Thread Rating:

Poll

5 votes (16.66%)
17 votes (56.66%)
5 votes (16.66%)
3 votes (10%)

30 members have voted

Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
December 1st, 2010 at 8:43:31 AM permalink
Recently at my casino, they installed yet another in a long line of BJ side bets on their BJ tables.
This ain't all that easy to do for a casino house:
a) Dealers had to retrain,
b) players had to be explained the new bet,
c) dealers had to get the new bet "into their hands," etc.

And side bets generally slow the game down and introduce both player confusion and dealer errors.

One employee decided to invent a new game, as mentioned - called "JUST FREAKIN' BLACKJACK!" - More hands per hour, less confusion, less dealer errors....MORE BLACKJACK!
Another employee invented a new side bet called "PULL MY D}CK" - player busts three hands in a row, and in frustration may yank the dealer....but the minimum bet is $25.
All not bad ideas...

What's your take on BJ side bets?
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
ItsCalledSoccer
ItsCalledSoccer
Joined: Aug 30, 2010
  • Threads: 42
  • Posts: 735
December 1st, 2010 at 8:46:44 AM permalink
I think any BJ with a dick pull is a little confusing. I'll just take the straight BJ.
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
December 1st, 2010 at 8:50:53 AM permalink
Amen!
Thing is, all the side bets have now gotten to be a bit too much.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
miplet
miplet
Joined: Dec 1, 2009
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 1971
December 1st, 2010 at 8:55:20 AM permalink
Some side bets don't bother me. Its the ones that slow the game to a crawl that bug me. Spanish21's match the dealer is one of them. The match the up card is fine. When they added the hole card that it just takes too long.
“Man Babes” #AxelFabulous
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
December 1st, 2010 at 9:26:31 AM permalink
Quote: Paigowdan

player busts three hands in a row, and in frustration may yank the dealer....but the minimum bet is $25.

What's your take on BJ side bets?


I'll refrain from answering the poll because I'm biased - my most successful product is a blackjack side bet. However, your "bust-3-hands" example would not be approvable as the payback to the player is 0%, less than the required 75% in Nevada. Plus, the player can bust any three hands at will just by hitting. Something like this might work if you could assess that the player were playing a reasonably appropriate strategy, but you'd either need an e-table or card-recognition software for that, both of which are very expensive. Also, I'm not sure the pit would look favorably on a side bet that changed their staff rotations. You'd have twice as many dealers in the break room all looking at each other saying "You got yanked too? Yeah. Then who's dealing on table 4?"

All joking aside, I think that a good side bet (note the qualifier "good") is likely to become an important facet to saving blackjack games from going all the way to 6-5 and other tighter rules. As players get better in the aggregate, the revenue per table drops. In this economy, that's really a bad idea. Keeping win numbers up can be done in a few ways, with side bets being up near the top. But let me turn it around on you: which would you rather see?
a) A 0.7% blackjack game with a 5% side bet, or
b) A 1.3% blackjack game with no side bet?

I can do pros/cons on both, but what are your thoughts?
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 187
  • Posts: 10501
December 1st, 2010 at 9:33:12 AM permalink
Slowing the game is one of the things I managed to avoid in my Hit It Again Roulette side bet. Too bat that idea had too many other problems. Hopefully, my Poker For Roulette side bet doesn't slow things down much.

As I mentioned in that other thread, I've kinda quit BJ not so much because of the side bets, (or their proliferation of them), but that if you're not betting it, those that do bet it, seem to take be unable to not point out when you would have won.


I do not play side bets, so, even though I think there are too many of them, I have not voted.
Last edited by: DJTeddyBear on Mar 21, 2021
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? 😁
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 187
  • Posts: 10501
December 1st, 2010 at 9:36:24 AM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

a) A 0.7% blackjack game with a 5% side bet, or
b) A 1.3% blackjack game with no side bet?

Well, since I don't play side bets, I'd go for A - just as long as the other players woulld shut the f--- up when I would have won a side bet!
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? 😁
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 7237
December 1st, 2010 at 10:03:29 AM permalink
I enjoy sidebets in general. I don't play them often, but I like watching others play them - it's always fun to watch a big win paid out. But I've always been confused about the BJ sidebets. They're all the same thing, but they all coexist. I don't really care if I'm watching for 4 aces, 4 queens, a 4 card straight flush, a 4 card total under 10, double blackjacks, or a spontaneously ignited dealer's upcard. Rare is rare, and I don't see how there is a need for more than one of these games.

I feel the same about the PGP sidegames and the Emperor's Lucky Challenging Fortune sidebet of doom.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14484
December 1st, 2010 at 10:07:00 AM permalink
Hey, what is so wrong with that side bet?
Just think of all the dealers in the break room telling each other about this gorgeous young chick that intentionally busted hand after hand. They would no longer have to tell each other the one about getting toked a black.
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
December 1st, 2010 at 10:14:26 AM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

All joking aside, I think that a good side bet (note the qualifier "good") is likely to become an important facet to saving blackjack games from going all the way to 6-5 and other tighter rules. As players get better in the aggregate, the revenue per table drops. In this economy, that's really a bad idea. Keeping win numbers up can be done in a few ways, with side bets being up near the top. But let me turn it around on you: which would you rather see?
a) A 0.7% blackjack game with a 5% side bet, or
b) A 1.3% blackjack game with no side bet?

I can do pros/cons on both, but what are your thoughts?



I admit it - side bets ARE absolutely a necessary evil. As we have seen with Borgata, very strong players + big action = VERY thin table hold. In a way, side bet suckers subsidize the action for the BJ purist. No doubt about it, I'd rather play 0.7% HE than 1.3% on the straight game.

But not all side bets are created equal.
The Push Your Luck tie bet was easy enough to deal and implement, as it is take-and-pay as you go; the Bust It! side bet requires an additional dealer round of take-and-pay (must be done separately, as a separate full-table action BEFORE any take-and-pay on the main bets.)
Already dealers are not listening to management and surveillance's "table speed audit reports" on their reviews [never took 'em seriously anyway], signing their review sheets "Richard M. Nixon" in a scribble, and telling management (on audit pace reports) that it hurts their already-severly-strained credibility.

The inventor of the Bust it! side bet personally demo-ed the product (actually, not a bad side bet at all, but sloooow), trying to convince dealers that the full extra round of take-and-pay for EVERY round of Blackjack dealt "won't significant decrease audit pace speed." Howls abounded, with dealers muttering things in Korean. Just no way it was believed, because it is just not true.

A good game idea takes into account real table procedures.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.

  • Jump to: