Blackjack rules got a lot worse

It's like mostly 6:5 and the few 3:2 games they have are just H17, no DAS, no RSA, no Surrender.
It still hasn't been updated on the las vegas blackjack survey page. Is there some way to submit updates to that?

I think the few 3:2 tables that are DD and 6D have different rules. Believe 6d should still have at least DS and RSA.

What is the minimum bet to get that in a shoe? Is it in a high roller area only (if they even have one)?

Quote: Lucca3927

What is the minimum bet to get that in a shoe? Is it in a high roller area only (if they even have one)?

Lucca, this is the BJ survey on the WoV, and it shows min bets and more for all games. Don't know about high roller games.

https://wizardofvegas.com/guides/blackjack-survey/

Note: not updated since 18 Jan 2016.

Quote: duck

Is there some way to submit updates to that?

Consider sending updates to the wiz or any admin, like beachbumbabs or Mission146.

For an overall summary of games, see https://www.qfit.com/maps.shtml

Click on a state
Scroll down to the bottom to see a summary of games in that state
Click on a number of decks in the left doughnut and the right doughnut will show a breakdown of the rules for that selection

This is updated monthly. Rules have been fairly stable for the last few months, with a tiny worsening trend.

Quote: QFIT

For an overall summary of games, see https://www.qfit.com/maps.shtml.

Folks,
If you get a server error, it is because the period at the end of the sentence is included in the link. Delete the period and you will connect to this most interesting BJ site.

I just spent the weekend at the GN. Here's how the BlackJack tables work. All the pits inside the casino play at 3-2. You might find a $5 table in the morning, or up to noon on the weekends, but otherwise it's going to be a $10 minimum. The only 6-5 tables are in the "party pit" that surrounds the pool area. The inferior odds are the price people pay to either be dealt cards by very young girls in near-swimwear or to gamble and not lose their pool chair. There is a shortage of shoes everywhere. It's mostly single and double deck. The VIP area has 3-2, RSA, DOS, and surrender. The minimum is $25-$50, depending on when you go, and you can get a shoe. I didn't use the high limit area though because the shoe table was empty and I don't like to play alone since it produces more hands per hour.

It was rough to get a table on Saturday night, but that's true of most casinos. The girls came by for drinks at a nice clip which was odd because, at the crap table, they were not to be found.

Quote: Timesharemooch

I just spent the weekend at the GN.

Which of the several Golden Nugget casinos did you visit?

Vegas.

I've always been a strip snob but have to admit that I've reconsidered. I thought that the GN was as nice, albeit smaller, hote/casino as some on the strip. If you've never seen it, Freemont Street is a bit of a nuthouse, to say the least. On the other hand, I've seen people begging on the strip while using their IPads.

Nugget (Vegas) had its best BJ during the period that Timothy and Tom owned it, in 2004 or so. Before that it wasn't bad either in that they more or less wouldn't molest you if you jumped your bet a lot when the card count was good, at least not as long as you were a known regular player.

Once Landry's took over they implemented rules such as not allowing you to increase your bet by more than 3X whatever you bet the previous hand, or more than 3X what you bet the first hand of the deck/shoe. I noticed this same sort of thing going on at Binion's by the late 2000s, trying to keep you from varying your bet too much.

I liked it better in the 70s.:)

It was before my time, but the norm used to be 2:1 on BJ no?

Then 3:2 came along and everyone complained, but now we view 3:2 as the norm, and 6:5 as something to rail against.

Quote: MDawg

It was before my time, but the norm used to be 2:1 on BJ no?

Then 3:2 came along and everyone complained, but now we view 3:2 as the norm, and 6:5 as something to rail against.

That is incorrect. Blackjack in casinos traditionally paid 3-2, not two for one.

Quote: billryan

That is incorrect. Blackjack in casinos traditionally paid 3-2, not two for one.

According to Scarne, the original blackjack game (not vingt-et-un) paid 10:1 for an ace-ten of spades, which would be slightly better than 3:2 albeit with higher variance. However, Scarne had a habit of making things up.

