6 to 5 better than 3 to 2?
I.E. Perhaps if the 3:2 table had limited splitting and doubling and no surrender, while 6:5 allowed unlimited splits, double with anything and allowed surrender, then it MIGHT be worth it.
But even then, I'm not sure, and tend to doubt it.
If there were, the casinos all over town would not be pushing 6:5 so much. Some of the difference may be an emotional issue but its also a financial difference and there is no way that its ever in the player's favor to be at a 6:5 game rather than a 3:2 game. Not ever.Quote: ikusaIs there ever a situation when getting paid 6 to 5 is a better game for the player than getting paid 3 to 2?
Quote: ikusaIs there ever a situation when getting paid 6 to 5 is a better game for the player than getting paid 3 to 2?
Those would have to be some pretty awful rules for that to be the case.
Quote: ikusaIs there ever a situation when getting paid 6 to 5 is a better game for the player than getting paid 3 to 2?
You'll be allowed to spread your bets from table minimum to table maximum whenever you choose without the fear of a back off. You'll also earn a lot more comps than the 3:2 player, but those comps will cost you dearly.
With today's rules the answer to your question is an emphatic NO!
In that situation, 6:5 at $5 is not necessarily better, but a better than nothing sort of thing.
Quote: drwIf you are just there for the free drinks super-low-stakes 6:5 bj is worth playing. Also if you can't afford to lose much, 6:5 $5 bj is better than risking 5* more on 3:2 $25 bj - at $5 you might lose $100 in 2 hours if unlucky, but at $25 you could be out $500.
Flat betting both games without counting would put your hourly expected dollar loss darn close to the same in both games depending on the exact house edge. As we all know anything can and probably will happen in the short term.
Quote: INkyatariThe sense I've been getting is that 6:5 isn't necessarily the horrible game that everyone makes it out to be. Sure, I'd love to get the 3:2 payout, but at my low stakes game, (especially here in the Chicago area) its probably the closest to a good bet I'll get out here. Most of the casinos have great odds on craps (Seriously, 100X seems to be the norm from my unscientific survey) but everything else seems to suck eggs, so 6:5 at the $5 level doesn't seem quite so bad.
Take a stand and play craps or some other game. The only chance of getting rid of 6:5 is if people refuse to play.
Quote: INkyatariThe sense I've been getting is that 6:5 isn't necessarily the horrible game that everyone makes it out to be.
Most of the casinos have great odds on craps 100X seems to be the norm so 6:5 at the $5 level doesn't seem quite so bad.
6:5 at Blackjack is the same as 100x at craps. An illusion.
At craps they proudly trumpet the availability of 100x odds but darn few players actually go that high.
At BlackJack they proudly trumpet the availability of 6:5 payouts but darn few know that is bad and even fewer care about it enough to walk away. They may care about it enough to gripe a bit but they don't walk away from 6:5, particularly when at their level of play there sure ain't much else but 6:5. I remember the days when BlackJack layouts all had printed on them in large letters: Dealer must draw to 16 and hold on all 17s. And Blackjacks paid 3:2 the same as they had for eons, there was no thought of changing anything.
