Stateline NV – Nov 2019

A bulleted list trip report for Stateline, Nevada on the night of Sunday, November 24:

—The Mrs. got a “free” 3-night stay ($28.50 daily resort fee) at either Harrah’s or Harveys Lake Tahoe—we chose Harrah’s.
—Our room was on the 7th floor near the elevators, so we asked for a different room and got upgraded to a 14th floor, north-facing strip view of Hard Rock and Montbleu. Both rooms have two bathrooms, which is nice. I noticed Harrah’s isn’t afraid to have a 13th floor—I salute them for that!


— Went over to Harveys for $1-$3 no-limit. There was an interest list for $4-$8 limit poker, but the table never formed. Drained away $98 (including $2 dealer tips). Went all-in with $20 left on Q-10 suited with a flush and gunshot straight draw. No luck this time. Fun time, though. At one point, a woman in her 30s left the game and on her way out said “I’m off to a sex party,” which perked everyone up and elicited chatter.
— Shared a cigar with the Mrs. at a Harrah’s bar, playing $1/credit 9-5 JoB. Surprised to see 9-5 JoB on a bartop machine. Played single coin. (I know, I know.) Won $3. Enjoyed a Maker’s Mark neat and a Modelo.


— I tried vulturing an “Ocean Magic” slot that had a Wild symbol on the third reel, but lost $2.


— Looked around at Dotty’s. The “Singin’ in the Rain” slot machines that I enjoyed in April have been replaced by “Shark Week” slots. For the first time, I touched some of their country curios, and noticed that they’re glued to their surfaces. Not surprised.
— Walked over to Montbleu and played a few hands of IGT 3 Way-Action Poker. They have at least 4 such machines, but at the terrible 94.713% payback setting. Won a hand for 105 nickels though, and finished up $1.25.


—Video poker at Montbleu is generally terrible: 6-5 JoB on the main floor!
— The Mrs. played IGT’s “Texas Hold’Em Heads Up Poker No Rake” (the same game from like 5 years ago that had Johnny Chan or Phil Hellmuth but now genericized), and on her third hand, she rivered a royal flush—but we weren’t aware of the “Bonus Bet” side bet. She coulda, shoulda, woulda won at least an extra $62.50! But when she was done, she turned her $10 into $40!


— The tables were super slow (they even had the one-dealer craps table shortener), and after reading about the seemingly imminent demise of traditional Pai Gow Poker, I played at their $5 table. Lost $36.50, but the Mrs. and I enjoyed chatting with the dealer, who’s nearing retirement and whose husband sadly passed away last year. Sounds as if she has had a good life living in the Tahoe area for the past 35 years, though.
— Late night breakfast special back at Harrah’s on the 18th floor Highlander Bar for $4.99. (The Mrs. was there in September and said it was $2.99 then.) I made the individual components into two bacon-and-egg half-sandwiches. Also have 9-5 JoB but played video blackjack (with 98.3% payback rules) and won $4. Excellent spicy Bloody Mary.


—The next morning, I played the $40 poker tournament at 10 a.m. About 16 players. Fun time, but had to go all-in with A-rag and finished 10th.
— We left after 2 nights to avoid the storm. I’m sure Harrah’s was happy to reclaim a room they could book for $300 with all the skiers coming in.

Quote: smoothgrh

played video blackjack (with 98.3% payback rules)

Thanks for the report. I didn't think 98.3% was possible (assuming "2 for 1" even-money BJ payouts). Did it have unusually favorable rules?

Quote: HugoSlavia

Thanks for the report. I didn't think 98.3% was possible (assuming "2 for 1" even-money BJ payouts). Did it have unusually favorable rules?

You're welcome! I had a relaxing time checking out what's available these days. Seems like the South Tahoe casino area is recovering—they're adding Gordon Ramsey's "Hell's Kitchen" restaurant to Harveys in "late 2019" and Hard Rock Casino is a major improvement over Horizon.

I haven't seen this 98.3% BJ configuration in a long time. The tipoff is that Surrender is offered.

Here are the (unconfirmed) payback percentages/rules:

99.5%— Dealer hits soft 17, Blackjack pays 5 for 2, Split pairs (Ace one card), Double Down 10 or 11. Surrender and Insurance offered.
98.3%— Dealer stands on 17, Blackjack pays 2 for 1. Split pairs (Ace one card), Double down on 10 or 11. Surrender and Insurance offered.
95.7%— Dealer stands on 17, Blackjack pays 2 for 1. No Insurance or surrender. Split pairs, Double Down 10 or 11.
93.2%— Dealer stands on 17, Blackjack pays 2 for 1. No Split or Double Down. No insurance or surrender.

Nearly every game I've seen is set to 95.7%

Quote: smoothgrh

You're welcome! I had a relaxing time checking out what's available these days. Seems like the South Tahoe casino area is recovering—they're adding Gordon Ramsey's "Hell's Kitchen" restaurant to Harveys in "late 2019" and Hard Rock Casino is a major improvement over Horizon.

I haven't seen this 98.3% BJ configuration in a long time. The tipoff is that Surrender is offered.

Here are the (unconfirmed) payback percentages/rules:

99.5%— Dealer hits soft 17, Blackjack pays 5 for 2, Split pairs (Ace one card), Double Down 10 or 11. Surrender and Insurance offered.
98.3%— Dealer stands on 17, Blackjack pays 2 for 1. Split pairs (Ace one card), Double down on 10 or 11. Surrender and Insurance offered.
95.7%— Dealer stands on 17, Blackjack pays 2 for 1. No Insurance or surrender. Split pairs, Double Down 10 or 11.
93.2%— Dealer stands on 17, Blackjack pays 2 for 1. No Split or Double Down. No insurance or surrender.

Nearly every game I've seen is set to 95.7%

98.3%— Dealer stands on 17, Blackjack pays 2 for 1. Split pairs (Ace one card), Double down on 10 or 11. Surrender and Insurance offered.
95.7%— Dealer stands on 17, Blackjack pays 2 for 1. No Insurance or surrender. Split pairs, Double Down 10 or 11.

Why is there such a big discrepancy, Late surrender can't possibly have that much.

Quote: smoothgrh

99.5%— Dealer hits soft 17, Blackjack pays 5 for 2, Split pairs (Ace one card), Double Down 10 or 11. Surrender and Insurance offered.
98.3%— Dealer stands on 17, Blackjack pays 2 for 1. Split pairs (Ace one card), Double down on 10 or 11. Surrender and Insurance offered.

98.3 appears correct for a 6-to-5 (11 for 5) game if it existed, but I think an even-money game would have to be a full percent or so lower. The Wizard's calculator doesn't include an option for even-money BJ payoffs.

Usually the 6-card win rule is also present, but it's probably not worth much at single deck. Late surrender adds only negligible value at single deck, and of course insurance is useless against a newly shuffled deck every hand.

Quote: AxelWolf

Why is there such a big discrepancy, Late surrender can't possibly have that much.

Late surrender value (single deck) should be very close to zero for a non-counting situation.

I don't see how it's possible to set the game at 93.2%. Wizard's rule variations page shows a cost of 1.91% if neither doubles nor splits are allowed. That's for an 8-deck game, but I doubt the single-deck effect would be drastically different.

House edge calculator:

https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/calculator/

Just an idle wish, but I would like to see additional radio buttons supporting some of the really bad rule options encountered on video BJ machines. The author probably assumed such games to be unplayable, but a 2.5% house edge can sometimes be viable if the machine earns points at the reel slot rate.

Quote: smoothgrh

You're welcome! I had a relaxing time checking out what's available these days. Seems like the South Tahoe casino area is recovering—they're adding Gordon Ramsey's "Hell's Kitchen" restaurant to Harveys in "late 2019" and Hard Rock Casino is a major improvement over Horizon.

