https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/expected-values/

You need in to throw in some Martingale and hit and run strategies and then to REALLY crown it, come back here and post a picture of your winnings and Rolex.
$;o)

Quote: OnceDear

Quote: odiousgambit

Am I now to be an Apostate now in the Church of the Wizard?

Your thoughts?


*I'm curious as to whether anyone has seen a bonafide gambling writer cover this topic


https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/expected-values/

You need in to throw in some Martingale and hit and run strategies and then to REALLY crown it, come back here and post a picture of your winnings and Rolex.
$;o)

I do wonder if *any* kind of deviation from flat-betting BJ makes more sense than flat-betting.

Although I will post that picture for you should I get lucky ... I won't lose track of the fact that increased Variance can cut both ways, sir.

I'd buy-in for $200 at a $5 table (and $400 at a $10 table, and $600 at a $15 table, and $1000 at a $25 table) using my special strategies that don't involve flat betting unless I'm stuck at the bottom of a losing streak. There's an equal chance of going bust, and an equal chance I'll double or quadruple my money. Maybe quitting for the day after 4 hours and up a couple bets to pay for the gas is where it's at though.

Quote: ChumpChange

special strategies that don't involve flat betting ...

do tell!

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, I'm pondering just what kind of response I really expected. I'm examining the possibilities

1] I've scandalized absolutely everyone with the blasphemy, not just the Wizard [if he saw it], and all are nearly speechless

2]actually nobody knows what the hell I'm trying to say. I think this may be a stronger possibility

3] it's not about reversing the HE to player advantage [edit], but anybody reading it who tries to find the place in the post where -EV is supposed to change to +EV, can't find it, and gives up

4] readers 'get it' but nobody cares. Another strong possibility

Quote: me

I'll go so far with my blasphemy as to say I think every negative expectation player out there should double 9 against a dealer 2

I really would like to know what the argument is against this. I will grant you that maybe I should say 'most' not 'every' because it does depend on whether or not you agree that the Variance flat-betting BJ with an unmodified BS is too low to begin with. Other than that I am ready to go to the mat on this.

Quote: odiousgambit

do tell!

I really would like to know what the argument is against this. I will grant you that maybe I should say 'most' not 'every' because it does depend on whether or not you agree that the Variance flat-betting BJ with an unmodified BS is too low to begin with. Other than that I am ready to go to the mat on this.

No argument from me.

I'm firmly with you on this. There's nothing more boring and relentless than flat, min betting at Blackjack. Mixing it up with just a 5,10,15,15, 15 progressive, or doubling some borderline hands will have negligible effects on house edge and will multiply the fun value significantly. Weirdly, it will also increase your probability of increasing your bankroll significantly, while, of course increasing your probability of going bust quickly... all the while at the silly cost of reducing your probability of a boringly long break even session.
Go for it!

Oh hell, if you crave variance go play Mississippi Stud. Or Criss Cross. Those’ll vary you. Lose 15 hands in a row, then a pair of kings gets you even.

9 vs 2, 8 decks, H17

4-5 vs 2 Double = +6.573%; Hit = + 7.491%
2-7 vs 2 Double = +6.559%; Hit = + 7.350%

I noted that he didn't say hit soft 17. He said hit all 17s. Instead of standing, as virtually every BJ ga me requires. I guess in his dream deal, he gets to set the rules, and I would think that one would change the EV just a skosh. Was waiting for a correction on that sentence, doesn't seem to be coming, so perhaps that's the hook.

Quote: beachbumbabs

I noted that he didn't say hit soft 17. He said hit all 17s. Instead of standing, as virtually every BJ ga me requires. I guess in his dream deal, he gets to set the rules, and I would think that one would change the EV just a skosh. Was waiting for a correction on that sentence, doesn't seem to be coming, so perhaps that's the hook.

I see blasphemers are to be addressed in the third person LOL.

No hook, you are correct, for some reason I was thinking 'hit all 17s' was another way to say 'hit soft 17s' which makes no sense at all. Why do I think I saw a sign like that once? I can change it in the blog post but not the thread I think. The Wizard's data has the correct scenario, not some imaginary thing, not to worry... sorry.

As for changing the EV, yes, it changes the EV for the worst... and the HE, that's not what I mean, changed that in my last thread post.

I will respond to Gordon too, need some time to catch up.

Thanks for the input.