"Lucky Stiff Blackjack" Live @ 7 Cedars
May 26th, 2013 at 12:46:22 PM
permalink
I am pleased to announce that Lucky Stiff Blackjack, a companion bet for regular blackjack, went live at 7 Cedars Casino in Sequim, WA on 5/15/13.
Lucky Stiff was conceived and developed by the Forum's very own "Lucky." The latest version, and the one in play at 7 Cedars, is a result of our collaborative effort to modify and tweak the pay table of the previous version.
Details of the game can be found here:
http://www.paradigmtablegames.com/lucky_stiff.html
Lucky Stiff is a side wager that is focused on the player being initially dealt a hard 12 through 16, although the side bet also wins even money on any natural blackjack.
If the player is initially dealt a "Stiff Pair", a pair of 6's, 7's or 8's, the player instantly wins 10-1. Any natural Blackjack also instantly wins even money and the side bet is paid regardless of the dealer's hand.
If the player is not initially dealt a hard 12-16 or a blackjack, the side bet loses immediately.
Players dealt an unpaired hard 12-16 still have action on their Lucky Stiff wager and will be paid 5-1 on their side bet if their final BJ hand ends up beating the dealer's hand. Players can stand or hit in their attempts to beat the dealer and should employ basic strategy in all but the rarest of hands. If the player's main BJ wager is a push, the Lucky Stiff wager pushes as well. If the player busts or loses their BJ hand to the dealer after starting with a hard 12-16, their Lucky Stiff wager loses as well.
The rules of normal blackjack apply to the regular blackjack game on which Lucky Stiff is added as a side bet.
The house edge on Lucky Stiff varies with the number of decks in play, but under most circumstances, is right at 4%. The win rate of Lucky Stiff is just under 18%; the push rate is just over 1%.
The "qualification rate" of Lucky Stiff is 43%. This means that 43% of initial two card blackjack hands are a either a stiff hand or natural blackjack. So a player is either immediately paid or still has a chance to win their Lucky Stiff side bet on 43% of their initial two card hands.
We welcome comments on Lucky Stiff Blackjack.
Lucky Stiff was conceived and developed by the Forum's very own "Lucky." The latest version, and the one in play at 7 Cedars, is a result of our collaborative effort to modify and tweak the pay table of the previous version.
Details of the game can be found here:
http://www.paradigmtablegames.com/lucky_stiff.html
Lucky Stiff is a side wager that is focused on the player being initially dealt a hard 12 through 16, although the side bet also wins even money on any natural blackjack.
If the player is initially dealt a "Stiff Pair", a pair of 6's, 7's or 8's, the player instantly wins 10-1. Any natural Blackjack also instantly wins even money and the side bet is paid regardless of the dealer's hand.
If the player is not initially dealt a hard 12-16 or a blackjack, the side bet loses immediately.
Players dealt an unpaired hard 12-16 still have action on their Lucky Stiff wager and will be paid 5-1 on their side bet if their final BJ hand ends up beating the dealer's hand. Players can stand or hit in their attempts to beat the dealer and should employ basic strategy in all but the rarest of hands. If the player's main BJ wager is a push, the Lucky Stiff wager pushes as well. If the player busts or loses their BJ hand to the dealer after starting with a hard 12-16, their Lucky Stiff wager loses as well.
The rules of normal blackjack apply to the regular blackjack game on which Lucky Stiff is added as a side bet.
The house edge on Lucky Stiff varies with the number of decks in play, but under most circumstances, is right at 4%. The win rate of Lucky Stiff is just under 18%; the push rate is just over 1%.
The "qualification rate" of Lucky Stiff is 43%. This means that 43% of initial two card blackjack hands are a either a stiff hand or natural blackjack. So a player is either immediately paid or still has a chance to win their Lucky Stiff side bet on 43% of their initial two card hands.
We welcome comments on Lucky Stiff Blackjack.
May 26th, 2013 at 1:05:56 PM
permalink
The win rate of 18% is rewarding, and the "in the game participation" rate of 43% also is good.
Two chances to win (in two stages) I think is a good gimmick or mechanism, a good draw to players.
It does seem a little countable with key cards, via the BJ and the 6's, 7's, and 8's, but since they must be pairs, the effect is diluted; if it is, an HE adjustment can protect it (a la Lucky Ladies).
Good luck with it!
Two chances to win (in two stages) I think is a good gimmick or mechanism, a good draw to players.
It does seem a little countable with key cards, via the BJ and the 6's, 7's, and 8's, but since they must be pairs, the effect is diluted; if it is, an HE adjustment can protect it (a la Lucky Ladies).
Good luck with it!
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
May 26th, 2013 at 1:47:27 PM
permalink
Well done on getting it in somewhere. Example, If I receive 13 on my first 2 cards, what happens? Do I get paid out on my Lucky Stiff bet? Or do I have to hope the dealer busts or I am higher than the dealer?
Controversial sometimes, brutally honest..Always
May 26th, 2013 at 1:50:32 PM
permalink
Yes, because of the stiff pair payouts (66, 77, 88), we had Charles Mousseau do an AP analysis, which concluded that the bet was only 1/100th as vulnerable as the main BJ bet. And as you pointed out, even that small risk can be easily mitigated by adjusting the HE, limiting the side bet to an amount no greater than the main bet, or placing a flat limit on the side bet.
Thanks for the well wishes!
Thanks for the well wishes!
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
May 26th, 2013 at 1:56:18 PM
permalink
Attn: McDemon
You win and are paid 5:1 if you win the main BJ bet. You are free to hit or stand to beat the dealer, and employing basic BJ strategy is almost always the correct way to play.
You win and are paid 5:1 if you win the main BJ bet. You are free to hit or stand to beat the dealer, and employing basic BJ strategy is almost always the correct way to play.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
May 26th, 2013 at 2:00:56 PM
permalink
Quote: LuckyAttn: McDemon
You win and are paid 5:1 if you win the main BJ bet. You are free to hit or stand to beat the dealer, and employing basic BJ strategy is almost always the correct way to play.
Right, so a 13 would effectively mean your bet is still in play, it qualifies and you receive a payout of 5 to 1 if the dealer busts or you beat him. Anything else you lose. Bet the dealers going to love you!
Controversial sometimes, brutally honest..Always
May 26th, 2013 at 2:08:02 PM
permalink
I hope so; the bet was designed to be dealer-friendly.Quote: McDemonRight, so a 13 would effectively mean your bet is still in play, it qualifies and you receive a payout of 5 to 1 if the dealer busts or you beat him. Anything else you lose. Bet the dealers going to love you!
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
May 26th, 2013 at 2:13:39 PM
permalink
Correction: You also push on player-dealer ties.Quote: McDemonRight, so a 13 would effectively mean your bet is still in play, it qualifies and you receive a payout of 5 to 1 if the dealer busts or you beat him. Anything else you lose. Bet the dealers going to love you!
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
May 26th, 2013 at 2:24:23 PM
permalink
Quote: LuckyCorrection: You also push on player-dealer ties.
Good luck with that, I think you are addressing a fertile area of BJ
Controversial sometimes, brutally honest..Always
May 26th, 2013 at 2:34:19 PM
permalink
We hope so....the frequent action/payout with a reasonable house edge is the niche we are going for, we will find out how it is working after getting some first month performance data
May 26th, 2013 at 2:45:26 PM
permalink
Too bad I didn't know about this when I was there yesterday. I would've snapped a pic, and asked what the players thought! I live a half hour away and don't go there much since 7 Cedars closed their poker room last year, but I do stop in from time to time.
Congrats!
Congrats!
"Poker sure is an easy game to beat if you have the roll to keep rebuying."
May 26th, 2013 at 2:46:31 PM
permalink
I like the signature face of the game, of Keven Patrick Mulligan.....(look, there's wee Keven Mulligan.....) I sense branding is going on....
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
May 26th, 2013 at 2:57:23 PM
permalink
Nice to see a side bet with a low HE like this. Have to ask, why didn't you get The Wizard to do the AP Analysis?
May 26th, 2013 at 3:02:24 PM
permalink
Wiz doesn't do as much indie developer work anymore and Charles is a master :-)!
May 26th, 2013 at 3:03:07 PM
permalink
Quote: BozNice to see a side bet with a low HE like this. Have to ask, why didn't you get The Wizard to do the AP Analysis?
Too many mercurial game inventors to deal with .....
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
May 26th, 2013 at 3:06:44 PM
permalink
Quote: zippyboyToo bad I didn't know about this when I was there yesterday. I would've snapped a pic, and asked what the players thought! I live a half hour away and don't go there much since 7 Cedars closed their poker room last year
Appreciate any field reports you can provide going forward, zippy. What players will tell deal staff/floor personnel isn't always the same as the player to player banter.
May 26th, 2013 at 3:11:48 PM
permalink
Quote: ParadigmWe hope so....the frequent action/payout with a reasonable house edge is the niche we are going for, we will find out how it is working after getting some first month performance data
Nice Side Bet, Paradigm.
Good Luck with the game.
Stephen Au-Yeung (Legend of New Table Games®) NewTableGames.com
May 26th, 2013 at 3:12:59 PM
permalink
Yep. Your senses are keen, Paigowdan.Quote: PaigowdanI like the signature face of the game, of Keven Patrick Mulligan.....(look, there's wee Keven Mulligan.....) I sense branding is going on....
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
May 26th, 2013 at 3:17:42 PM
permalink
Quote: MrCasinoGamesNice Side Bet, Paradigm. Good Luck with the game.
Thanks Steven, but this is really a "Lucky" creation.... I helped at the end, but the major creative credit is Lucky's. I am distributing in WA and if successful there, down in CA as well. Long road ahead....hopefully :-).
May 26th, 2013 at 3:55:42 PM
permalink
Not being on the casino or design end, I wonder how hard it is to get a game like this into a major casino with such a small HE? As a player it is nice to see this, but it seems most players are just as likely to play a 20 percent HE game. So does it come down to the "fun" for lack of a better word factor?
May 26th, 2013 at 4:22:48 PM
permalink
Quote: BozNot being on the casino or design end, I wonder how hard it is to get a game like this into a major casino with such a small HE? As a player it is nice to see this, but it seems most players are just as likely to play a 20 percent HE game. So does it come down to the "fun" for lack of a better word factor?
It's easy - IF the game is GREAT, is un-"AP-able", and it has a positive house edge so that it proves itself to have a decent hold, - and based on that positive edge.
Some games have INDEED been removed because it either lost or didn't hold enough, and/or is countable or fraud-able. For that matter, if the house edge is too high, the players feel the burn out it gives, and abandon the game. The right house edge is a balancing act.
This is a good reason why the "Lucky Stiff" guys had a fine mathematician (gaming expert CRM) examine and carry out an additional game protection/AP report.
For an even money type main bet, 2% is adequate. For a 10:1 side bet, 4% is adequate. For a side bet with higher and larger pay table, 7% is par.
Believe me, if a game can get slammed, or it slams the players - it goes out the door. At my company, we rejected signing games that were vulnerable to AP play or losses, and knew it.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
May 26th, 2013 at 4:49:50 PM
permalink
Thanks Dan, that helps. Appreciate the feedback from your side to a players side.
May 26th, 2013 at 4:58:10 PM
permalink
Quote: BozNot being on the casino or design end, I wonder how hard it is to get a game like this into a major casino with such a small HE? As a player it is nice to see this, but it seems most players are just as likely to play a 20 percent HE game. So does it come down to the "fun" for lack of a better word factor?
Paigowdan's explanation is excellent. Additionally, in some markets players are not given much of a choice on BJ side bets, so they play what is offered. The theory behind the Lucky Stiff bet is that it will be appealing to players because of its relatively low edge, high qualification rate, and players' affinity for turning a good hand out of a bad one (stiff), and that consequently they will participate at a much greater rate than they do on competing side bets. If the theory proves correct, then the casino will realize a more attractive overall return on the BJ table with Lucky Stiff than the BJ table with the high edge top heavy side bet.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
May 26th, 2013 at 6:03:31 PM
permalink
I like the combination of having a 5/1 payout with a 43% involvement rate. I think that players will feel that they have lots of chances to try and win the 5/1 payout.
Regarding vulnerability then I would guess that 6's, 7's and 8's are obviously good cards to have left in the shoe as any combination of these cards qualify you and they are also generally good cards to have if you are drawing on 12-15. Aces would be poor cards to have in despite the instant 1/1 win for a Blackjack - I'm guessing that 10's would not be very good either as you are more likely to bust on a stiff total.
If there is no real threat of vulnerability then the 4% edge is good IMO. I also like the simplicity of the bet.
The only slight negative factor that I can envisage is that players who bet this have to hope for a stiff hand if they are to be in with a chance of winning. Granted that a Blackjack pays out but they will sort of be betting against their 'Blackjack' wager and looking for a 12-16 rather than a 19, 20 , 9, 10, 11 sort of hand. It could be looked at as a type of Insurance against being dealt a bad hand but this is why it's so important that Paradigm has got a placement in order to gauge the players' reaction to the wager.
Regarding vulnerability then I would guess that 6's, 7's and 8's are obviously good cards to have left in the shoe as any combination of these cards qualify you and they are also generally good cards to have if you are drawing on 12-15. Aces would be poor cards to have in despite the instant 1/1 win for a Blackjack - I'm guessing that 10's would not be very good either as you are more likely to bust on a stiff total.
If there is no real threat of vulnerability then the 4% edge is good IMO. I also like the simplicity of the bet.
The only slight negative factor that I can envisage is that players who bet this have to hope for a stiff hand if they are to be in with a chance of winning. Granted that a Blackjack pays out but they will sort of be betting against their 'Blackjack' wager and looking for a 12-16 rather than a 19, 20 , 9, 10, 11 sort of hand. It could be looked at as a type of Insurance against being dealt a bad hand but this is why it's so important that Paradigm has got a placement in order to gauge the players' reaction to the wager.
May 26th, 2013 at 6:05:19 PM
permalink
In this regard, the Lucky Stiff side bet makes it so that there are less "bad hands" in Blackjack with this bet in action. A good feel to give for the player, me thinks. Slightly affects strategy, though.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
May 26th, 2013 at 6:40:44 PM
permalink
True, Switch, that players are betting against receiving the best initial starting hands.
Also true, Paigowdan, that the bet serves as a 'hedge' against the high frequency poor starting hands that they receive (starting stiff hands occur 38.5% of the time).
The question, then, is the motivation to hedge stronger or weaker than the aversion to betting against a strong beginning hand.
As you say, Switch, the market will have a chance to answer this question now that Paradigm has secured placement activity in WA.
Also true, Paigowdan, that the bet serves as a 'hedge' against the high frequency poor starting hands that they receive (starting stiff hands occur 38.5% of the time).
The question, then, is the motivation to hedge stronger or weaker than the aversion to betting against a strong beginning hand.
As you say, Switch, the market will have a chance to answer this question now that Paradigm has secured placement activity in WA.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
May 27th, 2013 at 5:03:55 AM
permalink
Quote: BozNot being on the casino or design end, I wonder how hard it is to get a game like this into a major casino with such a small HE? As a player it is nice to see this, but it seems most players are just as likely to play a 20 percent HE game. So does it come down to the "fun" for lack of a better word factor?
I can't think of any established casino game with a House edge of 20%, you must mean "house hold" which is not quite the same thing. Switch Match is 1.7% HE but the casino hold is around 20 to 23%.
Controversial sometimes, brutally honest..Always
May 27th, 2013 at 7:02:13 AM
permalink
I think Boz was referring to BJ side bets rather than base casino games. One example of a side bet with a 20%+ edge is Lucky Ladies (24.71%), which is on a multitude of tables industry-wide. Its house edge is stratospheric because of its high variance pay structure and vulnerability to card counting.Quote: McDemonI can't think of any established casino game with a House edge of 20%, you must mean "house hold" which is not quite the same thing. Switch Match is 1.7% HE but the casino hold is around 20 to 23%.
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm." -- Winston Churchill
May 27th, 2013 at 1:51:40 PM
permalink
" As you say, Switch, the market will have a chance to answer this question now that Paradigm has secured placement activity in WA. "
CONGRATULATIONS "young" man. And every market is so damn different. Buffalo Bust Bonus rules Colorado, Switch is dead in
Colorado, only 3 3CP games in Blackhawk, and 1 Let It Die not yet buried. Yet Ameristar, which has 40% of the market in Blackhawk,
has no Buffalo Bust bonus, but 6 of the 20 tables are Streak Blackjack.
Best wishes, Lucky
I’ve always liked the definition of luck offered by Seneca, who wrote, just before not very efficiently killing himself, that “Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.”
CONGRATULATIONS "young" man. And every market is so damn different. Buffalo Bust Bonus rules Colorado, Switch is dead in
Colorado, only 3 3CP games in Blackhawk, and 1 Let It Die not yet buried. Yet Ameristar, which has 40% of the market in Blackhawk,
has no Buffalo Bust bonus, but 6 of the 20 tables are Streak Blackjack.
Best wishes, Lucky
I’ve always liked the definition of luck offered by Seneca, who wrote, just before not very efficiently killing himself, that “Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.”
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
May 27th, 2013 at 2:03:46 PM
permalink
Quote: BuzzardI’ve always liked the definition of luck offered by Seneca, who wrote, just before not very efficiently killing himself, that “Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity.”
Yep, Buzzard, and whenever I get lucky with the dice I figure this is what happened! [g]
That quote is much repeated in athletic team locker-rooms btw
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
May 27th, 2013 at 2:08:24 PM
permalink
Quote: ParadigmI am pleased to announce that Lucky Stiff Blackjack, a companion bet for regular blackjack, went live at 7 Cedars Casino in Sequim, WA on 5/15/13.
Congratulations! I think you know that few game inventors even get that far. Step two is making more money than blackjack tables without your side bet. My father was born in Sequim, by the way.
What is the maximum ratio of side bet to initial blackjack wager? I suppose with 12 vs 4 or 13 vs 2, the player might stand with a large enough side bet, because if you push, the side bet loses.
Can you tell me the number of decks and soft 17 rule up there. I'm pretty sure six and hit, but it doesn't hurt to verify.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
May 27th, 2013 at 2:14:55 PM
permalink
Well shouldn`t the player be standing on a 12vs 4 or 13 vs 2 anyway,unless he is counting and in a negative count?Quote: WizardCongratulations! I think you know that few game inventors even get that far. Step two is making more money than blackjack tables without your side bet. My father was born in Sequim, by the way.
What is the maximum ratio of side bet to initial blackjack wager? I suppose with 12 vs 4 or 13 vs 2, the player might stand with a large enough side bet, because if you push, the side bet loses.
Can you tell me the number of decks and soft 17 rule up there. I'm pretty sure six and hit, but it doesn't hurt to verify.
Happy days are here again
May 27th, 2013 at 2:39:10 PM
permalink
Thanks for well wishes Buzz & Wiz!
7 Cedars is actually running a 8 deck shoe with hit soft 17 rule.
Bet limit on Lucky Stiff bet was set to begin at $2 - $25. On a $5 min BJ table with $500 max main bet I believe.
As I recall Wiz, there were only 2-3 hands situations that you would want to deviate from basic strategy when playing Lucky Stiff. It cost you .1-.2% on your main wager to make those moves and you picked up .3% on the LS bet (based on memory, I can confirm that when I am back at the office). I guess with enough difference in your main bet vs. LS, it may make sense to alter basic strategy in those rare situations. PM me if you want to see any of Charles reports.
I wasn't sure what you meant when you said you lost pushes. If your main bet pushes and your Lucky Stiff wager is still in play, the Lucky Stiff wager will push as well. On the back end settlement, the main & Lucky Stiff bets win together, lose together or Push together.
7 Cedars is actually running a 8 deck shoe with hit soft 17 rule.
Bet limit on Lucky Stiff bet was set to begin at $2 - $25. On a $5 min BJ table with $500 max main bet I believe.
As I recall Wiz, there were only 2-3 hands situations that you would want to deviate from basic strategy when playing Lucky Stiff. It cost you .1-.2% on your main wager to make those moves and you picked up .3% on the LS bet (based on memory, I can confirm that when I am back at the office). I guess with enough difference in your main bet vs. LS, it may make sense to alter basic strategy in those rare situations. PM me if you want to see any of Charles reports.
I wasn't sure what you meant when you said you lost pushes. If your main bet pushes and your Lucky Stiff wager is still in play, the Lucky Stiff wager will push as well. On the back end settlement, the main & Lucky Stiff bets win together, lose together or Push together.
May 27th, 2013 at 2:45:16 PM
permalink
Quote: ParadigmThanks for well wishes Buzz & Wiz!
7 Cedars is actually running a 8 deck shoe with hit soft 17 rule.
Hit soft 17, ouch..thankfully dealer stands on s17 in the UK, wouldn't get away with that here
Controversial sometimes, brutally honest..Always
May 27th, 2013 at 3:41:54 PM
permalink
Just give it time,It might take a few more years but it would not surprise me if casinos in the U.K. start to hit soft 17.Quote: McDemonHit soft 17, ouch..thankfully dealer stands on s17 in the UK, wouldn't get away with that here
Happy days are here again
May 27th, 2013 at 4:32:45 PM
permalink
Quote: HunterhillJust give it time,It might take a few more years but it would not surprise me if casinos in the U.K. start to hit soft 17.
Can't rule it out mate, nothing seems to surprise me or is out of the question anymore, the industry is a changing.
Controversial sometimes, brutally honest..Always
May 27th, 2013 at 4:44:55 PM
permalink
Quote: McDemonHit soft 17, ouch..thankfully dealer stands on s17 in the UK, wouldn't get away with that here
H17 is nothing compared to the 6:5 BJ garbage in Vegas.
I don't think I have ever played S17 blackjack in a casino. Maybe next time I go to Vegas, I'll go downtown so I can say I have....lol
May 27th, 2013 at 4:54:49 PM
permalink
You must be young or just started playing bj recently.Until about 5 years ago you could find s17 in many places.Quote: tringlomaneH17 is nothing compared to the 6:5 BJ garbage in Vegas.
I don't think I have ever played S17 blackjack in a casino. Maybe next time I go to Vegas, I'll go downtown so I can say I have....lol
Happy days are here again
May 27th, 2013 at 5:02:13 PM
permalink
Quote: HunterhillYou must be young or just started playing bj recently.Until about 5 years ago you could find s17 in many places.
33, and I haven't played blackjack in Vegas recently except trying Geoff's "Free Bet Blackjack", which is also H17. I have also played sporadically in Tunica and St. Louis where H17 is also the norm.
May 27th, 2013 at 5:23:55 PM
permalink
I believe H17 is the norm in WA as well so I imagine all Lucky Stiff tables will be H17
May 28th, 2013 at 9:33:06 AM
permalink
Quote: Paradigmthe main & Lucky Stiff bets win together, lose together or Push together.
Hmm, so that makes it sound like basic strategy is ALWAYS correct. Can you give the examples when you should deviate from BS because of the sidebet? Thanks!
Somebody said sth like "now it needs to prove it is making more money than a regular table". Incorrect, unless casino management are morons: Let's say you have 4 tables with the Lucky Lady side bets. Let replace just one with the new sidebet and see what happens. PPL who like Lucky Ladies (less than 75% of all players is safe to assume) will still be able to make their sidebet. Ppl like me, who would never touch that terrible bet, but would consider a fun 4% HE bet, would start to sidebet. They otherwise wouldn't. End of story - they collect that extra 4% from a certain group of ppl without sacrificing anything. (Simplified example, but still true enough I suppose.)
May 28th, 2013 at 10:05:35 AM
permalink
Quote: McDemonHit soft 17, ouch..thankfully dealer stands on s17 in the UK, wouldn't get away with that here
The 'Hit Soft 17' rule was approved a while ago along with the approval of 3CP in the UK.
Thankfully most (if not all) casinos have stayed with the 'Stand Soft 17' version. They hold higher in the UK anyway due to players not playing as well over here.
