New Blackjack Companion bet – FEEDBACK REQUEST
September 14th, 2011 at 1:02:00 PM
permalink
Hello all. Here’s a link to a roughly constructed information page designed to briefly explain the concept and disclose the math highlights for my new game:
http://www.wix.com/in6866/lucky-stiff-blackjack
I’d appreciate hearing from any of you who care to review this page and offer your opinion and/or questions, either publicly in this forum or privately using the contact address on the linked page.
THANKS!
http://www.wix.com/in6866/lucky-stiff-blackjack
I’d appreciate hearing from any of you who care to review this page and offer your opinion and/or questions, either publicly in this forum or privately using the contact address on the linked page.
THANKS!
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 14th, 2011 at 3:21:52 PM
permalink
I don't think that players generally like to wager on receiving a bad hand, in my experience. However, this wager doesn't quite qualify for that as you need to draw a good hand in order to win.
Nevertheless, players will still be aiming to be in a bad position in order to get a chance of winning the side-bet so I think that will be it's downfall.
Have you performed a count vulnerability study yet? Although it's different to the O/U 13 side-bet it does incorporate player totals so it would be worth checking into.
Nevertheless, players will still be aiming to be in a bad position in order to get a chance of winning the side-bet so I think that will be it's downfall.
Have you performed a count vulnerability study yet? Although it's different to the O/U 13 side-bet it does incorporate player totals so it would be worth checking into.
September 14th, 2011 at 3:36:16 PM
permalink
Do you have to / can you double the "Stiff" if you double down the main?
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
September 14th, 2011 at 7:23:52 PM
permalink
Good point, Switch. Without the benefit of live play on the floor, whether or not players will bet on receiving a bad hand is certainly one of the big questions. In my play testing, though, it was interesting to see how players actually seemed to hope for a stiff hand to get the chance for a multiple payout. Of course, they weren't playing with 'real' money.
As one of my developer friends observed, the bet serves somewhat as a semi-hedge against receiving a bad hand ... not a full hedge since you can still win both bets when playing the 'high side.'
Yes, I did have an advantage play analysis done, with results showing that the Stiff bet was only about 1/100th as vulnerable as the main bet.
As one of my developer friends observed, the bet serves somewhat as a semi-hedge against receiving a bad hand ... not a full hedge since you can still win both bets when playing the 'high side.'
Yes, I did have an advantage play analysis done, with results showing that the Stiff bet was only about 1/100th as vulnerable as the main bet.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 14th, 2011 at 7:30:34 PM
permalink
No, doubling down is not a provision in the Stiff rules as currently designed, even if a player chooses to double down on a hard 12 - 16.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 14th, 2011 at 8:50:30 PM
permalink
That link either takes me to web page design site or back here. What am I doing wrong >
September 14th, 2011 at 8:59:22 PM
permalink
Don't know, buzzpaff. It works for me. Make sure you have the complete link address:
http://www.wix.com/in6866/lucky-stiff-blackjack
Please copy and paste and try again. I'd like to get your input.
http://www.wix.com/in6866/lucky-stiff-blackjack
Please copy and paste and try again. I'd like to get your input.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 15th, 2011 at 8:26:54 AM
permalink
Keep getting same results. Even tried to Google lucky stiff blackjack. Can you post a click on link or pm me the rules. Games seems interesting !
September 15th, 2011 at 9:22:11 AM
permalink
Buzz, I sent you a hyperlink (click-on link) privately - to the gmail address posted on your member profile. Let me know if it's not in your Inbox and I'll resend.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 15th, 2011 at 10:38:34 AM
permalink
The link is working for me. Here is what I noticed about the bet:
1) The bet is not resolved after the first two cards are dealt and is linked to the base BJ game of your hand vs. the dealer's hand (i.e. it is not a three card poker bonus, Lucky Ladies, Lucky Lucky, etc.).
2) It appears that you "qualify" with a stiff hand 40% of the time, so 1 out of every 2.5 hands you have some anticipation that you could win based on the card you subsequently draw. That qualification/anticipation rate is a lot higher than most other side bets and the win rate at 20% is also pretty good.
3) When you are dealt a "Stiff Hand" and the dealer has 7 - A, you get paid at least 5 to 1 even if you don't beat the dealer (and lose your main BJ bet) provided you draw to at least at least 17 without busting. I hate it when I get a dealt a 14 and hit to 19 against a dealer 10 upcard only to lose when the dealer has a 10 for their hole card as well.
4) It is NOT a "dollar and a prayer" type side bet with huge top end payouts, a 9% - 12% hit rate and a large house edge. There are already plenty of those side bets out there. But it does give you a chance to win 9 to 1 even in the "non-power version".
5) The downside I see is what Switch indicated in that the players are betting that they get a "stiff hand" which is not what you want to be rooting for in BJ. I guess the upside there is that it isn't a true "insurance" type bet as you can win both your main bet and the Lucky Stiff bet in the same hand. "Half hedge" is a good description.
It will be interesting to see what the rest of the forum thinks (and what players think if you get it out on the floor). It gives BJ some increased variance without a ridiculous house edge price tag.
1) The bet is not resolved after the first two cards are dealt and is linked to the base BJ game of your hand vs. the dealer's hand (i.e. it is not a three card poker bonus, Lucky Ladies, Lucky Lucky, etc.).
2) It appears that you "qualify" with a stiff hand 40% of the time, so 1 out of every 2.5 hands you have some anticipation that you could win based on the card you subsequently draw. That qualification/anticipation rate is a lot higher than most other side bets and the win rate at 20% is also pretty good.
3) When you are dealt a "Stiff Hand" and the dealer has 7 - A, you get paid at least 5 to 1 even if you don't beat the dealer (and lose your main BJ bet) provided you draw to at least at least 17 without busting. I hate it when I get a dealt a 14 and hit to 19 against a dealer 10 upcard only to lose when the dealer has a 10 for their hole card as well.
4) It is NOT a "dollar and a prayer" type side bet with huge top end payouts, a 9% - 12% hit rate and a large house edge. There are already plenty of those side bets out there. But it does give you a chance to win 9 to 1 even in the "non-power version".
