Ayecarumba
Ayecarumba
Joined: Nov 17, 2009
  • Threads: 231
  • Posts: 6512
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).
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
Lucky
Lucky
Joined: Nov 6, 2009
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 192
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.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
Lucky
Lucky
Joined: Nov 6, 2009
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 192
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.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
buzzpaff
buzzpaff
Joined: Mar 8, 2011
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 5328
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.
Lucky
Lucky
Joined: Nov 6, 2009
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 192
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.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
buzzpaff
buzzpaff
Joined: Mar 8, 2011
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 5328
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.
Paradigm
Paradigm
Joined: Feb 24, 2011
  • Threads: 42
  • Posts: 2217
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).
Lucky
Lucky
Joined: Nov 6, 2009
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 192
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).
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
buzzpaff
buzzpaff
Joined: Mar 8, 2011
  • Threads: 112
  • Posts: 5328
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 .
Paradigm
Paradigm
Joined: Feb 24, 2011
  • Threads: 42
  • Posts: 2217
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.

  • Jump to: