Super 4 Progressive Blackjack

Quote: SM777

Super 4 is a big step below the 21 + 3 progressive from Galaxy, and Blazing 7's from SG. AGS has work to do to find a better solution for BJ progressives.

They have some work to do to get some decent games and save their company. This one sucks, as do most of their games. And let's not forget their attempt to steal High Card Flush from Galaxy, which cost them heavily.


ZCore13

Quote: Zcore13

We just got this side bet at one of the two casinos I work at. What a terrible side bet! Terrible payout percentage. Terrible frequency, Terrible flow. Yuck!

Along with the bad game, they replaced side bets that were $1 or more with this one that's $5. It's mostly a locals casino, so the players are pissed off. And to top it off, they set the must hit portion of the progressive way too high at $1,000. Should have been set much lower for continuous pursuit of the must hit, rather than only when it her's in the $950+ range.


ZCore13

Wait! Mr. ZCore, aren't you the person responsible for bringing new table games and progressives? How did this terrible side bet get in on your watch?

Quote: UCivan

Wait! Mr. ZCore, aren't you the person responsible for bringing new table games and progressives? How did this terrible side bet get in on your watch?

It would have never happened under my watch. I left my previous Director position about 3 1/2 years ago. I'm a Pit Supervisor at my current one. No input in selecting games.


ZCore13

This is after less than about 10 hands playing their demo. I had blackjack three times within that time and the one was this win. I thought i had won the progressive at first but this is still a crazy win after 10 hands.

It is tough for me to understand how this game was introduced in CT at one of the big properties (Mohegan Sun?!?) with a 50 table install and zero history on whether it would work...and yet MS installed all the necessary equipment for a game with no track record. I understood it was doing well there on the East Coast.

I agree with ZCore...I think the game is not that good. But to be fair, I am not sure I like any of the existing BJ progressives. I question the theory that regular BJ players are interested in bringing a slot type event to their BJ experience. But the players in the industry are pumping them to clients, so it has to be working for some of them, right?

At a local property I have visited, Super 4 gets less than 10% participation which can't possibly be enough to cover the lease fee. Query for TG management, what is the hurdle for participation to make a BJ Progressive viable as I understand lease fees are in the $500-$700/table/month range? The good news with the Progressive is you know exactly what kind of play you are getting, so your aren't guessing when it comes to the question of whether it is working with your player clientele.

Quote: Zcore13

I think it's an excellent side bet and would give it a try at my place if everything fell together. I would however adjust the pay table to drop to the house edge to about 20-25%. Probably reducing the RF payouts and bumping up one of the lower level payments a little.


ZCore13

I'm a bit confused. Zcore liked this in 2015 and have a different take in 2019. (see quoted post in this same thread).

Not sure if you will see this six years later but I have been doing something similar for about three years. I have been doing an experiment with this bet at a TC of +3 and keeping track of what I spend and what I take in, because I can't find any solid info on it. Not sure why no one has done the runs on this.

Can you calculate at what true count this bet would be profitable?

I'd imagine this happens at a true count so high you would likely never get an advantageous hand in your lifetime. If the return is 66.6% (2/3) we would need the frequency of blackjack to be raised by 50% (3/2). The actual number would be less since the higher payout odds increase with TC also but its still too much. The odds of drawing a 10 would have to be 4/10.614 to make a blackjack 50% more likely. This means 9.54 non-tens would have to be missing per deck while leaving every 10-A untouched. So a true count of 6.3 or greater is needed and a true count even higher if any aces are missing to make this profitable. Besides the extreme volatility, I still don't recommend this even at a true 10 for a hi-lo counter. I've had 2 hands at this TC ever in my ~60 hours playing where the first was a dealt 10-10 and 3-5 vs dealer 6. You better believe I split and doubled those bad boys. Split to 3 hands and dealer busted. $750 hand was basically 1/3 of my bankroll. Yeah, variance was my best friend. The other hand was a dealt 4-4 vs dealer 4. I was going off gut feeling and split those suckers, which after checking on wizards hand calculator, was the correct choice. However, I lost each hand after getting 2 14's and the dealer's hole card was a 6. The dealer and the pit boss told me I a made a dumb choice believing you should never split fours which is completely untrue. Make sure to always play your cards and never your bet!