Quote: QFIT

According to Scarne, the original blackjack game (not vingt-et-un) paid 10:1 for an ace-ten of spades, which would be slightly better than 3:2 albeit with higher variance. However, Scarne had a habit of making things up.

No one could cut an ace like Scarne.

Quote: MDawg

It was before my time, but the norm used to be 2:1 on BJ no?

Then 3:2 came along and everyone complained, but now we view 3:2 as the norm, and 6:5 as something to rail against.

I don't remember casinos having better than 3-2, and this goes back to the late 1960s.

"House" games tend to be 2-1, but in a house game, all pushes are losses.

As far as 2:1 BJ, it's hard to find anything definitive one way or another online.

You find articles that read like this:
"If you see "Blackjack pays 2 to 1", that's good news for you. This doesn't happen often anymore because most casino owners have figured out that 2 to 1 actually gives the player better odds than the house. But in case you do stumble upon a casino like this, make the most of it."

which seem to imply with the words "this doesn't happen often anymore" that it used to happen.


Then you find articles such as this one
"In the 1940s and 1950s, it was possible to find a blackjack game that offered players an edge off the top. This means the casino offered a game, which, if played correctly, gave the player an advantage from the very first hand of a new shuffle. Yes, some casinos offered a game in which they not only did not have a built-in advantage; they actually dealt a game where the house was disadvantaged!"

that do not explain what house rules were in place that made it a player advantage game, but perhaps 2:1 BJ was one of them.


Anyway, I had always assumed that 2:1 came first, then 3:2 and now 6:5, it makes sense intuitively that the house would have gradually been experimenting with ways to whittle away the player's advantage. You see this not just with 6:5, but with elimination of things like RSA, with dealer hitting soft 17, not letting players bet more than 3X their bet from the first hand of the shoe (or not more than 3X the prior bet), etc.

2:1 has always been extremely rare. Yes, some games used to be positive EV, because they were early surrender, single-deck.

Hello guys i am new in here please accept me...

Well the biggest way they put you at a disadvantage is by simply kicking you out. That's never happened to me but I was handicapped at all _____ casinos for a couple of years, they put some notation in the computer that I could never jump my bet more than 3X. I appealed the ruling to the gaming commission and got nowhere, my grounds were "they may kick me out but not disadvantage me compared to other players," but got nowhere with that appeal. I was killing them by alternating between table minimum and table maximum, and somehow winning all of my maxes and losing only the minimums, doing this consistently for days on end and multiple trips until they stepped in to stop the action. I stayed away from BJ for a couple of years and then gradually, they somehow forgot about this and I started to play again.

Quote: vgrower

Hello guys i am new in here please accept me...

Don't try to sell any stupid gambling systems and you should be fine.

Quote: MDawg

Well the biggest way they put you at a disadvantage is by simply kicking you out. That's never happened to me but I was handicapped at all _____ casinos for a couple of years, they put some notation in the computer that I could never jump my bet more than 3X. I appealed the ruling to the gaming commission and got nowhere, my grounds were "they may kick me out but not disadvantage me compared to other players," but got nowhere with that appeal. I was killing them by alternating between table minimum and table maximum, and somehow winning all of my maxes and losing only the minimums, doing this consistently for days on end and multiple trips until they stepped in to stop the action. I stayed away from BJ for a couple of years and then gradually, they somehow forgot about this and I started to play again.

If I were winning all my max bets and losing all my small bets, I'd eliminate the small bets. No small bets, there is no spread and you don't get kicked out. E-Z-P-Z.

Quote: TigerWu

Don't try to sell any stupid gambling systems and you should be fine.

Stay hydrated
Never start a land war in Asia

welcome new guy

Quote: billryan

If I were winning all my max bets and losing all my small bets, I'd eliminate the small bets. No small bets, there is no spread and you don't get kicked out. E-Z-P-Z.

Then you fail.

moved - placed in wrong thread