I haven't seen this 98.3% BJ configuration in a long time. The tipoff is that Surrender is offered.

Here are the (unconfirmed) payback percentages/rules:

99.5%— Dealer hits soft 17, Blackjack pays 5 for 2, Split pairs (Ace one card), Double Down 10 or 11. Surrender and Insurance offered.
98.3%— Dealer stands on 17, Blackjack pays 2 for 1. Split pairs (Ace one card), Double down on 10 or 11. Surrender and Insurance offered.
95.7%— Dealer stands on 17, Blackjack pays 2 for 1. No Insurance or surrender. Split pairs, Double Down 10 or 11.
93.2%— Dealer stands on 17, Blackjack pays 2 for 1. No Split or Double Down. No insurance or surrender.

Nearly every game I've seen is set to 95.7%

When I first read this I raised my eyebrows, but my eyebrows had just woken up. Now that I'm awake, it still doesn't seem right. I'm quite familiar with the top schedule. The second is VERY common in my neck of the woods. That's the one I have a problem with. The third, I've seen it, but it doesn't sound right either. The fourth, I don't think I've ever even seen that one. I have always figured the top one at about 99.8, even though it sets at "99.5". With card composition, 6-card charlie, and DAS. I cannot think right now of an old machine or any age machine that doesn't offer surrender and 6-card. But I'm only picturing California in my mind right now.

Quote: HugoSlavia

Usually the 6-card win rule is also present, but it's probably not worth much at single deck.

Without looking it up, and still with sleep in my eyes, I'm thinking about .0015.

Quote: AxelWolf

98.3%— Dealer stands on 17, Blackjack pays 2 for 1. Split pairs (Ace one card), Double down on 10 or 11. Surrender and Insurance offered.

This can't be right.

Quote: bobbartop

Without looking it up, and still with sleep in my eyes, I'm thinking about .0015.

Yes, Wizard says 0.16% for six-card charlie:

https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/basics/

But that's for an 8-deck game. Single deck could be considerably lower.

Btw, surrender is somewhat unusual on the machines in Vegas, but it's one of those rules primarily valued by card counters with opportunities to identify + situations.

Enjoyed the TR.

It's really hard to make a royal in Hold Em. That jackpot sounds very stingy.

I wonder if the woman got to the sex party and mentioned she had come from playing poker and some guy was like, "oooh, they have poker here?"

Quote: HugoSlavia

Yes, Wizard says 0.16% for six-card charlie:

https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/basics/

But that's for an 8-deck game. Single deck could be considerably lower.

Btw, surrender is somewhat unusual on the machines in Vegas, but it's one of those rules primarily valued by card counters with opportunities to identify + situations.

I'm not arguing or disagreeing, but I don't see why 8-deck or single would differ on 6-card Charlie.

As to surrender, off the top of my head, with best rules Game Kings I surrender T-6, 9-7, T-5, 9-6, and 7-7 versus Dealer Ten.

Quote: Rigondeaux

Enjoyed the TR.

It's really hard to make a royal in Hold Em. That jackpot sounds very stingy.

I wonder if the woman got to the sex party and mentioned she had come from playing poker and some guy was like, "oooh, they have poker here?"

I enjoyed the TR also. And I also thought the royal was on the cheap side.

Quote: bobbartop

This can't be right.

Gah. I should know better than to trust a secondary source.

I'll try to get the actual percentages/rules soon.

Quote: bobbartop

I'm not arguing or disagreeing, but I don't see why 8-deck or single would differ on 6-card Charlie.

This is interesting because someone asked about 6-card Charlie in reference to a single deck game, and Wizard did not mention the possibility of adjusting the 0.16% calculation:

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/blackjack/989-6-card-charlie/#post5606

My logic is that for single deck, your odds of continuing to draw low cards diminish rapidly. To simplify, assume there are 20 cards in the deck that help you, and you need 6 of them. Odds on your first card are 1-in-20, then 1-in-19, continuing down to 1-in-15. For a shoe game, your odds continue in the vicinity of 1-in-20.

