Plaza brings back "Worlds Most Liberal" blackjack - What is the house edge?
I noticed that the Plaza has brought this table back (which I believe was originally at the Las Vegas Club arcross the street), which was the following rules:
6 decks
Blackjack pays 3:2
Player may double on any 2, 3 or 4 cards
Player may split as many times as they like (even with Aces)
Double after split
Early surrender
Unfortunately the table was full when I saw it so I couldn't try it out. Penetration looked very good in the game and the limits were $10-$2000
Anyone have any idea what the house edge is in this game?
thanks!
https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/calculator/
He is also has a list of rule variations and the effect on the edge:
https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/rule-variations/
Quote: LonesomeGamblerThose rules are not correct, although that would certainly be fun! The table was dead last time I was there, but I seem to remember naturals paying even money, or some similar catch.
There has to be a major catch somewhere. The game you are describing would be a significant negative house advantage. Either the max bet is very small, and it is a giveaway to attract people, or there is a rule that "pushes on ties" or some similar big gain for the casino.
In my opinion it is false advertising to call this game the "World's Most Liberal Blackjack" and the Plaza and Las Vegas Club should be ashamed. I'm tempted to complain to Gaming about it, but the word "liberal" is so abused in the English language that it has lost any kind of legal respect.
Quote: WizardThey pay even money on non-suited blackjacks and 2 to 1 on suited blackjacks, for an average blackjack win of 5 to 4.
In my opinion it is false advertising to call this game the "World's Most Liberal Blackjack" and the Plaza and Las Vegas Club should be ashamed. I'm tempted to complain to Gaming about it, but the word "liberal" is so abused in the English language that it has lost any kind of legal respect.
I suppose they get away with it because the rules governing player decisions have the most choices. Of course, that advantage is more than lost to the lower payouts.
Quote: Etymology Onlineliberal (adj.)
mid-14c., "generous," also, late 14c., "selfless; noble, nobly born; abundant," and, early 15c., in a bad sense "extravagant, unrestrained," from O.Fr. liberal "befitting free men, noble, generous, willing, zealous" (12c.), from L. liberalis "noble, gracious, munificent, generous," lit. "of freedom, pertaining to or befitting a free man," from liber "free, unrestricted, unimpeded; unbridled, unchecked, licentious," from PIE *leudh-ero- (cf. Gk. eleutheros "free"), probably originally "belonging to the people" (though the precise semantic development is obscure), and a suffixed form of the base *leudh- "people" (cf. O.C.S. ljudu, Lith. liaudis, O.E. leod, Ger. Leute "nation, people;" O.H.G. liut "person, people") but literally "to mount up, to grow." With the meaning "free from restraint in speech or action," liberal was used 16c.-17c. as a term of reproach. It revived in a positive sense in the Enlightenment, with a meaning "free from prejudice, tolerant," which emerged 1776-88.
In reference to education, explained by Fowler as "the education designed for a gentleman (Latin liber a free man) & ... opposed on the one hand to technical or professional or any special training, & on the other to education that stops short before manhood is reached" (cf. liberal arts). Purely in reference to political opinion, "tending in favor of freedom and democracy" it dates from c.1801, from Fr. libéral, originally applied in English by its opponents (often in French form and with suggestions of foreign lawlessness) to the party favorable to individual political freedoms. But also (especially in U.S. politics) tending to mean "favorable to government action to effect social change," which seems at times to draw more from the religious sense of "free from prejudice in favor of traditional opinions and established institutions" (and thus open to new ideas and plans of reform), which dates from 1823.
Quote: Wizard
In my opinion it is false advertising to call this game the "World's Most Liberal Blackjack" and the Plaza and Las Vegas Club should be ashamed. I'm tempted to complain to Gaming about it, but the word "liberal" is so abused in the English language that it has lost any kind of legal respect.
It's not false advertising... it's a new twist on the game. Barney Frank deals the game quite a bit, and a Kennedy gets it on his nights off.
Quote: buzzpaffI assume Barney deals it in the " Party Pit " ?
HAHA. Paigowdan sits on the committee of ethics at the Plaza... they're questioning payouts to some players. Apparently, Frank was giving money to people who really didn't earn it.