May 28th, 2013 at 10:20:40 AM
permalink
Quote: SwitchThe 'Hit Soft 17' rule was approved a while ago along with the approval of 3CP in the UK.
The 'Hit Soft 17' rule was approved a while ago in the UK, but not 3CP.
3CP was approved years ago in the UK.
Stephen Au-Yeung (Legend of New Table Games®) NewTableGames.com
May 28th, 2013 at 10:53:06 AM
permalink
The non-basic BJ strategy moves to minimize the Lucky Stiff HE on a "hit soft 17" set of rules is as follows (per our report from Charles Mousseau):
1) Stand on a hard 12 vs. a 3
2) Stand on a hard 12 that is not a T-2 vs. a 2
3) Stand on a hard 15 vs. T
4) Stand on a hard 16 vs. a 9 or T
The HE rises by 0.3% - 0.4% from the base 6 deck house edge of 4.05% if these adjustments to basic strategy are not followed. However, following these changes gives up 0.1% - 0.2% on your main BJ wager. Otherwise you may want to change BS in these 5 situations (out of 360 possible beginning hands).
If your base wager is at least twice the size of your Lucky Stiff wager, correct strategy to minimize the HE over all all your bets will be to play basic strategy.
Other than hard core BJ players (which probably aren't playing any side bets to begin with), 99% of players will simply play basic strategy and be looking at a slightly higher 4.35% to 4.45% HE on Lucky Stiff. Of course that assumes that they are playing basic strategy to start which is not always a reasonable assumption.
1) Stand on a hard 12 vs. a 3
2) Stand on a hard 12 that is not a T-2 vs. a 2
3) Stand on a hard 15 vs. T
4) Stand on a hard 16 vs. a 9 or T
The HE rises by 0.3% - 0.4% from the base 6 deck house edge of 4.05% if these adjustments to basic strategy are not followed. However, following these changes gives up 0.1% - 0.2% on your main BJ wager. Otherwise you may want to change BS in these 5 situations (out of 360 possible beginning hands).
If your base wager is at least twice the size of your Lucky Stiff wager, correct strategy to minimize the HE over all all your bets will be to play basic strategy.
Other than hard core BJ players (which probably aren't playing any side bets to begin with), 99% of players will simply play basic strategy and be looking at a slightly higher 4.35% to 4.45% HE on Lucky Stiff. Of course that assumes that they are playing basic strategy to start which is not always a reasonable assumption.
May 28th, 2013 at 11:29:14 AM
permalink
Thx Paradigm, but I should have phrased my question differently:
WHY is there a change in basic strategy? At the relevant point of decision, all bets are made, and I am doing whatever is best to maximize my chances of winning the hand. The sidebet doesn't seem to change that...
WHY is there a change in basic strategy? At the relevant point of decision, all bets are made, and I am doing whatever is best to maximize my chances of winning the hand. The sidebet doesn't seem to change that...
May 28th, 2013 at 11:48:03 AM
permalink
Gotcha, let me see if I can explain it in a different way.
In those 5 situations mentioned above, the best move for your Lucky Stiff is contrary to basic BJ strategy (e.g the best decision for your main BJ wager).
In situation 3) above, if you have a hard 15 against a dealer Ten up card, basic strategy would tell you to take a hit to minimize the negative EV in that hand. For Lucky Stiff, your best play is not to take a hit. So there is a conflict in the 5 particular hands above between what to do to minimize the HE on your main BJ wager vs. minimizing the HE on your Lucky Stiff wager.
You would run into one of these scenarios approximately once every 72 hands and the difference in HE between the two strategies is one that we don't believe will be significant for the majority of players participating in Lucky Stiff.
Bottom line is we recommend to players (and dealers to tell players) "play basic strategy" and accept a slightly higher HE (e.g. 4.35% vs. 4.05%) on Lucky Stiff.
In those 5 situations mentioned above, the best move for your Lucky Stiff is contrary to basic BJ strategy (e.g the best decision for your main BJ wager).
In situation 3) above, if you have a hard 15 against a dealer Ten up card, basic strategy would tell you to take a hit to minimize the negative EV in that hand. For Lucky Stiff, your best play is not to take a hit. So there is a conflict in the 5 particular hands above between what to do to minimize the HE on your main BJ wager vs. minimizing the HE on your Lucky Stiff wager.
You would run into one of these scenarios approximately once every 72 hands and the difference in HE between the two strategies is one that we don't believe will be significant for the majority of players participating in Lucky Stiff.
Bottom line is we recommend to players (and dealers to tell players) "play basic strategy" and accept a slightly higher HE (e.g. 4.35% vs. 4.05%) on Lucky Stiff.
May 28th, 2013 at 11:57:25 AM
permalink
What would happen if your game was played in a casino that offers surrender?Quote: ParadigmThe non-basic BJ strategy moves to minimize the Lucky Stiff HE on a "hit soft 17" set of rules is as follows (per our report from Charles Mousseau):
1) Stand on a hard 12 vs. a 3
2) Stand on a hard 12 that is not a T-2 vs. a 2
3) Stand on a hard 15 vs. T
4) Stand on a hard 16 vs. a 9 or T
The HE rises by 0.3% - 0.4% from the base 6 deck house edge of 4.05% if these adjustments to basic strategy are not followed. However, following these changes gives up 0.1% - 0.2% on your main BJ wager. Otherwise you may want to change BS in these 5 situations (out of 360 possible beginning hands).
If your base wager is at least twice the size of your Lucky Stiff wager, correct strategy to minimize the HE over all all your bets will be to play basic strategy.
Other than hard core BJ players (which probably aren't playing any side bets to begin with), 99% of players will simply play basic strategy and be looking at a slightly higher 4.35% to 4.45% HE on Lucky Stiff. Of course that assumes that they are playing basic strategy to start which is not always a reasonable assumption.
Happy days are here again
May 28th, 2013 at 1:07:01 PM
permalink
No Surrender offered on BJ tables with Lucky Stiff as Surrender is not contemplated as an option for Lucky Stiff.
May 28th, 2013 at 1:22:46 PM
permalink
Quote: CanyoneroThx Paradigm, but I should have phrased my question differently:
WHY is there a change in basic strategy? At the relevant point of decision, all bets are made, and I am doing whatever is best to maximize my chances of winning the hand. The sidebet doesn't seem to change that...
I can answer this one.
In regular blackjack, if you traded a 2% extra chance of pushing for a 1% extra chance of winning and a 1% extra chance of losing, it would net break even.
On the lucky stiff wager, this would obviously be much to your advantage, since that 1% extra chance of winning pays at greater than even money.
To give an example of 16 vs 10 from an infinite deck model:
Standing:
Win: 22.98%
Lose: 77.02%
Push: 0%
Hitting:
Win: 20.05%
Lose: 74.03%
Push: 5.92%
In regular blackjack, the results are +1 for win, 0 for push and -1 for loss. This gives:
Standing: -54.04%
Hitting: -53.98%
... so here you can see that hitting is marginally better.
However, when wins pay 5:1, and your EV = (5 * %WIN - %LOSS), the fact that you're likelier to win the hand (versus non-wins) now makes standing correct, to wit:
Standing: +37.87%
Hitting: +26.20%
Long story short: the changes are a result of the increased value of winning the hand at any cost; if a push was as bad as a loss, you'd naturally stand on more stiffs. Well, the Lucky Stiff rule makes the pushes 5 times closer to being as bad as a loss, so a lot of that reflects in the basic strategy here.
And just to be finicky, I have to point out that my findings for AP play were about 1/20th, not 1/100th. 75% pen on 6 and 8 deck shoes, perfect use of a count (1 unit with any edge, 0 units with no edge) and no count-based adjustments to play strategy yielded an overall player edge of 0.09% - 0.15%, which I put relative to a 2-3% range in regular blackjack under similar conditions.
May 28th, 2013 at 2:10:09 PM
permalink
ATTENTION, LUCKY STIFF-ERS:
Stephen How just did a review on Lucky Stiff's AP factor.... (www.discountgambling.net)
Of course I tipped him off.....good game....
Stephen How just did a review on Lucky Stiff's AP factor.... (www.discountgambling.net)
Of course I tipped him off.....good game....
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