As an extreme example, imagine a big jackpot offered for a hand of 333333. Now it's completely impossible at single deck.

Quote: HugoSlavia

This is interesting because someone asked about 6-card Charlie in reference to a single deck game, and Wizard did not mention the possibility of adjusting the 0.16% calculation:

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/blackjack/989-6-card-charlie/#post5606

My logic is that for single deck, your odds of continuing to draw low cards diminish rapidly. To simplify, assume there are 20 cards in the deck that help you, and you need 6 of them. Odds on your first card are 1-in-20, then 1-in-19, continuing down to 1-in-15. For a shoe game, your odds continue in the vicinity of 1-in-20.

As an extreme example, imagine a big jackpot offered for a hand of 333333. Now it's completely impossible at single deck.

I dunno. I was just looking at some of Wong's charts. It's confusing. For instance, for the longest time I have been hitting five card hard 17 against Dealer 9, T, or Ace. After just looking at Wong, it appears I should also hit 17 against 8. In single deck? I dunno. I'm just more confused now.

Should have stopped at the Lucky Beaver next to Dotty’s. Great burgers and they comp decent craft drafts, even on .05 VP.

Quote: bobbartop

I dunno. I was just looking at some of Wong's charts. It's confusing. For instance, for the longest time I have been hitting five card hard 17 against Dealer 9, T, or Ace. After just looking at Wong, it appears I should also hit 17 against 8. In single deck? I dunno. I'm just more confused now.

I haven't studied Charlie strategy at all. Wizard calculated strategy using an infinite deck:

https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/rule-variations/automatic-winner-charlie-rule/

Wizard says only hit 17 against 9, T or A.

If you stand against 8 for infinite deck, I assume you would also have to stand for any finite number of decks because you'd then have a lower percentage of your desired cards remaining available. Single deck would be the least aggressive of all, so you would possibly stand vs 9. But I don't know either.

It's a rarely occurring situation though, so shouldn't significantly affect EV.

Quote: HugoSlavia

It's a rarely occurring situation though, so shouldn't significantly affect EV.

No sir. It happens all the time. I play a lot. And at a rate of at least 1000 hands an hour. Of course, each hand is fresh, shuffled each hand. Between Charlie strategy and card composition, I really have to stay awake. Do I stand 16 against a ten? Are there 5s out or 6s out? 16 against a 9? How are the 7s?

Quote: bobbartop

Between Charlie strategy and card composition, I really have to stay awake. Do I stand 16 against a ten? Are there 5s out or 6s out? 16 against a 9? How are the 7s?

For rarity, I was only referring to 5-card 17s against a strong dealer up card. Some of the other scenarios such as any 16 vs T occur much more routinely for sure. I don't play a lot of vbj, so I haven't tried to master all the strategy fine points because it would slow me down too much.

Quote: HugoSlavia

For rarity, I was only referring to 5-card 17s against a strong dealer up card. Some of the other scenarios such as any 16 vs T occur much more routinely for sure. I don't play a lot of vbj, so I haven't tried to master all the strategy fine points because it would slow me down too much.

Yes, Hugo. 5-card 17s against 9, T, Ace, comes up all the time. It might surprise you.

And I don't even hesitate, I don't slow down at all. Automatic hit.

Quote: bobbartop

Yes, Hugo. 5-card 17s against 9, T, Ace, comes up all the time. It might surprise you.

OK, thanks for the correction. For whatever reason, those situations didn't stick in my memory, and I have no clue how to calculate the frequency of occurrence.

The percentages are correct. I believe the rules are correct—if you include the automatic win on 6 cards.

Quote: HugoSlavia

House edge calculator:

https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/calculator/

Just an idle wish, but I would like to see additional radio buttons supporting some of the really bad rule options encountered on video BJ machines. The author probably assumed such games to be unplayable, but a 2.5% house edge can sometimes be viable if the machine earns points at the reel slot rate.

I've had the same thought, the calculator should allow all options that can be found in VBJ.

Thank you for posting this image. It's very interesting. I still think there's something wrong with this picture. Well, not the picture, lol, I mean in a figure of speech. Even-money on blackjack's almost 2-1/2% by itself. Surrender, S17, 6-Card Charlie, and probably DAS too, is not going to put it over 98%. It's going to be in the 97% range. I dunno. I'm missing something.

And I am stumped as to how it can ever be as bad as in the 95% range, let alone 93.20. I don't get it.

Now I know where I've seen those same numbers before. If you look at vpfree (not vpfree2), there are some files you can download. I just downloaded a spreadsheet that I haven't looked at in a long time. Sure enough, 99.5, 98.3, 95.7, and 93.2. And the name of the file is "Game King".

Most likely I am missing something. I usually am. But don't forget, In The Beginning, (sometime after God made the Earth), Bally's actually gave Pick'em to the casinos with the WRONG math. That's why there used to be Pick'em all over the place. One day they saw the light. Now no more Pick'em. I'm just sayin.

Quote: bobbartop

Thank you for posting this image. It's very interesting. I still think there's something wrong with this picture. Well, not the picture, lol, I mean in a figure of speech. Even-money on blackjack's almost 2-1/2% by itself. Surrender, S17, 6-Card Charlie, and probably DAS too, is not going to put it over 98%. It's going to be in the 97% range. I dunno. I'm missing something.

And I am stumped as to how it can ever be as bad as in the 95% range, let alone 93.20. I don't get it.

It DOES seem odd that there's such a big gap between BJ game #2 and #3, instead of between #1 and #2. One would think—as you pointed out—that 5 for 2 vs. 2 for 1 is the major difference.

And the 93.2% blackjack is even-money for BJ, no splitting, and no double downs. Even if all those bad rules doesn't get the percentage down that far, the game doesn't even feel like blackjack anymore!

These percentages come from Game Kings going back 20+ years, so you might be right that the posted percentages are off.

I cannot reproduce the posted percentages for any of the four sets of rules that are posted - I get much higher values. Clearly, there must be a rule that is not being quoted.

For instance, on #2 I modeled:

Single deck
BJ Pays 2:1
Dealer stands on 17 (including soft)
Double only on 10,11
Split up to 3x (except aces cannot be resplit and only one card drawn to a split ace)
DAS (except Aces)
Late surrender vs. Dealer 2-10 but not vs Dealer A.
6-card Charlie

I calculate that player has a positive expectation for this game.

If the rule is Split Pairs (once only) the expectation is still quite positive.

Quote: gordonm888

I cannot reproduce the posted percentages for any of the four sets of rules that are posted - I get much higher values. Clearly, there must be a rule that is not being quoted.

For instance, on #2 I modeled:

Single deck
BJ Pays 2:1
Dealer stands on 17 (including soft)
Double only on 10,11
Split up to 3x (except aces cannot be resplit and only one card drawn to a split ace)
DAS (except Aces)
Late surrender vs. Dealer 2-10 but not vs Dealer A.
6-card Charlie

I calculate that player has a positive expectation for this game.

If the rule is Split Pairs (once only) the expectation is still quite positive.

Thank you, Gordon. And yes, I'm sure it's split pairs only once, no matter what pair. I would say you have it all, EXCEPT, that's 2 FOR 1 for BJ, not 2 to 1. So try it again and let's see what you get. I'm thinking maybe 97.60, thereabouts, without checking a calculator. I have no idea where 98.3 comes from.

Quote: bobbartop

Thank you, Gordon. And yes, I'm sure it's split pairs only once, no matter what pair. I would say you have it all, EXCEPT, that's 2 FOR 1 for BJ, not 2 to 1. So try it again and let's see what you get. I'm thinking maybe 97.60, thereabouts, without checking a calculator. I have no idea where 98.3 comes from.

I just re-read this thread about video blackjack and noticed that the game in the photo uses two decks!

So at some point, IGT reconfigured its blackjack games. The percentages I posted were for their really old (pre-2000) single deck games. I don't know which game I was playing at Harrah's, but I'm assuming it's double deck.

Apologies for passing along erroneous information!

Quote: smoothgrh

I just re-read this thread about video blackjack and noticed that the game in the photo uses two decks!

So at some point, IGT reconfigured its blackjack games. The percentages I posted were for their really old (pre-2000) single deck games. I don't know which game I was playing at Harrah's, but I'm assuming it's double deck.

Apologies for passing along erroneous information!

I've never seen an old game like that that uses two decks. Interesting. However, lately, there are brand new games where you have a choice, single deck or double deck. Rules the same on both options, and I assume a fresh shuffle each hand. I'll grab a photo next time I'm in front of one.

Of course, double deck is worse so I still don't see 98.30.

Thanks, this has been interesting, informative.

A few final TR notes:

—At Montbleu, we asked the PGP dealer what was going on with all the unusually dressed young people walking around. She said it was Burning Man. I knew it couldn't possibly be. We went back the next day, and near the garage I saw many people packed to go with all kinds of unusual stuff. I asked what was going on, and one woman said it was an artists consortium. I think that's the group the woman going to the "sex party" was with. Though I think she was trolling us.
—Also on Monday morning, we stopped by Hard Rock Casino. They had $5 craps, so I played with two other people for about 15 minutes and won $10. They also had $3 blackjack, which I have not seen since my last visit to Cal Neva in Reno (maybe 5 years ago?), but the table was packed. Hard Rock Casino had plenty of free parking—Harrah's and (I hear) Harveys now charges for self-parking!
—The “Texas Hold’Em Heads Up Poker" bonus bet works like a video poker side bet—you bet 25 cents to $1.25. Except the pay table changes based on when you make a winning hand—the flop, turn, or river. So if you flop a royal flush, it's huge compared to making it on the river with 7 cards. In that way, it pays kind of like 3 Way-Action Poker. In the photo below, the Mrs. played a 75-cent Bonus bet, and even though she folded in the main game, she won $29.25 thanks to quad 9s that she would have made on the turn. (She had $25 free play, and she wound up winning about $60!)

IME you can hit split aces.

Quote: bobbartop

Thank you, Gordon. And yes, I'm sure it's split pairs only once, no matter what pair. I would say you have it all, EXCEPT, that's 2 FOR 1 for BJ, not 2 to 1. So try it again and let's see what you get. I'm thinking maybe 97.60, thereabouts, without checking a calculator. I have no idea where 98.3 comes from.

Okay, with that correction I get 97.646% (not 98.3%)

When I remove Late Surrender, I calculate 97.626% (not 95.7%)

Quote: gordonm888

Okay, with that correction I get 97.646% (not 98.3%)

When I remove Late Surrender, I calculate 97.626% (not 95.7%)

IGT has had their Blackjack PAR sheets and paytables labelled wrong for as long as I can remember.

Quote: DRich

IGT has had their Blackjack PAR sheets and paytables labelled wrong for as long as I can remember.

1. I have a general comment about PAR sheets since my first gaming company shared this info with me (btw, IGT did not share anything with me with respects to PAR sheets). In my video poker game, the first game manufacturer lists two numbers: return under optimal play and return under “field conditions”, e.g. what they expect to get due to short coin, mistakes, etc and the field number was about 2% less than optimal play. So you need to take those numbers with a grain of salt.

2. The best advertised return on single deck IGT Video BJ was 99.7% based its marketing literature and I know several people from that independently verified this number; one programmer cycled through every possible hand to confirm the 99.7% number, e.g. through brute force via perfect play.

Some versions had an unannounced rule of split ace catch face pays 3:2 but pushes on dealer BJ. That version was still below 100%.

