Is this blackjack-like game beatable/exploitable?

Hi guys, after asking the wizard himself I'm follwing his advice and posting my question here(warning: long post)

I've got a question regarding a card game offered at a local cardroom. The game appears to be similar to blackjack at first. It does vary though in certain ways, the rules are explained in detail below. I'm curious if anyone here could help me figure out an optimal strategy or even a way to beat the game. Counting cards is possible. Also, I'd be happy to answer any questions regarding this game. I haven't played it myself yet, just watched people playing it.

I only have basic knowledge of card counting and blackjack. I apologize should I be explaining the obvious in the rules. I'm just trying to be as exact as possible.

Here are the specific rules:

- The game is referred to as "twenty-two". The goal is to get to 22 or as close as possible without going higher than 22. To win you must be closer to 22 than the dealer, or on/below 22 when the dealer busts. When player and dealer have the same value it is a "stand-off" and the player takes back his wager. The exception is if the dealer has two aces, but that's explained in detail below.

- The game is played with a shoe of 6 decks of cards. The penetration is somewhere between 20-30% of the deck. By penetration I understand the point at which the dealer puts in the cutting-card prior to loading the shoe. Once this card comes out during the game, the current game is finished and after that the shoe is re-shuffled. Thus about 70-80% of the cards in a shoe are dealt.

- It is possible to watch the game and sit in/out at any point.

- The game is played with a minimum wager of $10 and a maximum wager of $100 per box. It is no problem to vary the betting sizes.

- The cards have the value they display. All face cards have the value 10. An Ace has the value 11 or 1.

- The game is played on a table like blackjack. All players are dealt one card open, then the dealer gets dealt one card open, then all players get dealt a second card open. After this the first player can choose to "hit" i.e. draw another card, or "stand" that is draw no more card.

- Once all players have made their choices the dealer draws for himself. The dealer must draw until 16 and stand at 17 or higher. There is no difference to soft/hard sums.

- When you win you are payed 1 to 1. (IE: you bet $30 and win --> you win $30 and take back your wager.)

- Two aces beat everything including any combination equaling 22. When a player is dealt two aces he is paid 2 to 1 on his wager immediately, except if the dealer's card is an Ace.

-)Should the dealer's card be an ace (when the player is dealt two aces) the following options arise for the player:

• a) The player can immediately take 1.8 to 1 and end his game right there. OR
• b) The player can buy an "insurance" for 10% of the betting amount (this option is given before the first player acts).

In case of b) the following outcomes are possible:

1. -Should the dealer hit an ace and the player insured himself he can take back his wager and the insurance is kept by the dealer.
2. -Should the dealer hit an ace and the player has not insured himself he loses to the dealer.
3. -Should the player buy insurance and the dealer hits no ace, the player receives 2 to 1 but loses the insurance.

- Whenever the two cards dealt to a player add up to 10, 11 or 12 the player may "double-down". The player then doubles his bet and receives only one more card.

- Any pair as well as any two face cards dealt to a player allow the option of splitting. Should the player opt to do so the two cards are separated and he receives an additional card to each of the originally dealt cards. Of course the player has to bet the same amount on the second hand as he did initially on the first hand.

Example: The player is dealt 3-3. He bet $10. He opts to split. He must now put down another $10 and then receives and additional card to his first 3 and an additional card to the second 3, thereby now playing two hands.

- There is no limit to splitting. If the cards allow it, the player can split and "re-split" without limitation. Also, should the player split and the possibility arise, he can double-down.

- There is no form of "surrender" as there is in blackjack.

A quick "shoot from the hip" from a guy who counts on his fingers and finds even that to be mentally challenging: If the cardroom has been offering it for awhile and has survived, its probably no great bargain. If the cardroom has only recently offered it and lacks an expert to work out the math for them, go for it!

If you try to work out the math, I'd focus on the primary situations to be encountered and forget the player's option at Two Aces or whatever it is.

Good luck, I'll await a more precise approach by others, and will have my mittens off so I can check everyone's math.

Hmmm, innovative game! I don't think its going to be good news whenever someone gets around to calculating the house edge and the optimal strategy (you will need to run simulations which can take a very long time).

Reasons I think the house edge will be high:
-No doubling on soft hands (s17,s18,etc),
-No surrender,
-AA paying 2-to-1 is a hand you will see once every 176 hands versus regular blackjack 3-to-2 once every 21 hands. The loss in the expected value of the bonus payoff in this variant will increase the house edge (at least by 1%, as seen in 6-5 games).

Some of this will be mitigated by the fact the dealer stands on all 17s, more so than in regular bj, but will probably not lower the house edge enough. Optimal strategy will call for the player hitting hard 17s sometimes, I suspect.

In terms of counting, a good place to start is tracking aces, since they are the most valuable card in this game.

It seems like this game would be worse than 6:5 blackjack. Counting is probably pointless. Especially with the lack of analysis out there, you'd have to figure everything out on your own. You need a basic strategy, a counting system, player/house advantages at each count, and much more. If we call that 100 steps, we are only on about step 2.

This immense time commitment is far better spent elsewhere, such as counting at regular blackjack.

Thank you all for the feedback. It really sounds as if the players would be at a grave disadvantage in this blackjack variation...

Has anyone maybe ever heard of this game or something comparable?

Generally the only reason to invent new rules for an old game is to increase the house edge. There are exceptions. Blackjack Switch if played properly has a very low house edge. One of the reasons you never see "surrender" any more in blackjack is that players rarely misplay surrender and throw away good hands. They intuitively know to dump 16 against a dealer 10. In addition it slows down the game.
-----------
A full analysis of a card game like this is very complex and requires developing a good computer code. But you can bet that the guy who invented the game has a patent and he has done a full mathematical analysis. In the old days casinos would "invent" new rules on the fly like offering 2:1 blackjack to increase business during an off peak time. Casinos can lose thousands in a few hours.

This is probably played in one of the player-banked casinos around Los Angeles or the Bay Area. There is a law in California (that the tribal casinos are exempt from) that forbids "21" games. So the card clubs often tack on some unusual hand that beats a blackjack, in this case, two aces. They often also get unnecessarily creative, and come up with a bunch of silly rules while they're at it.

Just about every club in the Los Angeles area has a different blackjack game. I analyzed this' rel='nofollow' target='_blank'>https://wizardofodds.com/californiablackjack]this variant a while back. After they got rid of the game, I pretty much decided to not fuss with California rules any longer. However, my gut feeling is this game retains a healthy house edge. To beat it, I would bank it.