Sidebets only: ever been tried?

Playtech have several "All Bets" tables, where as well as playing the main BJ game you can also bet on your choice of any or all of 6 sidebets. It's a single seat table where everybody gets the same cards and can then make their own decisions, each new card contributing to the players score based on their own decisions. You have to put a bet down on the main game to play any sidebets even though none of them except the Buster are affected by player choices, and player choice doesn't affect the longterm RTP of the Buster bet.

However it is clear from the dealer cajoling the players to use sidebets, the range of sidebets available and the lower RTP that sidebets represent, that the main BJ game is not the focus. Given that each game you have to wait for decision time for every card dealt, and there are always slow players and ill advised splits so can take up to 3 minutes for 1 game sometimes, it makes me think they ought to do a "sidebets only" All Bets Blackjack, cutting out the main game, where they only deal initial cards then immediately play out the dealers hand for the Buster sidebet. All sidebets are resolved, and the game takes less than 20 seconds.

I think a lot of sidebet players would flock to this. Has anyone ever tried this, either online or in B&M. If so was it a success?

I don’t have much experience in this regard as I don’t often play table games, but I do recall one occasion in which a player ONLY wanted to play the UTH sidebet and was not allowed to do so—which I thought seemed odd. I think they only wanted to play the Trips bet ($5) and the $1 progressive thing.

The dealer explained it as they had to be playing the main game to even get cards. In any event, that player did not end up playing.

I don’t know what the rationale is behind the scenes, perhaps ZCore or someone would know. If I had to choose between a player only playing the main bets, or only playing the side bets, I know which one I would choose. I could at least maybe understand why you wouldn’t want a player only doing the $1 progressive thing, but if they’re also doing Trips bet, then I don’t see why you wouldn’t want that.

Sorry that’s not related to blackjack. In any case, I agree that maybe a side bets only game could be successful. I imagine that there are some players who only play the main game basically so they can play one, or more, of the side bets.

A lot of this is "social gambling", spouses, friends, clients, etc.
The focus is not on 'the math"or the game, but on the conversation.

Of course I'm also reminded of the father who took off his little kid's bracelet and tried to make an "odd's bet" with it. It takes all kinds.
If I recall correctly the craps crew tossed the jerk out.

Someone is forgetting the basic concept. You have to HAVE the main game to HAVE a side bet...........otherwise the cards wouldn't be played. I guess you could have a house hand v the dealer, if you allowed side betting only, kind of like Baccarat. Weird but doable. But I have seen instances where a "audience" member or other player at the table would bet on the side bet while the hand was being played. Like I have let the player next to me play my side bet while he was playing his hand and side bet. Or someone behind. But it's up to the individual dealers or pit critters. Sometimes it's allowed;; sometimes it's not.

Quote: MJGolf

Someone is forgetting the basic concept. You have to HAVE the main game to HAVE a side bet...........otherwise the cards wouldn't be played. I guess you could have a house hand v the dealer, if you allowed side betting only, kind of like Baccarat. Weird but doable. But I have seen instances where a "audience" member or other player at the table would bet on the side bet while the hand was being played. Like I have let the player next to me play my side bet while he was playing his hand and side bet. Or someone behind. But it's up to the individual dealers or pit critters. Sometimes it's allowed;; sometimes it's not.

That’s kind of what I was thinking, something akin to Baccarat where the cards get dealt out and you just see what happens.

On 3CP my local used to allow the side bets only. Where I've seen Baccarat in London, I think you can make the various tie bets regardless of whether you're playing Banker or Player or have a seat.

At Blackjack the only time it's sort of allowed is a player, who's already playing their box, makes a bet on an adjacent player. However I think most the time they make a BJ bet as well, so maybe it isn't allowed.

Quote: charliepatrick

At Blackjack the only time it's sort of allowed is a player, who's already playing their box, makes a bet on an adjacent player. However I think most the time they make a BJ bet as well, so maybe it isn't allowed.

It isn't actually legally allowed, but it is a looked the other way sort of thing. Some dealers don't care and look the other way, but if a floor person sees it, they usually speak up and disallow it.

I'm guessing it's due to more progressive jackpots being installed on Blackjack tables with payouts anywhere from $125-$200-300K that only require a $5 bet. Legally, the person sitting in the seat, playing the hand is entitled the money and does not owe anything to the person who provided the $5 bet.

But I'm sure there has been a fight or two over a perfect match payout of $60 before!

I will quietly offer to let someone play my sidebet if they keep up a running commentary on how many times I have gotten one without playing it. I take their money, set it aside my own chips, and play the sidebet off of their stack, putting their winnings back on the separate stack. Always, sooner or later, usually sooner, their investment goes to zero, proving by actual experience that the bet is a lousy one.

We usually need to do this on the sly, since dealers and floors sometimes take exception. Not once have they made a significant payout on the sidebet. I do occasionally get hell if, in addition to minding my own business, I forget to put up their bet every time.

There's a relatively new variation of Baccarat in WA state called Bad Beat Baccarat. It offers the following eight bets, and you are allowed to play just bonuses if you choose:

Player
Banker
Tie
Super 7 (Dragon 7) - 40:1
Fortune 8 (Panda 8) - 25:1
Any 8/7 - 25:1
Natural 9/8 - 45:1
3 card 9/8 - 200:1

One catch: Per state law, you can only play four of them, and if playing four, one is capped at a $5 max.

Some casinos allow you to meet their table minimum by including your sidebet. A $25 minimum can be met with a $10 regular bet and a $15 sidebet. To whatever extent that entices someone to the table, the house edge on the sidebet being so high, it's probably a wise marketing move. I wonder if a $1 blackjack bet coupled with a $24 sidebet would be kosher?