5) The downside I see is what Switch indicated in that the players are betting that they get a "stiff hand" which is not what you want to be rooting for in BJ. I guess the upside there is that it isn't a true "insurance" type bet as you can win both your main bet and the Lucky Stiff bet in the same hand. "Half hedge" is a good description.
It will be interesting to see what the rest of the forum thinks (and what players think if you get it out on the floor). It gives BJ some increased variance without a ridiculous house edge price tag.
September 15th, 2011 at 11:04:29 AM
permalink
I'm not a hardcore Blackjack player. I view this bet as a hedge, even though it has the possibility of a win when the main bet also wins. It would be hard not to split 8's. I think this "wrench" in basic strategy in order to maximize the "stiff" bet, may make casual player's too uncomfortable for this side game to be successful.
However, I hope I am wrong, and wish you many installs. More games with lower house edges are good for players (and I think, better for the Casino's bottom line).
However, I hope I am wrong, and wish you many installs. More games with lower house edges are good for players (and I think, better for the Casino's bottom line).
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
September 15th, 2011 at 11:22:48 AM
permalink
ATTN: Ayecarumba
Thanks for the input. You make a good point about the basic strategy adjustment (never split 6s, 7s or 8s) to minimize the edge for the Stiff bet, and you might be right that it could be a 'killer.' I will point out, though, that the game is designed to allow players to split a stiff pair and not lose their side bet (push).
Agreed that lower edge bets are good for casino bottom lines, although operators don't seem to get that.
Thanks for the input. You make a good point about the basic strategy adjustment (never split 6s, 7s or 8s) to minimize the edge for the Stiff bet, and you might be right that it could be a 'killer.' I will point out, though, that the game is designed to allow players to split a stiff pair and not lose their side bet (push).
Agreed that lower edge bets are good for casino bottom lines, although operators don't seem to get that.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 15th, 2011 at 11:35:44 AM
permalink
ATTN: Paradigm
Thanks for the thoughtful response. Let me clarify just a couple of things:
1) The bet can be resolved after the first two cards are dealt if player has a blackjack; in fact, the bet can be resolved at all three points that the main bet is resolved: after the initial deal, after the player completes his hand, or after the dealer completes her hand. That's why I call it a companion bet rather than a side bet (all the side bets in the marketplace are resolved at one point only, usually after the initial deal).
2) A player actually gets a stiff hand without a dealer blackjack about 37% of the time; that, together with the percent players get a BJ make up the qualification rate of approx. 41.5%. So you're right - players are seeing stiffs frequently, which is the basis of the idea for the game.
Thanks for the thoughtful response. Let me clarify just a couple of things:
1) The bet can be resolved after the first two cards are dealt if player has a blackjack; in fact, the bet can be resolved at all three points that the main bet is resolved: after the initial deal, after the player completes his hand, or after the dealer completes her hand. That's why I call it a companion bet rather than a side bet (all the side bets in the marketplace are resolved at one point only, usually after the initial deal).
2) A player actually gets a stiff hand without a dealer blackjack about 37% of the time; that, together with the percent players get a BJ make up the qualification rate of approx. 41.5%. So you're right - players are seeing stiffs frequently, which is the basis of the idea for the game.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 15th, 2011 at 11:48:08 AM
permalink
" Agreed that lower edge bets are good for casino bottom lines, although operators don't seem to get that. " If the side bet is just that, say $1 at a $10 table, and has a small house edge, the casino is just not interested. Because it slows down the normal game and thereby overall is a losing proposition.
September 15th, 2011 at 12:06:22 PM
permalink
"If the side bet is just that, say $1 at a $10 table, and has a small house edge, the casino is just not interested. Because it slows down the normal game and thereby overall is a losing proposition."
A valid observation and agreed that the benefit from the additional bet must exceed the loss from the slower pace of play. The tradeoff has to be a winner for the casino in terms of a higher overall yield; e.g., higher average hold and win than stand-alone BJ.
A valid observation and agreed that the benefit from the additional bet must exceed the loss from the slower pace of play. The tradeoff has to be a winner for the casino in terms of a higher overall yield; e.g., higher average hold and win than stand-alone BJ.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 15th, 2011 at 12:34:10 PM
permalink
Lets make sure I get this right. I have my BJ bet out and I get dealt a stiff. Then as I wait to see the dealers up card, I should be rooting for it to be a 7 - A. I think not!
Also most side bets at low limit tables are $1. Since you pay 3-2 on side bet, would the table have to add quarters, if they are now
using pinks to pay the $5 BJ ?
With a more than 50 percent instant loss rate, How many Dollar slugs or chips would be needed to be added to opening bank?
Have you had a few friends sit down and play normal for an hour, then redo with 2 making the side bet, dealer paying off, waiting for a decision based on the original bet versus the EV of the side bet, changing large chips for the dollar ones, etc and really
see how many fewer hands are dealt per hour ? Remember it's not just the house edge but the drop. Casinos figure average players mistakes add up to close to a 2% HE. Your HE is as advertised basically. Take 6 players betting just $10 a hand at 70 hands per hours.
If that number of hands drop to 66, even in a perfect world where the $10 bets are flat throughout that hour and your 2 players bet $1 on the side bet each and every hand, the house loses more on the 4 hands not played, than it wins on your 134 side bets. That is why most side bets, especially the very few successful ones, are decided on the first two cards.
That being said I wish you luck but you need to have rebuttals to the above when pitching your game.
Also most side bets at low limit tables are $1. Since you pay 3-2 on side bet, would the table have to add quarters, if they are now
using pinks to pay the $5 BJ ?
With a more than 50 percent instant loss rate, How many Dollar slugs or chips would be needed to be added to opening bank?
Have you had a few friends sit down and play normal for an hour, then redo with 2 making the side bet, dealer paying off, waiting for a decision based on the original bet versus the EV of the side bet, changing large chips for the dollar ones, etc and really
see how many fewer hands are dealt per hour ? Remember it's not just the house edge but the drop. Casinos figure average players mistakes add up to close to a 2% HE. Your HE is as advertised basically. Take 6 players betting just $10 a hand at 70 hands per hours.
