Blackjack Tie Side Bet (Again, from a non-Blackjack player0

Was playing blackjack at a casino last night. This particular table had the "Tie" side bet, where if the player's total and the dealer's total tied, the player would win 10-1 on whatever amount he had bet on the tie. The Wizard describes the side bet here.

I had never seen such a side bet before, and I was a bit baffled by it. It didn't seem like the side bet was hit that often, but when it was, at 10-1, the payoff was a nice one for the player.

The most confounding part was the way player's played. Obviously, they would rather tie the dealer than beat the dealer. For the most part, I felt like the players played the same way the dealer would with that hand, but with an eye on the dealer's up card, hoping for that tie.

I never played the side bet, not understanding the odds on it, and at one point, tied the dealer 4 times in a row. I got blasted by the other players for not playing the side bet. I still refused to play the side-bet, knowing that side bets are usually not in the player's favor.

However, according to the Wizard, the overall house edge with the side bet is 0.24% (from the above linked page). Using the Wizard's house edge calculator, I come up with the game (without a side bet) as having a house edge of 0.64%.

The numbers indicate to me that one SHOULD play this particular side bet, using the modified strategy as presented on the Wizard's page, as the house edge is 37.5% better when you play the side-bet. Is this right?

I stand by what I wrote. You should make the side bet only if you use my modified strategy, that favors ties.

I didn't mean to sound like I was questioning your numbers. Only that this would be the first instance I've encountered where a side bet is actually better than the main bet. Or, at least in this case, the combination of the two is a good bet.

I actually feel bad now that I was annoyed by the players trying to get ties. I don't know that they were using your modified strategy, or any strategy for that matter, but now having seen the numbers, I know I shouldn't have silently ridiculed them for making the bet and then playing to win it.

This is kinda fascinating.

Considering how side bets are generally considered Sucker Bets, it's amazing to see one as good as this.

It makes me wonder: Are there any other side bets that lower the overall house edge?

Yes, but most players will continue using the normal basic strategy (or whatever other strategy the use) and not the correct modified basic strategy. And I am sure using normal basic strategy, this side bet would have a big HE.
The wizzard modified strategy shows almost all stiff hands to be hit v 2-6. Very few people would know and play such correct modified strategy.

House Edge? Correct Modified Basic Strategy? Ugh. I give up. I just remember all the hoopla and hollering whenever anyone hit that Match The Dealer bet and I cringe at the mere thought of playing it much less playing it correctly.

In very general terms... in Blackjack using basic strategy, the chance for a tie is about 1 in 12. So if Playing using basic Strategy, the House Edge is rather large. By modifying your Decisions to attempt to tie the House Edge for both 21 and tie lowers. As stated, the correct strategy WILL make the game weird, but better.

Any ideas, then, on whether or not card counting with this side bet can make this a positive expectation game, and by that I mean in an easy manner. If the house edge is already so low at 0.24%, it seems like card counting would make this a piece of cake without needing a wide fluctuation in your betting units. On the other hand, it seems like the main aspect of this game is to tie, and no amount of card counting can improve that situation, except possibly in situations when the deck is rich in 10s, and you can consistently hope for a tie 20. And if that is the case, can the game be counted so that you only bet the tie bet when the chances of a tie are greater, and thus increase your edge?

A few ideas. First you can play the game without betting on the side bet, thus card counting would work as normal.
Since the side bet reduces the house edge you can bet the side bet when the count is 0 negative and you play minimum. When the count increases to the point where is positive Ev you play only the main bet according to the bet schedule. This would probably work.
Have in mind that the Ev per Wizzard is 0,24% but based on the 1.5 units.
So the choice is say between $10 @ -0.64% = -$0.064 or $15 @ -0.24% = -$0.036. ie the 0,24% is actually 0,36% based on the initial bet only.

I am pretty sure that counting would also work with the side bet and Hi-Low would probably be a decent count to use because of the 20-20 tie. You will need simulations to confirm this and see how the Ev changes with the count. A better count system could probably be devised. It is a lot of work to do all this and also find indices for such a game.
But the bigger problem even if you get decent Ev, is the increase in variance to the game. The 10:1 payout on the side bet (1/3 of total bet) means the variance increases a lot and you need a big bankroll to play it.

Well, I avoid the outside world on major drinking holidays like tomorrow, so perhaps I'll write a quick simulation and see what happens.

Or I might just go to the casino and play and have fun. We'll see which one of those ideas ends up winning.

I was browsing the website for a casino that has tie bet. I found matazal that stays on soft 17's, four deck shoe, allows splitting aces up to four hands and doubles after splits. (except aces) Is there another tie bet basic strategy for soft 17's?