House Money - Friggin' FANTASTIC!
September 18th, 2012 at 11:42:07 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardI just analyzed this yesterday. You can find my results in my blackjack appendix 8. As always, I welcome all comments and corrections.
I used Firefox and the page goes off the right side of the screen perhaps due to too wide a chart.
September 18th, 2012 at 11:44:04 AM
permalink
It's all there for me with firefox. Perhaps the casinos are limiting your bandwidth ?
September 18th, 2012 at 12:00:03 PM
permalink
While I didn't see any errors, I think it should include the raw house edge of the side bet - as if the player never parlays the win, as well as the edge if he always parlays it.Quote: WizardI just analyzed this yesterday. You can find my results in my blackjack appendix 8. As always, I welcome all comments and corrections.
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
September 18th, 2012 at 1:13:33 PM
permalink
Insurance question, anyone ?
September 18th, 2012 at 1:16:51 PM
permalink
Quote: buzzpaffSick Question from a sick mind :
I get AK suited. Dealer has an Ace up. Will I be paid before he asks for insurance. The count ( forgive me Dan ) is +14 and I want to insure my full bet ( original and side bet winnings )
Also would I bet correct in saying I will hit side bet about 1 in 5 times ( math illiterate ) and 2 out of 3 times hit will pay 1-1 .
Don't sound that exciting to me. Or am i wrong again ?
According to http://www.wsgc.wa.gov/docs/game_rules/house_money.pdf you don't get paid for the House Money wager until after the dealer checks for BJ. You would get 9 to 1 if he has a BJ and if he doesn't you'll get 9 to 1,then you can press your BJ for the 3 to 2.
“Man Babes” #AxelFabulous
September 18th, 2012 at 2:41:58 PM
permalink
Quote: buzzpaffI get AK suited. Dealer has an Ace up. Will I be paid before he asks for insurance. The count ( forgive me Dan ) is +14 and I want to insure my full bet ( original and side bet winnings )
So, you're asking if you can insure the House Money bet when the dealer has an ace up. I would assume not. You can always as Pacman, the game inventor, if it is really urgent that you get an answer within ten minutes.
Quote:Also would I bet correct in saying I will hit side bet about 1 in 5 times ( math illiterate ) and 2 out of 3 times hit will pay 1-1 .
Don't sound that exciting to me. Or am i wrong again ?
I did not quantify those things explicitly.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 18th, 2012 at 2:44:05 PM
permalink
Quote: WizardSo, you're asking if you can insure the House Money bet when the dealer has an ace up. I would assume not. You can always as Pacman, the game inventor, if it is really urgent that you get an answer withing ten minutes.
I did not quantify those things explicitly.
I don't tug on Superman's cape. I don't bug Roger with my asinine questions.
Hey, you already know i am math challenged !
September 18th, 2012 at 3:27:49 PM
permalink
You can take even-money on the HM proceeds if you have AK and the dealer has an ace-up.
--Roger
--Roger
September 18th, 2012 at 3:34:56 PM
permalink
Quote: PacmanYou can take even-money on the HM proceeds if you have AK and the dealer has an ace-up.
--Roger
If the dealer has an A or 10 showing he will check for Blackjack before paying House Money wagers per Washington State.
Insurance if offered before checking, I should think.
Are you saying I can take Even Money on both wagers ? Seems the proceeds are not in play when insurance is offered ?
Just asking ? I get confused easily, as you already know !
September 18th, 2012 at 5:03:54 PM
permalink
Am I wrong again ?
September 18th, 2012 at 8:19:24 PM
permalink
.......... anyone ?
September 18th, 2012 at 10:12:46 PM
permalink
Ok, I'll try:-
You get dealt A,K suited with $10 wagered on both your bet and 'House Money' side bet.
Dealer will offer 'Insurance' and then check for 'Blackjack'.
In the case of your main wager then you would either receive $15 (dealer does not have 'Blackjack') or $0 (dealer has 'Blackjack'). However, by taking 'Insurance' you will win $10 either way.
In the case of your 'House Money' wager then you will either receive $90 (dealer has 'Blackjack') or $135 (dealer does not have 'Blackjack'). So you are asking whether the difference can be insured against so that you end up winning a middle amount either way?
As the 'House Money' wager already wins (even with a dealer 'Blackjack') then you cannot use Insurance to protect it IMO. You would simply press the full amount if the dealer does not have 'Blackjack' and refuse to press anything if the dealer has a 'Blackjack' i.e. you would just take your 9/1.
This would follow the correct method and procedure of the 'House Money' side wager IMO.
You get dealt A,K suited with $10 wagered on both your bet and 'House Money' side bet.
Dealer will offer 'Insurance' and then check for 'Blackjack'.
In the case of your main wager then you would either receive $15 (dealer does not have 'Blackjack') or $0 (dealer has 'Blackjack'). However, by taking 'Insurance' you will win $10 either way.
In the case of your 'House Money' wager then you will either receive $90 (dealer has 'Blackjack') or $135 (dealer does not have 'Blackjack'). So you are asking whether the difference can be insured against so that you end up winning a middle amount either way?
As the 'House Money' wager already wins (even with a dealer 'Blackjack') then you cannot use Insurance to protect it IMO. You would simply press the full amount if the dealer does not have 'Blackjack' and refuse to press anything if the dealer has a 'Blackjack' i.e. you would just take your 9/1.
This would follow the correct method and procedure of the 'House Money' side wager IMO.
September 18th, 2012 at 10:43:04 PM
permalink
The dealer checks for blackjack before resolving the House Money wagers.
If a player has AK suited and the dealer has blackjack, the player would win 9 to 1 on his HM bet. He cannot insure it and take 9 to 1 and then 1 to 1.
Sorry for the confusion.
--Roger
If a player has AK suited and the dealer has blackjack, the player would win 9 to 1 on his HM bet. He cannot insure it and take 9 to 1 and then 1 to 1.
Sorry for the confusion.
--Roger
September 19th, 2012 at 7:46:00 AM
permalink
The confusion was on my part, not yours. Looking forward to actually playing all 8 games at G2E. And unlike Focus Group 1, I will
hopefully not expose my ignorance. . LOL
hopefully not expose my ignorance. . LOL
September 20th, 2012 at 9:38:40 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardI just analyzed this yesterday. You can find my results in my blackjack appendix 8. As always, I welcome all comments and corrections.
Since the player can add any amount, up to the total of their HM wager + HM win to their BJ base bet (and not just all or nothing), are there times when an increased BJ base bet, for an amount less than a full parlay, would be correct, (rather than the recommended, "no parlay")?
For example: A player 44 against a dealer 2; or a player 98 against a dealer 6?
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
September 20th, 2012 at 10:19:08 AM
permalink
Short answer, no. If your 2 card hand is +EV, you add as much as you can. If it is -EV, you pocket the HM wager. Any other amount is sub-optimal, you are giving up EV.
The only situation where it would be possible is if the EV is exactly 0, then it doesn't matter what you do. You would only be able to spot such an incident if you were counting, and you would probably not be correct in thinking it was EV 0 anyway.
The only situation where it would be possible is if the EV is exactly 0, then it doesn't matter what you do. You would only be able to spot such an incident if you were counting, and you would probably not be correct in thinking it was EV 0 anyway.
Wisdom is the quality that keeps you out of situations where you would otherwise need it
June 15th, 2013 at 9:54:10 AM
permalink
deleted
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
June 23rd, 2013 at 3:22:14 AM
permalink
How is Hou$e Money going in the US, as usual it bombed in the UK?
Controversial sometimes, brutally honest..Always
August 5th, 2013 at 2:26:23 PM
permalink
I saw House Money today at Mohegan Sun. I don't know if it just went in or if I didn't notice it earlier.
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
August 6th, 2013 at 8:20:54 AM
permalink
McD, why do you think it bombed in UK? Is it the game or the environment?Quote: McDemonHow is Hou$e Money going in the US, as usual it bombed in the UK?
August 6th, 2013 at 4:31:57 PM
permalink
Quote: UCivanMcD, why do you think it bombed in UK? Is it the game or the environment?
Probably both, as a side bet its a bit drab. I also feel there is a limit to the amount of sidebets the market can take here in the UK.
The UK environment for new games and sidebets is virtually toxic, I wish I lived in the US, much better environment for game table game developers.
Controversial sometimes, brutally honest..Always
August 6th, 2013 at 5:28:02 PM
permalink
Quote: McDemon.......as a side bet its a bit drab.....
I don't know what this comment means. Despite the fact that HM may not be working in the UK, the bet strikes me as a real step forward in a world of BJ side bets made up almost exclusively of propositions that are resolved instantly after the initial cards are dealt......always facing instant resolution involving your first two cards and/or the dealer's upcard and playing against a pay table.....that to me is drab :-).
August 7th, 2013 at 4:17:49 AM
permalink
Quote: ParadigmI don't know what this comment means. Despite the fact that HM may not be working in the UK, the bet strikes me as a real step forward in a world of BJ side bets made up almost exclusively of propositions that are resolved instantly after the initial cards are dealt......always facing instant resolution involving your first two cards and/or the dealer's upcard and playing against a pay table.....that to me is drab :-).
I agree that instant resolution on sidebets has its limits although as the concept of a sidebet is to win a quick bet without having to do anything, that is probably the appeal. I think where house money could be going wrong, is that players like features dependent on gameplay and events within the game. As a feature, the option to put more money on your main bet doesn't really qualify as a gameplay feature, its a staking one. So close, but no cigar..
Controversial sometimes, brutally honest..Always
August 7th, 2013 at 8:28:15 AM
permalink
Raising your wager based on the out come of the cards dealt in the hand is fundamental to game play for most successful casino games. But are you saying that the "poker" based hands in House Money that allow a player to raise their main BJ wager are not really connected to the base game of BJ?
August 7th, 2013 at 10:11:22 AM
permalink
Quote: ParadigmRaising your wager based on the out come of the cards dealt in the hand is fundamental to game play for most successful casino games. But are you saying that the "poker" based hands in House Money that allow a player to raise their main BJ wager are not really connected to the base game of BJ?
Not quite, I am saying that winning a sidebet based on whatever the novelty hand that instigates a pay out, that then requires the player to increase his stake or not is not as appealing to the player. If, in HM, for instance, the player receives a pair of sixes, this excites a payout. If then the player received a further pay out dependent on the outcome of the dealer's card/s, that would be a game play feature, and a very nice sidebet.
Controversial sometimes, brutally honest..Always
August 7th, 2013 at 11:06:47 AM
permalink
I don't find HM drab at all...with a hit freq of ~1 in 5, and good guidance on when to cap, not just doubling but up to 10x base sidebet on a great (if rare) hand, which you could then double or split if that's the right play, I would really enjoy giving this a try. This from a person who dealt BJ for a year (25 years ago) and got thoroughly bored with it to the point of not playing it at all for decades. I will definitely play it if/when I find it, see how it goes; I like the variance, even with the 24%HE before transitioning the winnings to the base bet. Demographically, I'm a paigow player up to 100/hand who always plays the fortune bonus, and more recently UTH playing the trips.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
August 7th, 2013 at 11:37:05 AM
permalink
It sounds like you would be a fan of eTableGames, "Shortie" side bet. You get paid 3-1 if you are dealt a hand lower than 10 (includes soft totals), a "Shortie". You take down the instant winnings on a "Shortie", but the side bet stays in play and if your BJ hand beats the dealer, your Shortie bet gets paid an additional 2-1. Essentially you win 2-1 (net) if you get a Shortie and lose to the dealer and get paid 5-1 (net) if you start with a "Shortie" and win the BJ hand. There are some bonuses if you are dealt two Aces, unsuited/Suited/Against a Dealer Up Ace, etc.
Our Lucky Stiff BJ has instant winners (pairs of 6's, 7's, 8's & BJ) or back end winners if you win the BJ hand after starting with an unpaired hard 12-16. But you don't get paid on the instant winners and then have a chance to get paid on in the same hand. Instant winners are 10-1 on the pairs and even money on BJ, back end winners are 5-1 if you start with a unpaired hard 12-16 and end up beating the dealer.
There are mechanical dealing issues with "double pay" side bets and I know that HM has experienced some of that in WA where you aren't allowed by state rules to stack the winnings on top of your main BJ bet. There is also a slow down element with HM in that players sometimes hem & haw about whether they want to stack their winnings in total or in part or take them down....it can take several seconds for players to make that decision.
HM, Shortie & Lucky Stiff side bets are examples of where I think BJ side bets will be going in the future. With the exception of 21+3 with the 9-1 uniform pay table (bottom heavy pay table saves this bet), I think the pinnacle of installs has been reached with Lucky Ladies and even Royal Match (which I like much better, sorry Dan) and similar side bets that only offer the instant resolution type action.
Our Lucky Stiff BJ has instant winners (pairs of 6's, 7's, 8's & BJ) or back end winners if you win the BJ hand after starting with an unpaired hard 12-16. But you don't get paid on the instant winners and then have a chance to get paid on in the same hand. Instant winners are 10-1 on the pairs and even money on BJ, back end winners are 5-1 if you start with a unpaired hard 12-16 and end up beating the dealer.
There are mechanical dealing issues with "double pay" side bets and I know that HM has experienced some of that in WA where you aren't allowed by state rules to stack the winnings on top of your main BJ bet. There is also a slow down element with HM in that players sometimes hem & haw about whether they want to stack their winnings in total or in part or take them down....it can take several seconds for players to make that decision.
HM, Shortie & Lucky Stiff side bets are examples of where I think BJ side bets will be going in the future. With the exception of 21+3 with the 9-1 uniform pay table (bottom heavy pay table saves this bet), I think the pinnacle of installs has been reached with Lucky Ladies and even Royal Match (which I like much better, sorry Dan) and similar side bets that only offer the instant resolution type action.
August 7th, 2013 at 12:03:07 PM
permalink
I watched a couple of guys play House Money this morning and they were having a ball. They were both using the Wizard's strategy chart.
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
August 7th, 2013 at 2:38:25 PM
permalink
I believe it was at Pala (near San Diego, CA) that had House Money on a single or double deck game. The analytic side of me was intrigued by how many people continued to play it after the majority of the A/Ks were used up.
August 12th, 2013 at 8:11:00 AM
permalink
Quote: WizardI just analyzed this yesterday. You can find my results in my blackjack appendix 8. As always, I welcome all comments and corrections.
Now that the House Money bet has reached Pennsylvania where the game is S17 with LS, I was wondering if you would consider re-doing your House Money side-bet analysis for that game.
The only change in capping strategy, I think, is go ahead and cap a 9,8 vs a dealer 6. Would that be right?
I also was curious how the over all House Edge might change given that the underlying S17 LS game is so much better than the H17 game you analyzed.
If you do re-do your analysis, we are not allowed to re-split Aces at all. Heck, we can't even split normal pairs to 4 hands. Only 3 hands.
October 21st, 2013 at 9:34:04 AM
permalink
Quote: McDemonHow is Hou$e Money going in the US, as usual it bombed in the UK?
It didn't last long at the Mohegan Sun $5 tables.
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
October 21st, 2013 at 1:47:50 PM
permalink
Just stumbled across this thread and I have seen and played house money a few times. Nearly every table I've seen now has a sidebet, some have 2 or 3, and the UK market seems happy to play them. Probably the favourites are 3CP (Pair+, Prime) BJ (Perfect Pairs, 21+3 and Top 3) (see http://www.ukcasinotablegames.info/blackjack.html ).Quote: UCivanMcD, why do you think it bombed in UK? Is it the game or the environment?
One of the main problems in the UK is that dealer's don't check for Blackjack - so it's quite a hassle to keep the bet separate from the main bet (one casino always kept it apart, another one put it with your main bet for 2-9 upcards). When you bust they have to keep the cards alive with the bet (on one occasion when I had bust and the dealer then bust I even won the bet rather than lost). Another problem is it affects your main bet (as you want to double 11 and split 8s vs 10).
It also makes the variance on your Blackjack bet high as quite often you're doubling or splitting many times your original bet using your own money, for instance with suited 65 you have to put up 6x your base bet to double, or with a pair you've got to put up 5x. From my personal experience playing £2+£2 for a while, the evening depended solely on the few occasions having about £16 running, whether it won or not. It's quite a shock losing so much of your own money and happens much more than multiple splits and doubles vs a 6!
As an aside the Victoria also had, and may still have, a similar bet for Baccarat, but with that House Edge I'd be surprised if it ever took off - see http://www.ukcasinotablegames.info/puntohousemoneybaccarat.html .
October 21st, 2013 at 3:05:29 PM
permalink
Just wondering how often you actually have a hand you want to put the House Money on ? I can see where a few hands would cause you to have a winning or losing session. Low limit bettors are not really into larger bets. Many times I have seen a player go to two hands only to be told, he must bet double the table minimums to do so. Every time I saw this happen, he went back to one hand.
Double the bet is one thing, but then a split on one hand, double the other, etc and he has half his bankroll exposed.
Double the bet is one thing, but then a split on one hand, double the other, etc and he has half his bankroll exposed.
Shed not for her
the bitter tear
Nor give the heart
to vain regret
Tis but the casket
that lies here,
The gem that filled it
Sparkles yet
October 21st, 2013 at 3:27:46 PM
permalink
Essentially you have an option to take your winnings or logically add it to your Blackjack bet (assuming the dealer does not have a BJ). This means you add it when your chances are over 50%. This always happens if you're doubling 11 (65) or 10 (55) but also on many pairs against low cards. Consequently it does happen quite a bit, e.g. against a 6 (except 67 78 89) you always leave the money on; so often find yourself making larger bets to cover the other half (double or split) and in some cases the re-split.
What it really means is, even more than UTH, you have to be prepared to make significant larger bets than your original wager. For me this reduces the appeal and can change a simple sounding £2 sidebet into quite a bigger punt.
Aside I see (ref: https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/8/#housemoney ) you don't leave house money on 88 vs A/10, but you do with AA or 65.
What it really means is, even more than UTH, you have to be prepared to make significant larger bets than your original wager. For me this reduces the appeal and can change a simple sounding £2 sidebet into quite a bigger punt.
Aside I see (ref: https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/8/#housemoney ) you don't leave house money on 88 vs A/10, but you do with AA or 65.
November 29th, 2013 at 1:25:14 PM
permalink
I saw it in 2 casinos in WA state, and one of those casinos actually went under recently. I have not been back to the other casino to see if HMBJ survives.
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
November 29th, 2013 at 4:31:49 PM
permalink
Quote: AcesAndEightsI saw it in 2 casinos in WA state, and one of those casinos actually went under recently. I have not been back to the other casino to see if HMBJ survives.
The meadows in PA has 1 table with it but it is on a CSM table so I haven't had a chance to play it.
Expect the worst and you will never be disappointed.
I AM NOT PART OF GWAE RADIO SHOW
November 29th, 2013 at 5:49:00 PM
permalink
It was still hanging on at Harrington, DE when I was there 2-3 weeks ago - both on shoe and CSM games.
November 29th, 2013 at 7:50:47 PM
permalink
Quote: AcesAndEightsI saw it in 2 casinos in WA state, and one of those casinos actually went under recently. I have not been back to the other casino to see if HMBJ survives.
Drift on Inn would be the one that went under? I had heard it was converting to all poker tables, but have not been back to verify....I'll be up in a couple of weeks.
I know it was at Emerald Queen as well, three tables I believe including one in their High Limit area.
Was there another location that you saw it at, Aces?
July 16th, 2019 at 2:52:11 PM
permalink
It's time to waken this long-dormant thread. I hear that House Money can now be found at the Jackson Rancheria casino. If you've never heard of it, neither have I. It's located between Sacramento and Reno. This one will be harder than the average side bet to analyze, because of the feature to parlay a winning side bet to the blackjack wager, but certainly doable.
With the big pay on a suited ace-king, it would seem very countable (shut up Wiz!).
With the big pay on a suited ace-king, it would seem very countable (shut up Wiz!).
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
July 16th, 2019 at 3:06:36 PM
permalink
Quote: WizardIt's time to waken this long-dormant thread. I hear that House Money can now be found at the Jackson Rancheria casino. If you've never heard of it, neither have I. It's located between Sacramento and Reno. This one will be harder than the average side bet to analyze, because of the feature to parlay a winning side bet to the blackjack wager, but certainly doable.
With the big pay on a suited ace-king, it would seem very countable (shut up Wiz!).
1 it’s an Indian casino. Nuff said.
2 it’s good to see a former banned member on a page. One who has traveled around Gambling Forums on the web to bash you at every opportunity.
3. I’ll take the consequences, F 1BB/ Freddy and all his petty incarnations.
4. See #1 Respect to anyone finding a way to beat it and get paid.
5. Casino is on a great drive from Sacramento to Tahoe. Coming from the East Coast, often cheaper flights into SAC than RNO if you are willing to drive. Plus SAC has much cheaper rental cars based on volume.
6. Multiple cool breweries on the way, if so inclined.
July 16th, 2019 at 3:14:35 PM
permalink
Quote: WizardThis one will be harder than the average side bet to analyze, ...
I see that I already analyzed it, but it no longer is on the site. I still have my spreadsheet on it, so will recreate a page for it.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
July 17th, 2019 at 7:26:31 PM
permalink
Here is my new page on House Money. I welcome all comments.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
July 18th, 2019 at 2:23:28 AM
permalink
Interestingly I found the date I originally looked at this was 2012. Just to let you know using your figures from https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/9/6ds17r4/ I get that you play 9.8 vs 6. Also ref https://www.ukcasinotablegames.info/blackjackhousemoney.html although it doesn't have a start date.
In the UK I remember it being a nightmare as they had to keep the side bet separate from the main bet because they hadn't peeked. Also it meant you split Aces vs Ace with your main bet, so the actual House Edge was higher.
In the UK I remember it being a nightmare as they had to keep the side bet separate from the main bet because they hadn't peeked. Also it meant you split Aces vs Ace with your main bet, so the actual House Edge was higher.
July 18th, 2019 at 6:10:11 AM
permalink
House Money as a gambling expression: Its a common phenomenon. See Harry Bosch Season Five on Amazon.
House Money as a specifically entitled table game: Ain't never played it; ain't never gonna play it.
House Money as a specifically entitled table game: Ain't never played it; ain't never gonna play it.
July 18th, 2019 at 5:13:48 PM
permalink
I saw the game several years ago at the Venetain and even played a shoe or two. In my opinion, it can't compete with Freebet.
July 18th, 2019 at 5:26:32 PM
permalink
Quote: WizardHere is my new page on House Money. I welcome all comments.
Pala Casino in Southern CA has this for years and it has VERY high participation rate; local BJ players there love it. The thrill of getting a great hand is hard to be described in text. Let's say you have $10 on main and $10 on HM. You are dealt a As-Ks blackjack, making $90 on HM. Stack $100 on main. You are then paid $165 (1.5x on $110) automatically.