If that number of hands drop to 66, even in a perfect world where the $10 bets are flat throughout that hour and your 2 players bet $1 on the side bet each and every hand, the house loses more on the 4 hands not played, than it wins on your 134 side bets. That is why most side bets, especially the very few successful ones, are decided on the first two cards.
That being said I wish you luck but you need to have rebuttals to the above when pitching your game.
September 15th, 2011 at 12:41:57 PM
permalink
I am curious since this isn't a "$1 and a prayer" type of side bet is it going to be available for $1 or is it going to be marketed as a $5 bet similar to a Pair Plus or 21+3 type of bet? What do you envision the minimums being?
What does Lucky Lucky or Instant 18 allow for typical minimum bets?
It seems like with a low house edge 2%-4%, this isn't going to work well as a $1 side bet for the casino (i.e. Buzz's point, why slow down the action for an additional $1 bet that only has a 3%+ edge).
What does Lucky Lucky or Instant 18 allow for typical minimum bets?
It seems like with a low house edge 2%-4%, this isn't going to work well as a $1 side bet for the casino (i.e. Buzz's point, why slow down the action for an additional $1 bet that only has a 3%+ edge).
September 15th, 2011 at 1:02:13 PM
permalink
ATTN: Buzzpaff / Paradigm
Buzz's points are well taken. I designed the game as a $5 minimum for both bets and envisioned the average player betting at a 2:1 ratio (main/stiff). But as they say, "the best laid plans ...," so who knows how others will see it or play it beyond the theoretical? But my plans are to promote it as designed. Mathematically it is competitive with 21 +3 but admittedly, will deal a bit slower (disadvantage for operators) but hit over twice as frequently (a perceived advantage for players).
Buzz's points are well taken. I designed the game as a $5 minimum for both bets and envisioned the average player betting at a 2:1 ratio (main/stiff). But as they say, "the best laid plans ...," so who knows how others will see it or play it beyond the theoretical? But my plans are to promote it as designed. Mathematically it is competitive with 21 +3 but admittedly, will deal a bit slower (disadvantage for operators) but hit over twice as frequently (a perceived advantage for players).
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 15th, 2011 at 1:22:02 PM
permalink
Can you define a bit slower ?? Numerically like hands per hours. Weekends lots of Casino are $25 minimum. Same problem as in
$5 versus $1. Frequent hits still less than 50%.
And really can not see benefit of hedging in a game that returns 99.4% ! Can not root for 7-A when I have a stiff, Biggest drawback to me.
Seriously , how many less hands that straight up BJ per hour. No license fee, you know !
$25 for BJ and $12.50 on a bet that has a house edge more than five times higher than a hit soft 17 6 deck shoe? Your vision seems a little cloudy to me .
$5 versus $1. Frequent hits still less than 50%.
And really can not see benefit of hedging in a game that returns 99.4% ! Can not root for 7-A when I have a stiff, Biggest drawback to me.
Seriously , how many less hands that straight up BJ per hour. No license fee, you know !
$25 for BJ and $12.50 on a bet that has a house edge more than five times higher than a hit soft 17 6 deck shoe? Your vision seems a little cloudy to me .
September 15th, 2011 at 1:33:00 PM
permalink
I don't think any side bets work on a "green chip" table do they? Seems like any side bet on BJ is geared to a market with $5 & $10 table minimums.
September 15th, 2011 at 2:02:12 PM
permalink
Correct sir. And as long as you say it is a "Companion" BJ bet, the emphasis is on BJ and people will think of it as a side bet.
Now Hedge blackjack or let me try and think of another. Oh My, well lets says SWITCH Blackjack.
The emphasis there is on a new form of BJ, not a sidebet
Can't speak for SWITCH but imagine that was the effect he desired.
Now Hedge blackjack or let me try and think of another. Oh My, well lets says SWITCH Blackjack.
The emphasis there is on a new form of BJ, not a sidebet
Can't speak for SWITCH but imagine that was the effect he desired.
September 15th, 2011 at 3:51:13 PM
permalink
In the UK the side bets that prove popular are those that have a chance of a reasonable payoff and don't affect the play of the main game. The only one I've seen that does affect play (in Belgium) is lucky 7s since with two 7s you might hit for the 777-bonus rather than split. I think the one with a jackpot for 4-Aces doesn't affect play since with two Aces, if the third card is an Ace you're bound to get a fourth card (you don't split against dealer Ace - I assume it doesn't pay AAxA as 3-aces otherwise you couldn't hit AA9).
My personal opinion is dealers want to get the option bets settled, either at the beginning before players draw cards (in BJ or Poker on your initial dealt ones) OR at the end when settling up all the bets (as in 3-card poker).
Personally if I'm playing an optional bet, it would be for fun and one that doesn't affect my main bet - for instance most Pai Gow bets pay on what cards you have not how you set them.
btw BJSwitch has a side bet based on your first four cards.
My personal opinion is dealers want to get the option bets settled, either at the beginning before players draw cards (in BJ or Poker on your initial dealt ones) OR at the end when settling up all the bets (as in 3-card poker).
Personally if I'm playing an optional bet, it would be for fun and one that doesn't affect my main bet - for instance most Pai Gow bets pay on what cards you have not how you set them.
btw BJSwitch has a side bet based on your first four cards.
September 15th, 2011 at 4:42:05 PM
permalink
“Can you define a bit slower?? Numerically like hands per hours. Seriously, how many less hands that straight up BJ per hour? “
No, I can’t give you a precise HPH since I’ve not scientifically measured it. My comment was comparing the speed to 21 + 3 and not straight up BJ. I understand the objection of some for any BJ side bet because of the flow interruption. But to partially answer your question, the Lucky Stiff bet would entail one additional interruption after the initial deal (when losing bets and BJs are settled), which would be after the player completes his hand or after the dealer completes his hand, depending on whether you’re playing the ‘high side’ or ‘low side.’
_____________________________________
“And really cannot see benefit of hedging in a game that returns 99.4%! Cannot root for 7-A when I have a stiff, biggest drawback to me.”
On average, players get a lot of stiffs (nearly 40% of the time). I’ve seen players get the same stiff total multiple times in a row and for the most part they’re not calculating the math. Not arguing your point, just conveying the reality that most side bet players are looking for the added excitement and variance.
And you don’t have to root for a 7-A with a stiff; a dealer bust with an up card <6 still pays 2:1.
_____________________________________
“My personal opinion is dealers want to get the option bets settled, either at the beginning before players draw cards (in BJ or Poker on your initial dealt ones) OR at the end when settling up all the bets (as in 3-card poker).”
Yes, charliepatrick, that is one of my greatest concerns. Even though BJ bets are settled in the middle of the game when a player busts, the Stiff bet is the only optional BJ bet that I know of that also ‘pays’ in the middle. Thanks for your input.
No, I can’t give you a precise HPH since I’ve not scientifically measured it. My comment was comparing the speed to 21 + 3 and not straight up BJ. I understand the objection of some for any BJ side bet because of the flow interruption. But to partially answer your question, the Lucky Stiff bet would entail one additional interruption after the initial deal (when losing bets and BJs are settled), which would be after the player completes his hand or after the dealer completes his hand, depending on whether you’re playing the ‘high side’ or ‘low side.’
_____________________________________
“And really cannot see benefit of hedging in a game that returns 99.4%! Cannot root for 7-A when I have a stiff, biggest drawback to me.”
On average, players get a lot of stiffs (nearly 40% of the time). I’ve seen players get the same stiff total multiple times in a row and for the most part they’re not calculating the math. Not arguing your point, just conveying the reality that most side bet players are looking for the added excitement and variance.
And you don’t have to root for a 7-A with a stiff; a dealer bust with an up card <6 still pays 2:1.
_____________________________________
“My personal opinion is dealers want to get the option bets settled, either at the beginning before players draw cards (in BJ or Poker on your initial dealt ones) OR at the end when settling up all the bets (as in 3-card poker).”
Yes, charliepatrick, that is one of my greatest concerns. Even though BJ bets are settled in the middle of the game when a player busts, the Stiff bet is the only optional BJ bet that I know of that also ‘pays’ in the middle. Thanks for your input.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 15th, 2011 at 5:58:55 PM
permalink
btw BJSwitch has a side bet based on your first four cards.
But to establish that side bet SWITCH had to invent a game where a player had 4 cards first !
But to establish that side bet SWITCH had to invent a game where a player had 4 cards first !
September 15th, 2011 at 7:10:37 PM
permalink
While you may prefer to compete against other games, your success will be measured against BJ tables. You have obviously invested a lot of money in this, why not buy a shoe, 6 decks of cards, invite some friend over who promise to act like they are betting real money ( they won't but you can try ). See the difference in hands dealt per hour. Switch has 8 hands going at a full table, BEAUTIFUL.
I mean actually make change for side bets, do the payoffs etc, then re-evaluate your game. Pay special attention to how a dealer might view the game.
Are you going to demonstrate the game for a distributor or have someone deal, preferably someone you pay who has dealt the game before ? If dealers don't like the game you are in BIG trouble. In 2001 saw Let It Ride and Digital 21 killed at the Isle of Capri , who was the 800 lb gorilla at the time.
How many spots were you figuring on your ideal table, 5, 6 , or 7 ?
I mean actually make change for side bets, do the payoffs etc, then re-evaluate your game. Pay special attention to how a dealer might view the game.
Are you going to demonstrate the game for a distributor or have someone deal, preferably someone you pay who has dealt the game before ? If dealers don't like the game you are in BIG trouble. In 2001 saw Let It Ride and Digital 21 killed at the Isle of Capri , who was the 800 lb gorilla at the time.
How many spots were you figuring on your ideal table, 5, 6 , or 7 ?
September 15th, 2011 at 9:15:59 PM
permalink
Good advice and I have play tested as you suggest; just haven't precisely measured the hands per hour for one, two, three, four, five or six players. I have viewed the game from the dealer's perspective. I agree that's most important. Matter of fact, I think it's important enough that I've invested the last few months training and then dealing part-time in the Tunica, MS market - mostly blackjack and my casino's sole BJ sidebet. I wanted to gain insight into the dealer perspective and the actual mentality 'inside the pit.' My dealing experience has been very enlightening in that respect. (I plan to finish my short dealing career at the end of this month, in time to attend G2E for a day or so before returning home to West Texas.)
So as a result of my dealing experience, I feel equipped to demonstrate the game myself to casino personnel and/or a distributor, although I haven't approached a distributor to this point. On that score, I'd like to make some contacts on the trip to LV next month and would certainly appreciate any guidance, advice or leads/introductions in that regard.
My layout design is for 6 spots, which I consider ideal for this game.
By the way buzz, you are correct in that there's a significant difference in the speed of straight blackjack and any BJ sidebet game, even the simple front-end ones such as 21 + 3. The players take more time placing their bets and the dealer takes more time casing the bets. Then, as in the case of 21 + 3 and most of the other popular side bets, the dealer must evaluate and reslove the side bets after the initial deal, which can be very quick with losers but also time consuming with winners (cutting out checks and making payouts). Not to mention that after the side bets are settled, the dealer must return to the flow of blackjack and not forget such things as checking for blackjacks on a ten up, sometimes amidst the loud excitement of some players after winning the early payout. As smooth and simple as it might look to the players, there is a difference in the complexity from the dealer's side. And as you've very clearly stated or implied, every level of complexity comes with a cost.
So as a result of my dealing experience, I feel equipped to demonstrate the game myself to casino personnel and/or a distributor, although I haven't approached a distributor to this point. On that score, I'd like to make some contacts on the trip to LV next month and would certainly appreciate any guidance, advice or leads/introductions in that regard.
My layout design is for 6 spots, which I consider ideal for this game.
By the way buzz, you are correct in that there's a significant difference in the speed of straight blackjack and any BJ sidebet game, even the simple front-end ones such as 21 + 3. The players take more time placing their bets and the dealer takes more time casing the bets. Then, as in the case of 21 + 3 and most of the other popular side bets, the dealer must evaluate and reslove the side bets after the initial deal, which can be very quick with losers but also time consuming with winners (cutting out checks and making payouts). Not to mention that after the side bets are settled, the dealer must return to the flow of blackjack and not forget such things as checking for blackjacks on a ten up, sometimes amidst the loud excitement of some players after winning the early payout. As smooth and simple as it might look to the players, there is a difference in the complexity from the dealer's side. And as you've very clearly stated or implied, every level of complexity comes with a cost.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 15th, 2011 at 9:23:57 PM
permalink
Been there, done that LOL Was a BJ dealer in 1991. Congrats on your invaluable dealing experience.
If you do get to demonstrate your game, expect somebody to be timing and looking for at least 60 hands at a full table.
Weekends are when the casino's make money with full tables. Weekdays just pay the nut. The earlier you can pay it, the more profitable you are. Same rules in pool halls and bars too. LOL
If you do get to demonstrate your game, expect somebody to be timing and looking for at least 60 hands at a full table.
Weekends are when the casino's make money with full tables. Weekdays just pay the nut. The earlier you can pay it, the more profitable you are. Same rules in pool halls and bars too. LOL
September 16th, 2011 at 8:54:58 AM
permalink
So I see we have the dealer experience in common. Yes, it's invaluable for someone designing a table game. Security and other issues come more clearly into focus to be sure. Thanks for your advice and other input. Maybe we can meet face-to-face if you're planning to be at G2E this year?
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 16th, 2011 at 9:27:01 PM
permalink
" In my play testing, though, it was interesting to see how players actually seemed to hope for a stiff hand to get the chance for a multiple payout. Of course, they weren't playing with 'real' money."
That's the real problem in testing a game with play money. Even in poker dealer's school, you could not get students to act reasonable, so there was hardly ever a side pot, everybody stayed to the river, etc. Sure screws up the results. If I can get away from school, I will be at G2E. Hope to see the many faces behind this forum. That being said, in all honesty. I see your "game" as a
dismal side bet, not a companion bet. GOOD LUCK
That's the real problem in testing a game with play money. Even in poker dealer's school, you could not get students to act reasonable, so there was hardly ever a side pot, everybody stayed to the river, etc. Sure screws up the results. If I can get away from school, I will be at G2E. Hope to see the many faces behind this forum. That being said, in all honesty. I see your "game" as a
dismal side bet, not a companion bet. GOOD LUCK
September 18th, 2011 at 1:37:57 PM
permalink
The proof on this bet will come if it gets on the floor. I think player education on this bet is going to be key.....players are going to assume Lucky Stiff is a long shot, high house edge side bet like so many others they are accustom to seeing.
If they understand that it is a 3% house edge bet with a 40% qualification and 20% hit rate as opposed to a 24% house edge bet that hits less frequently, it has a much better chance of succeeding.
A different type of side bet is why Lucky Lucky was able to make inroads into the BJ sid bet space that was dominated by Lucky Ladies, it was a different kind of side bet proposition and I think Lucky Stiff is a similar "different proposition" and one that is focused on the play of the BJ hand not simply getting a particular set of "Lucky Cards" on the initial deal.
If they understand that it is a 3% house edge bet with a 40% qualification and 20% hit rate as opposed to a 24% house edge bet that hits less frequently, it has a much better chance of succeeding.
A different type of side bet is why Lucky Lucky was able to make inroads into the BJ sid bet space that was dominated by Lucky Ladies, it was a different kind of side bet proposition and I think Lucky Stiff is a similar "different proposition" and one that is focused on the play of the BJ hand not simply getting a particular set of "Lucky Cards" on the initial deal.
September 19th, 2011 at 12:46:00 AM
permalink
ATTN: Paradigm
That's the idea ... a "different proposition" that qualifies and wins frequently - in different ways at different times - playing alongside the BJ hand. Well articulated!
That's the idea ... a "different proposition" that qualifies and wins frequently - in different ways at different times - playing alongside the BJ hand. Well articulated!
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 19th, 2011 at 3:35:07 AM
permalink
Positives:
The play of the bet seems well-incorporated into the game.
Quite often too many side bets are really different games that don't match well to the base game.
Additionally, the higher hit rate and the "hope rate" of the bet are important, too, with the "hope rate" being that the bet is in play a while with the play of the hand, instead of losing quickly right off the bat on some early event. Both of these provide good player involvement and re-inforcement.
The drawbacks are the complexities, not the payout tables but the handling of bets stage's of evolution leading to it take and pay result. Bets that kill hands per hour speed and are hard to process may meet strong resistance.
I wish you luck with it - it is a tight field.
The play of the bet seems well-incorporated into the game.
Quite often too many side bets are really different games that don't match well to the base game.
Additionally, the higher hit rate and the "hope rate" of the bet are important, too, with the "hope rate" being that the bet is in play a while with the play of the hand, instead of losing quickly right off the bat on some early event. Both of these provide good player involvement and re-inforcement.
The drawbacks are the complexities, not the payout tables but the handling of bets stage's of evolution leading to it take and pay result. Bets that kill hands per hour speed and are hard to process may meet strong resistance.
I wish you luck with it - it is a tight field.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
September 19th, 2011 at 9:50:45 AM
permalink
Attn: Paigowdan
Thanks, Dan. That's pretty much my assessment, too, on both the positives and negatives.
The key to minimizing complexity and maximizing pace of play, I think, is that the dealer not lose track as to whether the bets in play are based on "low side" or "high side" strategy; although the upcard is right in front of him/her, that is still possible with an inexperienced dealer.
P.S. ... "hope rate:" I like that!
Thanks, Dan. That's pretty much my assessment, too, on both the positives and negatives.
The key to minimizing complexity and maximizing pace of play, I think, is that the dealer not lose track as to whether the bets in play are based on "low side" or "high side" strategy; although the upcard is right in front of him/her, that is still possible with an inexperienced dealer.
P.S. ... "hope rate:" I like that!
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 19th, 2011 at 10:35:32 AM
permalink
Shortie Blackjack has a similar concept: rewarding "weak" hands, TWICE, not just once. If player’s 2 initial cards score 9 or lower, a first payout of at least 3 to 1 is made; if the player wins the 21 hand, a 2nd payout of 2 to 1 of the side wager is paid again. In this case, there is a guaranteed bonus payout first, unlike your payout schedule. You may want to consider giving some payouts for a stiff hand first, but be careful with patent infringement.
The newest first payout table for Shortie Blackjack for 6 decks is:
Player Two Aces and Dealer’s upcard Ace all in Diamonds...500 to 1
Player Two Aces and Dealer’s upcard Ace, suited...200 to 1
Player Two Aces and Dealer’s upcard Ace, unsuited...50 to 1
Player Two Aces, suited...10 to 1
Player Two Aces, unsuited...5 to 1
Player has a Shorite...3 to 1
Win the 21 hand, Shortie pays again…2 to 1.
Check this out. Shortie Blackjack. The game is played at WinnaVegas, Sloan..
The newest first payout table for Shortie Blackjack for 6 decks is:
Player Two Aces and Dealer’s upcard Ace all in Diamonds...500 to 1
Player Two Aces and Dealer’s upcard Ace, suited...200 to 1
Player Two Aces and Dealer’s upcard Ace, unsuited...50 to 1
Player Two Aces, suited...10 to 1
Player Two Aces, unsuited...5 to 1
Player has a Shorite...3 to 1
Win the 21 hand, Shortie pays again…2 to 1.
Check this out. Shortie Blackjack. The game is played at WinnaVegas, Sloan..
September 19th, 2011 at 10:46:40 AM
permalink
Quote: Lucky
P.S. ... "hope rate:" I like that!
This is an interesting factor in game design - is there a slightly drawn-out journey to get to the final win or lose result - or is it a "slam-bam-lose" or slam-bam-win" result to the game. As strange as this may sound - think of it that a "little foreplay" is required.
Let me give two examples:
1. Craps - there is often a long and drawn-out dice journey leading to the final point winner or 7-out - with lots of interim options and bets to shape your action before you reach that final point. Keeps people involved - even memerized.
2. Casino War - "My card's higher - you lose." Bam! Premature whatever makes for boring action.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:31:08 AM
permalink
"This is an interesting factor in game design - is there a slightly drawn-out journey to get to the final win or lose result - or is it a "slam-bam-lose" or slam-bam-win" result to the game. As strange as this may sound - think of it that a "little foreplay" is required."
Yes, I understand the importance of the suspense factor in game design, just never heard it called the "hope rate" before. I like it!
Foreplay is a good metaphor too.
Yes, I understand the importance of the suspense factor in game design, just never heard it called the "hope rate" before. I like it!
Foreplay is a good metaphor too.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 19th, 2011 at 12:09:33 PM
permalink
"Shortie Blackjack has a similar concept: rewarding "weak" hands, TWICE, not just once. If player’s 2 initial cards score 9 or lower, a first payout of at least 3 to 1 is made; if the player wins the 21 hand, a 2nd payout of 2 to 1 of the side wager is paid again. In this case, there is a guaranteed bonus payout first, unlike your payout schedule. You may want to consider giving some payouts for a stiff hand first, but be careful with patent infringement."
Thanks, RoyalBJ, for the info on Shortie BJ and the link to the demo. Interesting bet that I haven't seen. The two-stage payout possibility is nice, but as Paigowdan pointed out, there is a trade-off in complexity that must be considered. I do like the 20% hit rate and high variance in this game, though. Do you know what the house edge is for the newest paytable?
P.S. Did you notice the dealer's difficulty in picking up the cards in the demo? Because of the placement of the Shortie betting spot, he had to deal player cards in a rightward fashion rather than the normal leftward way, thus making it awkward to collect the cards after the hands were completed.
Thanks, RoyalBJ, for the info on Shortie BJ and the link to the demo. Interesting bet that I haven't seen. The two-stage payout possibility is nice, but as Paigowdan pointed out, there is a trade-off in complexity that must be considered. I do like the 20% hit rate and high variance in this game, though. Do you know what the house edge is for the newest paytable?
P.S. Did you notice the dealer's difficulty in picking up the cards in the demo? Because of the placement of the Shortie betting spot, he had to deal player cards in a rightward fashion rather than the normal leftward way, thus making it awkward to collect the cards after the hands were completed.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 19th, 2011 at 4:28:40 PM
permalink
House edge for the new payout is over 4%. The house edges for all other approved tables are in the range of 5-7%. As for the demo, the dealer is the inventor who has no prior dealing experience, and he is not even cute (or clean) enough to show his face - this is what he told me.
September 20th, 2011 at 10:20:49 AM
permalink
"As for the demo, the dealer is the inventor who has no prior dealing experience, and he is not even cute (or clean) enough to show his face - this is what he told me."
Well, I got the idea nevertheless. So whatever works, I guess. But I do think he'll have to tweak the layout and expect objections to the complexity of the dealing procedures.
Well, I got the idea nevertheless. So whatever works, I guess. But I do think he'll have to tweak the layout and expect objections to the complexity of the dealing procedures.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
September 20th, 2011 at 12:07:50 PM
permalink
Negative : People who play blackjack, like to play blackjack, Side bets are a distraction and little more. And one than takes more than 10 second to explain ?
Streak : Bet 1 to 4 hands, see the odds on the felt. Play BH and Streak
Switch : Switch your 2nds cards and then play BJ
Super Match Incorporated as part of Switch 4 card bet!
Streak : Bet 1 to 4 hands, see the odds on the felt. Play BH and Streak
Switch : Switch your 2nds cards and then play BJ
Super Match Incorporated as part of Switch 4 card bet!
September 20th, 2011 at 1:22:42 PM
permalink
Question for you Buzz/other BJ players:
Is the term "Stiff Hand" one that is widely known in BJ player circles?
I am not an avid BJ player. I did fully understand the term after reviewing the Lucky Stiff wager and I suppose that I would have gotten the definition close to right if someone asked me "What is a Stiff Hand in BJ?", but I wonder if this is a common term understood by the majority of BJ players.
I ask, because if you are trying to explain the wager in 10 seconds and you have to start by explaining what a Stiff Hand is to more than 10%-20% of BJ players, I think that could be problematic.
Is the term "Stiff Hand" one that is widely known in BJ player circles?
I am not an avid BJ player. I did fully understand the term after reviewing the Lucky Stiff wager and I suppose that I would have gotten the definition close to right if someone asked me "What is a Stiff Hand in BJ?", but I wonder if this is a common term understood by the majority of BJ players.
I ask, because if you are trying to explain the wager in 10 seconds and you have to start by explaining what a Stiff Hand is to more than 10%-20% of BJ players, I think that could be problematic.
September 20th, 2011 at 4:38:27 PM
permalink
My two late cents;
I like the standard version, not the power version so much. The meaning of "stiff hand" is obvious -- you are dealt 12-16.
If you hit to 17-20, you get paid 5:1 and 9:1 if you hit to 21 and the dealer shows a 7 or higher.
If you beat the dealer, you get paid 2:1 and if you tie the dealer you get a push if the dealer shows 2-6.
Splitting creates a push situation.
The rules are very straight forward.
However, since there is a divergence of payouts due to the dealer's hand and your hand based on the dealer's up card, this game will quickly become confusing for dealer, player, and pit alike.
- 1st action: you are not dealt a "stiff hand". The dealer action is to what "push back" the stiff bet at the start of the deal. if the bet remains up, then the dealer will have to calculate whether the hand dealt was stiff at the start of the hand.
-2nd action: determining what the dealer's up card is. Some dealers put the down card to the left of the up card, others to the right. You could find an argument as to what the up card was.
-3rd action: taking away the stiff bet when the player busts. Easy enough, happens on streak.
-4th action: the calculation and payout itself. Lose, Push, 2, 5, or 9 to one. Too many payout values based on the combination of dealer up card and player cards.
What makes royal match, streak, and other side bets successful is that there's one decision point. You either get paid at the beginning or the end of the hand.
You are also running against some counterintuitivity here: you assume that players know basic strategy. What this results is in that players will become better blackjack players by knowing that they should hit the 14-16 on dealer's 7-A. Some players (I bet) will complain that the side bet is a sucker bet not because of the HA but because they can only hit on a hand they believe (wrongly) they can stand on.
I think you might be more successful if simply push the bet if the dealer is showing a 2-6 and increase the payout if they are showing a 7-A and you have the stiff hand. That way, after the deal, the dealer simply pushes back all non-qualifying bets and pays a very simple pay table based on whether the player makes a hand or not and pay it out as soon as the hit is completed or when the hand concludes. A bit better. Still, two decision points, and that slows down the game considerably.
I like the standard version, not the power version so much. The meaning of "stiff hand" is obvious -- you are dealt 12-16.
If you hit to 17-20, you get paid 5:1 and 9:1 if you hit to 21 and the dealer shows a 7 or higher.
If you beat the dealer, you get paid 2:1 and if you tie the dealer you get a push if the dealer shows 2-6.
Splitting creates a push situation.
The rules are very straight forward.
However, since there is a divergence of payouts due to the dealer's hand and your hand based on the dealer's up card, this game will quickly become confusing for dealer, player, and pit alike.
- 1st action: you are not dealt a "stiff hand". The dealer action is to what "push back" the stiff bet at the start of the deal. if the bet remains up, then the dealer will have to calculate whether the hand dealt was stiff at the start of the hand.
-2nd action: determining what the dealer's up card is. Some dealers put the down card to the left of the up card, others to the right. You could find an argument as to what the up card was.
-3rd action: taking away the stiff bet when the player busts. Easy enough, happens on streak.
-4th action: the calculation and payout itself. Lose, Push, 2, 5, or 9 to one. Too many payout values based on the combination of dealer up card and player cards.
What makes royal match, streak, and other side bets successful is that there's one decision point. You either get paid at the beginning or the end of the hand.
You are also running against some counterintuitivity here: you assume that players know basic strategy. What this results is in that players will become better blackjack players by knowing that they should hit the 14-16 on dealer's 7-A. Some players (I bet) will complain that the side bet is a sucker bet not because of the HA but because they can only hit on a hand they believe (wrongly) they can stand on.
I think you might be more successful if simply push the bet if the dealer is showing a 2-6 and increase the payout if they are showing a 7-A and you have the stiff hand. That way, after the deal, the dealer simply pushes back all non-qualifying bets and pays a very simple pay table based on whether the player makes a hand or not and pay it out as soon as the hit is completed or when the hand concludes. A bit better. Still, two decision points, and that slows down the game considerably.
-----
You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
September 20th, 2011 at 4:45:02 PM
permalink
It only takes one confusion to be DOA, end of the story.Quote: boymimboHowever, since there is a divergence of payouts due to the dealer's hand and your hand based on the dealer's up card, this game will quickly become confusing for dealer, player, and pit alike.
September 20th, 2011 at 5:41:57 PM
permalink
I think you raise a lot of good points boymimbo!
I think if you aren't dealt a Stiff Hand the bet is immediately collected, so I don't quite understand this comment, but I may be missing something.....the bet won't stay up, it will be collected as a loss unless a Stiff Hand is dealt.
This is a good point since dealer's don't really need to track which card is their up card. Dealers will have to remember to look at their up card and determine if they are to pay according to the pay table before they play out their hand (i.e. their upcard is a 7-A) or play out their hand (if their upcard is 2-6) and pay the side bet 2 to 1 if the player's hand wins or collect both bets if the player loses. Actually as I write that it isn't that difficult, but it will slow down the pace when they have to pay out the side bet before playing out their hand (on a 7-A) which will be 61% of their hands.
This could be a problem as boy points out. Player's may wrongly not want to hit in this position but they have to in order to not lose their sidebet.
My guess is if you push back the bet on the dealer upcard of 2-6, you lose a lot of the percentage points in qualification rate and hit rate. It will make it a simpler bet, but also not as much fun once players understand the bet. Ahhhh, the dilemna. It needs to be simple to learn but too simple means once you learn it you get bored really quickly!
I'll say it again, this bet is going to require some education investment by the dealer's to get the players to understand it's benefits. I like it a lot and likely would give it a try. The rack card should advertise the qualification rate and the hit rate in big letters. "Stiff hand is dealt every 2.5 hands" and bet will "Win 1 in 5 hands". If the players don't understand those advantages over Lucky Ladies and other long shot, <10% hit rate side bets, they won't invest the time to learn the bet.
Quote: boymimbo1st action: you are not dealt a "stiff hand". The dealer action is to what "push back" the stiff bet at the start of the deal. if the bet remains up, then the dealer will have to calculate whether the hand dealt was stiff at the start of the hand.
I think if you aren't dealt a Stiff Hand the bet is immediately collected, so I don't quite understand this comment, but I may be missing something.....the bet won't stay up, it will be collected as a loss unless a Stiff Hand is dealt.
Quote: boymimbo2nd action: determining what the dealer's up card is. Some dealers put the down card to the left of the up card, others to the right. You could find an argument as to what the up card was.
This is a good point since dealer's don't really need to track which card is their up card. Dealers will have to remember to look at their up card and determine if they are to pay according to the pay table before they play out their hand (i.e. their upcard is a 7-A) or play out their hand (if their upcard is 2-6) and pay the side bet 2 to 1 if the player's hand wins or collect both bets if the player loses. Actually as I write that it isn't that difficult, but it will slow down the pace when they have to pay out the side bet before playing out their hand (on a 7-A) which will be 61% of their hands.
Quote: boymimboYou are also running against some counterintuitivity here: you assume that players know basic strategy. What this results is in that players will become better blackjack players by knowing that they should hit the 14-16 on dealer's 7-A. Some players (I bet) will complain that the side bet is a sucker bet not because of the HA but because they can only hit on a hand they believe (wrongly) they can stand on.
This could be a problem as boy points out. Player's may wrongly not want to hit in this position but they have to in order to not lose their sidebet.
My guess is if you push back the bet on the dealer upcard of 2-6, you lose a lot of the percentage points in qualification rate and hit rate. It will make it a simpler bet, but also not as much fun once players understand the bet. Ahhhh, the dilemna. It needs to be simple to learn but too simple means once you learn it you get bored really quickly!
I'll say it again, this bet is going to require some education investment by the dealer's to get the players to understand it's benefits. I like it a lot and likely would give it a try. The rack card should advertise the qualification rate and the hit rate in big letters. "Stiff hand is dealt every 2.5 hands" and bet will "Win 1 in 5 hands". If the players don't understand those advantages over Lucky Ladies and other long shot, <10% hit rate side bets, they won't invest the time to learn the bet.
September 20th, 2011 at 8:31:27 PM
permalink
" If the players don't understand those advantages over Lucky Ladies and other long shot, <10% hit rate side bets, they won't invest the time to learn the bet."
Let's face facts. 99.9% of the players don't even bother to learn basic strategy. The general attitude is" I am only gonna play a few hours, not a million hands". And that is why BJ is still alive. If 99.9 played basic strategy, the game could not survive.
Good luck with your game, but I would be less than honest if I did not say " You will need it! "
Let's face facts. 99.9% of the players don't even bother to learn basic strategy. The general attitude is" I am only gonna play a few hours, not a million hands". And that is why BJ is still alive. If 99.9 played basic strategy, the game could not survive.
Good luck with your game, but I would be less than honest if I did not say " You will need it! "
September 20th, 2011 at 8:50:12 PM
permalink
" Is the term "Stiff Hand" one that is widely known in BJ player circles? "
Not really and WHOA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just realized a soft 12-16 is not a stiff at all. But layout just says total of 12-16. How does that affect payouts? ???????????????????
Or am I missing something? Hope so !
Not really and WHOA !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Just realized a soft 12-16 is not a stiff at all. But layout just says total of 12-16. How does that affect payouts? ???????????????????
Or am I missing something? Hope so !
September 20th, 2011 at 8:52:42 PM
permalink
Yep it's me. Says hard total 12 to 17. Now you really have to explain a stiff, difference between hard and soft hand, and the payoffs.
As I said before Good Luck !
As I said before Good Luck !
September 20th, 2011 at 8:59:16 PM
permalink
And your strategy help on your rack card says you can use basic strategy but do not want to split 66 77 or 88 with a lucky stiff bet.
That makes a lot of assumptions and really opens a can of worms. At least I think so. Anybody else got an opinion on that ??
That makes a lot of assumptions and really opens a can of worms. At least I think so. Anybody else got an opinion on that ??
September 20th, 2011 at 9:29:38 PM
permalink
What are the odds of the average Lucky Stiff player who splits 2 thru 6's , not trying to put another dollar slug out, to split his Lucky Stiff bet too! I mean it will be his first 2 cards on each hand ? I know I know. But we are talking about your average BJ player, remember.
He sat here because the 6-5 table was too crowded. Did you cover this after telling him what a hard stiff ( pun intended ) was, explained why not to SOMETIMES not split 66, 77, 88, and basic strategy, and off course the Lucky Stiff payoffs???
GEE, Will that take more than 20 seconds ??
He sat here because the 6-5 table was too crowded. Did you cover this after telling him what a hard stiff ( pun intended ) was, explained why not to SOMETIMES not split 66, 77, 88, and basic strategy, and off course the Lucky Stiff payoffs???
GEE, Will that take more than 20 seconds ??
September 20th, 2011 at 9:41:35 PM
permalink
With STREAK Stacy Perry said basic strategy was in no way affected by a Streak bet. I called her on that and she smiled and said, well, Maybe ? Classy lady. Anybody who know BS knows you might give up another 3 cents per bet when you have a $10 strak bet on hand 5 at 37 to 1 LOL
Why would you want to talk about BS and sometimes not splitting 66, 77, 88, etc. Will just confuse the issue. Or in the word's of WC Field's illegitimate son Even Bob " Never smarten up a CHUMP "
Seriously, a BS player will know what to do. But then again he probably won't be playing any side bet !! Still got time before G2E to
redesign your rack card.
Why would you want to talk about BS and sometimes not splitting 66, 77, 88, etc. Will just confuse the issue. Or in the word's of WC Field's illegitimate son Even Bob " Never smarten up a CHUMP "
Seriously, a BS player will know what to do. But then again he probably won't be playing any side bet !! Still got time before G2E to
redesign your rack card.
