Super Fun 21

I am going to be on a cruise that has csm for BJ, but shoe dealt Fun 21. I was wondering if any one had any information on this game and if count counting (Knock Out BJ) would work.

Superfun-21 is basically Blackjack, except:
1. You can double down at any time on any number of cards, like on a four card hand of 11 when still hitting.
2. You can surrender at any time during your turn to hit.
3. Backjacks pay even money, except a full diamond backjack (Ad and 10d/Jd/Qd/Kd) pays double.
4. 5 or more card 21's pay double.
5. YOUR blackjack always wins against a dealer's blackjack.

If the dealer is using a CSM (continuous shuffling machine), you are unable to count. You can only count hand-held pitch games and shoe games.

Dan thanks very much for the reply. The Superfun 21 game is shoe dealt. The BJ game is with a csm. Would the Superfun 21 be a better game to play and would you be able to card count?

Superfun-21 is a fine version of blackjack, with a low house edge.
All blackjack is countable if not dealt from a CSM, so....

From a shoe yes, it is possible to count down the decks(s);
from a CSM, no.

Personally, I don't recommend card counting, because:
1. It's still next to impossible to win, very hard to do well.
2. If you are counting down Blackjack on a live game for personal profit, management can simply bar you from playing blackjack, or even from using their casino. On a cruise ship, you're in a fishbowl, so to speak.
3. From the standpoint of the gaming industry, on a cruise ship or not, Blackjack card counting is considered unethical and unacceptable.

.....

Quote: gofaster87

Unethical? Give me a break and stop drinking the kool-aid. Sometimes your advice is ridiculous.

No it's not. As a casino dealer, I see people every day try to take the position that "anything that I can get away with is okay", - and it makes NO sense to the ears of some that the casino operator has a point of view also. None.

Gofaster, Go to a Strip casino can count your butt off with card counting at $100 a hand or more, and see how quickly you'll be told:

"Sir - you are done for the night here."

.....

Quote: Slyfox1641

I am going to be on a cruise that has csm for BJ, but shoe dealt Fun 21...

Eight years ago on a Carnival cruise, I saw a game called "Fun 21." It wasn't Superfun 21; it was more like Spanish 21 in that all blackjacks paid 3:2. Instead of removing the 10's from the eight decks of the shoe, they removed the Q's. Unlike Spanish 21, early surrender was allowed. However, all the multicard 21, 777, and 678 payouts in Fun 21 were 3:2.

If your game is like this game instead of Superfun 21, you could use a Spanish 21 count.

I respect a lot of your posts, PaigowDan, but I have to say that your take on card counting is a bit misquided.

First of all, blackjack, while mostly a game of chance, has an element of skill involved. Otherwise, casinos would ban people who played perfect basic strategy, as they have an "edge" over players who play by a whim. Because skill is involved, card counting is just another skill that takes it to another level. If a casino wants to kick a player out because of that, then that's management's decision. However, as long the player is not CHEATING (i.e. using a device to count or otherwise cheat), it's basically the same as a basic strategy player. My experience has been, that while I have the ability to count 2-deck and single, that my understanding of basic strategy's finer points (splitting 99 against dealer 8 or 9, doubling soft 18 against 3-4-5-6) is more concerning to the house. I've never once been asked to stop playing, but I know for a fact that I'm on watch at a couple casinos. I don't spread a bet AT ALL, I MIGHT increase by one unit (i.e. $5) when the count is high or flat bet when the count is low, so the casinos are less concerned with that. Further, I play alone, and so there is no chance I'd be working in a team.

Second, card counting is not unethical. It may be frowned upon by the CASINO, but until there is a law written that bans players from using their heads, there's nothing wrong with doing it if you are so able. My belief is more people THINK they know how to count, and that actually helps the casinos. I agree at $100+ a hand your play COULD get you kicked out... and that's the casino's choice to do that. But it's not unethical. An unethical decision would be willingly working with a dealer to win. You could even argue an incorrect payout that you accept is unethical... but card counting just doesn't fit into that definition for me.

Finally, to get to the original post, unless the BJ rules on the cruise ship are AWFUL, regular BJ will always be a better bet that SuperFun 21. SuperFun minimum house edge is over 1%, while most BJ tables fall under that. I'm shocked that someone as well versed in gaming would even suggest that it's a good game. Sure it's better than 3-card or LIR, but against any 3:2 BJ table???

Quote: WizardofOdds website, SF21 odds

6 decks, dealer hits soft 17: 1.40%

I'm pretty sure that any set of rules where BJ pays 3:2 and double after split is allowed will result in less than 1%.

Again, this is no respect to you, Dan. I'm very excited you've had success with EZ PaiGow and hope any other games you are developing are doing well. And gofaster, your take on casinos is a bit jaded and extreme. There's a middle ground between both your viewpoints... I hope this helps clarify for both of you.

.....

Quote: gofaster87

I can admit I'm a bit jaded and extreme but that's because Ive seen a lot during my heavy gambling years, some good some bad.

Gofaster - I can relate!

And Tilt - please excuse my pro-gaming industry posture. I am not the Griffin Book Henchman I sometimes appear to be, though my white hat catches fire - and turns charcoal dark.

Years of dealing dice and poker games at a $5 house has destroyed my faith (and optimism) in humanity. JAy-Ded!....

As far as I am concerned, card counting is all right, kinda somewhat actually, - as opposed to capping bets and pulling cards out of your sleeve, and pinching the crap player's checks right next to you. Seen it all.

Jaded Dealers, Floormen, and shift managers feel it's unethical and in bad faith, and I agree that it's not fully in the spirit and sportsmanship of "the gracious gambler."

But counting is a very light shade of pale in the grey zone of nefarious gamling activities.

Dan,

To most of us here, card counting is in no way even a light shade of pale or at all nefarious. It's simply the usual way all card games are played: By using knowledge of what cards have already been seen.


Slyfox,

Please refer here, https://wizardofodds.com/superfun21, to the Wizard's Super Fun 21 page. It has a basic strategy. The house advantage against basic strategy is 1.4%, which (since it's about 1% higher than real BJ) sounds like it would be difficult to make up by counting.

Casinos seem to have no ethical dilemma in allowing players to play poor strategy or informing them which games are robbing them blind. Many players do not understand odds and the large house edge that the casino has on many games. Now I agree that it is not the casino's duty to inform the public, it is the player's to do research and select which games best suit them. On the same note, card counters have no duty to refrain from AP or inform the casino of their intent. It is the casino's job to decide who they wish to allow play.

If the casino has no problem taking my money I have no problem with taking theirs. Especially when I am only playing by the rules that they created.

Quote: iwannaiguana

If the casino has no problem taking my money I have no problem with taking theirs. Especially when I am only playing by the rules that they created.

Amen brother! Card counting is not the least bit gray, in my opinion. My advice to players is to bring your best possible game to the table.

Quote: Wizard

Amen brother! Card counting is not the least bit gray, in my opinion. My advice to players is to bring your best possible game to the table.

How does anyone justify the notion that you are welcome to play this game only if you promise to lose !

I appreciate all the comments. It was't a question of playing BJ against Superfun21. The former is dealt from a csm, while the latter will be dealt from a shoe.

Quote: Paigowdan

But counting is a very light shade of pale in the grey zone of nefarious gamling activities.

No offense Dan, but how is card counting in blackjack any different than keeping track of played cards in any other game and using that information to play better? That's exactly what skilled 7-card stud poker players do, what championship gin rummy or bridge players do, etc. In those games, only the bad players ignore that information. From that standpoint, the only difference between blackjack and those other games is that the house is one of the players in blackjack -- and in most jurisdictions they get to boot you off the table.

Imagine what would happen in the poker room if a 7-stud player was asked to leave because he was betting based on already-seen cards.

Quote: buzzpaff

How does anyone justify the notion that you are welcome to play this game only if you promise to lose !

There is no promise to lose made by any gambler when gambling. It's gambling - any result may happen.
That's the premise going in. You need to understand that a 2% house edge is 49/51. Slightly Lopsided - but NOT 0%/100%. And card counting might make it 51/49.

There are BJ players who win without counting, and counters who lose.
Ian Anderson lost $100,000 during a bad stretch, and he nearly gave up AP. A casino manager once recommended that he learn basic strategy better.

Quote: MathExtremist

No offense Dan, but how is card counting in blackjack any different than keeping track of played cards in any other game and using that information to play better? That's exactly what skilled 7-card stud poker players do, what championship gin rummy or bridge players do, etc. In those games, only the bad players ignore that information. From that standpoint, the only difference between blackjack and those other games is that the house is one of the players in blackjack -- and in most jurisdictions they get to boot you off the table.

Imagine what would happen in the poker room if a 7-stud player was asked to leave because he was betting based on already-seen cards.

Stacy, the two different games have two different premises or "ground rules" going in. THAT is how the games are different, and the way casinos offer and approach "fair play" in these two different games is quite different. True?

Also, poker is player-banked, BJ is house banked. VERY different from the casino's point of view. Also true.

Poker - use all your wiles, track everything.
BJ - use basic strategy for the hand in front of you on the table, but have selective anmesia on the discards.

BJ was implemented with the assumption that the original game was not really countable when it actually was. Edward O. Thorpe saw BJ as a math problem that included historical discards when no one prior to him really did, or to his great promotion.

Indeed, card counting gave BJ it's golden era (late 60's to late 90's), and made BJ way more popular than craps, which was the table game leader before Thorpe.
Casinos actually made way more money from card-counters than the other way around, with card-counters sending that game's popularity into orbit.

" There is no promise to lose made by any gambler when gambling. It's gambling - any result may happen. "

And the end result is if you win by using you brain to count., you will told your action is no longer wanted.
I stand by my original statement. You are welcome to play only if you promise to lose !

Unethical? Jeez Louise!

It does not have a low house edge (for a blackjack game). I am not going to look it up again, but in Fall 2003, the Wiz had it at 0.94%. That sucks for a blackjack game.

I have seen double deck SF21 (Orleans or Stratosphere, or somewhere, March 2008), but the whole concept of SF21 was that it was supposed to have every good rule you ever wanted (except they got it back by not paying properly on blackjacks). Does 6 deck SF21 really exist? Also, SF21 was supposed to be $5 Min, but those tables at Orleans (or wherever) were $10 min.

Quote: Paigowdan

BJ was implemented with the assumption that the original game was not really countable when it actually was.

So because whoever thought of blackjack didn't consider the possibility of card counting it is unethical to do so? Call me unethical then. Actually, I was already called that in the calculus thread, so call me double-unethical.