And here is a bit of trivia for you: Don’t believe Mickey Crimm when he talks about this full pay version.

“The payback screens on the Game Kings showed 99.5% for the full pay video blackjack. But two glitches IGT wasn't aware of, split aces catching paint was automatic 3-2 BJ, and double after the split. That brought it up to 100%.“ source: M. Crimm tweet dated May 17, 2018

The DAS rule is clearly spelled out on the screen but don’t tell Mickey (exact phrase on the screen is DD after split allowed only on first two cards). Separately Mickey was not aware of the player BJ pushes against dealer BJ on split aces catches face rule. Mickey went on the record on some Reno message board stating he had first hand knowledge the game returned over 100%. Shortly after those posts, many of the full video BJ disappeared from Reno and boy were the AP’s on upset on Mickey’s posts. If I had free time, I would love to dig up those incredulous claims that Mickey made on that message board.

So after about 10 years, Mickey Crimm still has not changed his story:
“The IGT full pay video blackjack, 100.03% was good for running comp, cashback, freeplay, even drawing tickets.”
Source: M Crimm tweet dated May 16, 2018.

It won’t be me to tell M Crimm he double counted the DAS rule.

Quote: EVBandit

It won’t be me to tell M Crimm he double counted the DAS rule.

Especially if he dies.

Quote: bobbartop

Without looking it up, and still with sleep in my eyes, I'm thinking about .0015.

I had to check Peter Griffin’s The Theory of BJ (5th edition) and on page 123, for Single Deck the 6-card auto winner is worth about 10 bp or 0.10%.

Sex Party, it’s a Northern Nevada thing. Nothing new or out of the ordinary. Try Reno next time. If you like playing the machines, I recommend the Western Village. Also has the best steak house in town.

1. Basically, this website strips out other websites. In my earlier post, I wrote AP’s from bj21(dot)com were upset when the VBJ machines got removed & it was several respected hard core VBJ players from bj21(dot)com that verify the 99.7% number. So in the future, I will be more careful about websites.

2. M Crimm was wrong about: (a) automatic 3-2 wins when split aces catches paint because it was a push against dealer BJ and (b) failed to realized the rules clearly states DAS 10 on first two cards (the rules for full pay were 1D, H17, D10, DAS 10, LS 10, 6 cd auto win).

Separately, I do play the 1D, S17, D10, NDAS, LS 10, 6 cd auto win version, which I estimate to have a 97.5% payback. I use a few composition dependent rules like:
stand (7,5) or (8,4) vs 3, hit (T,2) vs 4, hit (T,2) vs 6, hit (T,3) vs 2, Surr (7,7) vs T, Surr (9,6) & (T,5) vs T, Surr (9,7) & (T,6) vs T.

For 3 or more cards, you can count and use indices but I need to remind people in case of (3+ card) 16 v T, the “6” is a big card while in Hi Lo or Hi Opt, a 6 is considered a small card so keep that in mind. The rule I use is rule of 6, if I see a 6 and another card bigger than 6, then I hit those multicard 16’s vs T. You might see rule of 45 sometimes, but the key point is a “6” in this situation is a big card in that in can bust you.

And no, I do not automatically hit all 5 card 17’s vs 9, T, or A. The only composition dependent strategy I use is hit (5,5,5,A,A) vs 9, T, or A.

In summary, we all play differently. As I get older, I use less composition dependent plays. But the truth is it’s all muscle memory for me ... my body play on autopilot since I played this game for so many years.

Good luck.

PS This is my opinion about the full pay version: the biggest question was how the game treated split aces. I was so happy when I finally got the hand: split aces and catch face on each hand against dealer’s ace upcard. Dealer ends up with a BJ so my two hands pushed and I shared this information with my contacts. That meant when IGT gave us a rule not listed on the screen, they also changed the check for dealer blackjack on split aces. For example, if you split aces and if either don’t catch face, both hands will lose to a dealer’s BJ. I don’t think M Crimm was that anal-retentive to pick this up. The big players on bj21(dot)com will pick it up since they usually play $100 a hand. It’s a big distinction. My point is IGT gave us something but it also took something away at the same time.

On the S17 version, it will not let you split aces if dealer has a BJ with ace showing.

Quote: bobbartop

Yes, Hugo. 5-card 17s against 9, T, Ace, comes up all the time. It might surprise you.

And I don't even hesitate, I don't slow down at all. Automatic hit.

Obviously EVBandit has given me a lot to chew on. So has Hugo. I will thank both of you for your input as I try to isolate the mistakes I have been making and make some adjustments.

Thank you EVBandit. Thank you HugoSlavia.

Also, searching this forum has led me to other helpful advice from FiveSpot and others.

Quote: bobbartop

I'm not arguing or disagreeing, but I don't see why 8-deck or single would differ on 6-card Charlie.

Hugo, as I said in a previous post, I am forced to reconsider and correct mistakes I have been making. Thanks to you, and now EVBandit, your two heads were better than my one.

Quote: bobbartop

Obviously EVBandit has given me a lot to chew on.

Me too, but I can't resist talking while I chew.

Quote: EVBandit

it was several respected hard core VBJ players from bj21(dot)com that verify the 99.7% number.

(the rules for full pay were 1D, H17, D10, DAS 10, LS 10, 6 cd auto win).

Separately, I do play the 1D, S17, D10, NDAS, LS 10, 6 cd auto win version, which I estimate to have a 97.5% payback.

For decades, Northern Nevada tables have dealt 1D H17 D10 with an EV of 99.56% according to CBJN. The video (full pay) version adds DAS, LS & 6-card win; but removes resplitting beyond 2 hands. I would have guessed 99.75% EV because DAS & 6-card are each worth ~0.1% while LS cancels out the resplitting penalty. But you also mentioned another factor which reduced EV a little: the loss of split aces when dealer has BJ.

Stepping down to commonly available VBJ, even-money BJ subtracts 2.3%, NDAS subtracts 0.1%, while S17 adds 0.2%. So the 97.5% EV makes perfect sense to me.

What's the best available even-money game? Some machines allow DAS and you can draw to split aces with 21s beating a dealer 21. But LS is not available. Now the EV should be >97.7% imo.

Btw, I don't think anyone linked to Mickey's WOV posts. Start here:

https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/blackjack/13868-game-king-video-blackjack-he/#post350260

He mentions his 100.03% estimate, but describes the game as S17 -- which would account for 0.2%.

I'm not a BJ21 Green Chip subscriber. Am I missing anything there? I had membership several years back, but it seemed all the best information was communicated offline if at all.

Quote: bobbartop

I've never seen an old game like that that uses two decks. Interesting. However, lately, there are brand new games where you have a choice, single deck or double deck. Rules the same on both options, and I assume a fresh shuffle each hand. I'll grab a photo next time I'm in front of one.

I saw this today. Brand new, beautiful machines. Pay table sucks, but it's pretty. lol

Nice report!

I stay away from those heads up poker machines. Beat me pretty good when I tried them. Congrats to the wife getting a royal!

I think even money BJ and no splits or doubles is 95.7%. Sad that IGT has apparently had the numbers wrong for years...

Quote: bobbartop

I saw this today. Brand new, beautiful machines. Pay table sucks, but it's pretty. lol

Huh. Interesting that they're highlighting the "single deck" aspect. Of course, the deck is shuffled every hand, so you don't get the traditional advantage with single deck—including 5 for 2 payouts presumably!

Quote: tringlomane

Nice report!

I stay away from those heads up poker machines. Beat me pretty good when I tried them. Congrats to the wife getting a royal!

Thanks! Too bad there was no bonus for the royal!

I played the heads up poker game "against" Johnny Chan at the Venetian way back when (maybe 2012?) and was excited to have taken a few bucks from him. So the wife and I are undefeated against that game! (How does the casino keep it on the floor???)