Here are the rules:

8 decks; new shoe is used to deal every hand

Blackjack pays 2:1

Dealer hits on soft 17

No double downs

Split pairs once

No surrender

Now, I know at https://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/rule-variations.html it has all the percentages, but there isn't one for "no double downs"; can you just take the +.23% from "double on any 2 cards" and subtract it? I doubt it. If so, this game has well over a 1% player edge.

Quote:SilentBob420BMFJI have Googled the crap out of this, and this is my last resort, since I know you're busy.

Here are the rules:

8 decks; new shoe is used to deal every hand

Blackjack pays 2:1

Dealer hits on soft 17

No double downs

Split pairs once

No surrender

Now, I know at https://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/rule-variations.html it has all the percentages, but there isn't one for "no double downs"; can you just take the +.23% from "double on any 2 cards" and subtract it? I doubt it. If so, this game has well over a 1% player edge.

I assume you're talking about their "bonus" casino? They have several casinos but the bonus casino does offer a few games that are positive expectation. I'm not familiar with this blackjack game but they do have a few other games that are positive so it wouldn't shock me.

Of course if it is indeed in a "for play, not for real" casino then what is so wrong about them offering a sweetener, the whole purpose is to suck you into the "for real" casino.

Quote:FleaStiffI would verify the 2:1 payout. What is "normal" blackjack, 1.5:1?

Of course if it is indeed in a "for play, not for real" casino then what is so wrong about them offering a sweetener, the whole purpose is to suck you into the "for real" casino.

Yes, indeed verify it is not "2 for one." Here in PA the video BJ machined said 2:1 when it was 2 for one. I wrote an email to the casino about it. Never received a reply, but 2 years later the error is no longer there. I think many complained.

Quote:clarkacalOh and that .23% i'm sure is just for losing the doubles on soft hands and hard 8 or 9. Losing doubles on 10 and 11 would cost more %.

I'm confused by the Wizard's rule variation chart in general, because at the top it says what game he based it off of. OK, so if you're trying to find the effect it has on that game, why would rules that are already in the game, such as "double on any 2" be +EV? If the game his calculations are based off of contains the rule, wouldn't it obviously be 0% effect on the game? Now removing that rule having a negative effect, sure, but how can you add something that's already there? Thought the whole point of that chart was "if you're playing the game I listed above, here are the effects the following rules will have".

And even if that is cleared up, how do you do it, do you take the -.45% EV of his base game, and then add/subtract the rules? But again, what do you do with rules that are listed as positive, but already part of his game? So confusing.

I'm pretty sure this game is positive, but I want to know how positive, so I can calculate some stuff.

Quote:AZDuffmanYes, indeed verify it is not "2 for one." Here in PA the video BJ machined said 2:1 when it was 2 for one. I wrote an email to the casino about it. Never received a reply, but 2 years later the error is no longer there. I think many complained.

Wait, 2 for 1 as in you don't get your original bet back, just 2 in exchange for your 1, which would make it equivalent to 1 to 1? Ya I doubt it's that, because it's in their Bonus Casino, where they have higher paying games. Remember, you can't double at all, and can only split to 1 hand, and the dealer hits on soft 17, so that would make this game ridiculous.

So "kudos" to the original poster for bringing it up then.Quote:SilentBob420BMFJso that would make this game ridiculous.

I don't think I'm ever gonna get straight that difference between "to" and "for" in odds statements.

Quote:FleaStiffSo "kudos" to the original poster for bringing it up then.

I don't think I'm ever gonna get straight that difference between "to" and "for" in odds statements.

By ridiculous I meant really bad, as in there's no way it's true. What he brought up is pretty rare, and like he said it was in video blackjack at a casino. You would never find a real blackjack game with no double downs, dealer hits soft 17, and 1:1 blackjack, it just wouldn't happen.

Most importantly, what is the effect of not being able to double at all. And then secondly, do we just take the base game on that chart, which has a -.45% EV, and add or subtract the rules listed below?

Here's what I've got:

Base game: .43% HE

Adjustments:

2:1 BJ - 2.27%

H17 +.22%

no resplit +.1%

no doubling +1.6%

New game HE: .08%

Obviously, I'm not being exact here, but that seems in-line with the other offerings in the bonus casino.

Quote:rdw4potusI think that if tripling on any two cards is worth an extra 1.64% versus doubling any two cards, then doubling any two is probably worth about 1.64% versus not being able to double.

Here's what I've got:

Base game: .43% HE

Adjustments:

2:1 BJ - 2.27%

H17 +.22%

no resplit +.1%

no doubling +1.6%

New game HE: .08%

Obviously, I'm not being exact here, but that seems in-line with the other offerings in the bonus casino.

Where did you get that since tripling is worth +1.64% that not being able to double is then worth -1.64%? I'm pretty sure doubling is worth less than that. I'd say this game is definitely positive, I just don't know how much.

Quote:SilentBob420BMFJWhere did you get that since tripling is worth +1.64% that not being able to double is then worth -1.64%? I'm pretty sure doubling is worth less than that. I'd say this game is definitely positive, I just don't know how much.

Tripling adds one unit to doubling. If doubling is the baseline, then removing doubling should take away approximately the same amount that tripling adds. I think I agree that doubling is worth slightly less than tripling. Tripling just pays more on hands you'd already have doubled, while not being allowed to double will cause you to back into some hands (like 11+5+5=21 on two hits). That's why I used 1.6% in the math and not 1.64%. Maybe I'm underestimating the difference between the relative values of tripling and doubling.

I'm sure someone who knows the actual math will let us know the value of this game eventually...

2-1 on blackjacks is worth 2.26% to the player.

No doubling is worth 1.37% to the dealer.

So I show the house edge is 0.82% -2.26% + 1.48% = -0.07%.

Note: This post was edited. Earlier I showed a house edge of 0.04%.

Quote:WizardUsing my blackjack house edge calculator, I get a house edge of 0.82%, before factoring the 2-1 on blackjacks and no doubling.

2-1 on blackjacks is worth 2.26% to the player.

No doubling is worth 1.48% to the dealer.

So I show the house edge is 0.82% -2.26% + 1.48% = 0.04%.

Nice! By the way, is it just me, or are other people having trouble loading [http://www.5dimes.com/]5 Dimes.

Would you mind adding "player may not double" to the list of rule variations on the WoO site, since that rule is now known to exist in a game?

Quote:Wizard

Nice! By the way, is it just me, or are other people having trouble loading [http://www.5dimes.com/]5 Dimes.

Wizard, try logging in with your same id and password at propbet.com. Many times when there are problems with the main site this one will work.

Quote:WizardUsing my blackjack house edge calculator, I get a house edge of 0.82%, before factoring the 2-1 on blackjacks and no doubling.

2-1 on blackjacks is worth 2.26% to the player.

No doubling is worth 1.48% to the dealer.

So I show the house edge is 0.82% -2.26% + 1.48% = 0.04%.

Nice! By the way, is it just me, or are other people having trouble loading [http://www.5dimes.com/]5 Dimes.

So this game isn't positive? Aw what the hell. I really thought it would be like +.5%.

I see no point in playing casino games online unless they're positive EV, since you're not getting the full casino experience. You're paying for entertainment with that -EV, but sitting at your computer isn't exactly the same as being in a casino. But then again, no casino is going to have a $1 minimum or a near even EV, let alone both together.

I remember back when the best casino in my area had blackjack at -.5% with $3 tables. And $.05 9/6 Jacks Or Better video poker. All that changed quite quickly. And I heard it used to even better than that in the 90s, like way better. If only I was born in the 70s. But I digress.

Anyways, thanks Wizard.

Quote:SilentBob420BMFJQuote:WizardUsing my blackjack house edge calculator, I get a house edge of 0.82%, before factoring the 2-1 on blackjacks and no doubling.

2-1 on blackjacks is worth 2.26% to the player.

No doubling is worth 1.48% to the dealer.

So I show the house edge is 0.82% -2.26% + 1.48% = 0.04%.

Nice! By the way, is it just me, or are other people having trouble loading [http://www.5dimes.com/]5 Dimes.

So this game isn't positive? Aw what the hell. I really thought it would be like +.5%.

I see no point in playing casino games online unless they're positive EV, since you're not getting the full casino experience. You're paying for entertainment with that -EV, but sitting at your computer isn't exactly the same as being in a casino. But then again, no casino is going to have a $1 minimum along or a game that is damn near even, let alone both together. I remember back when the best casino in my area had blackjack at -.5% with a couple $3 tables. And $.05 9/6 Jacks Or Better video poker. All that changed quite quickly. And I heard it used to even better than that in the 90s, like way better. But I digress.

Anyways, thanks Wizard.

5Dimes has positive games but they aren't worth playing without a bot. If this was .5% positive it really wouldn't be worth playing without a bot either.

Quote:JimMorrisonQuote:SilentBob420BMFJQuote:Wizard

2-1 on blackjacks is worth 2.26% to the player.

No doubling is worth 1.48% to the dealer.

So I show the house edge is 0.82% -2.26% + 1.48% = 0.04%.

Nice! By the way, is it just me, or are other people having trouble loading [http://www.5dimes.com/]5 Dimes.

So this game isn't positive? Aw what the hell. I really thought it would be like +.5%.

I see no point in playing casino games online unless they're positive EV, since you're not getting the full casino experience. You're paying for entertainment with that -EV, but sitting at your computer isn't exactly the same as being in a casino. But then again, no casino is going to have a $1 minimum or a near even EV, let alone both together.

I remember back when the best casino in my area had blackjack at -.5% with $3 tables. And $.05 9/6 Jacks Or Better video poker. All that changed quite quickly. And I heard it used to even better than that in the 90s, like way better. If only I was born in the 70s. But I digress.

Anyways, thanks Wizard. .

5Dimes has positive games but they aren't worth playing without a bot. If this was .5% positive it really wouldn't be worth playing without a bot either.

+.5% is quite favorable though. I would still only play $1/hand even if it was .5% due to my bankroll being small.

Quote:WizardUsing my blackjack house edge calculator, I get a house edge of 0.82%, before factoring the 2-1 on blackjacks and no doubling.

2-1 on blackjacks is worth 2.26% to the player.

No doubling is worth 1.48% to the dealer.

So I show the house edge is 0.82% -2.26% + 1.48% = 0.04%.

Nice! By the way, is it just me, or are other people having trouble loading 5 Dimes.

A continuous shuffling machine favors the player, but what about being dealt every hand from a fresh 8 deck shoe? I imagine they're one in the same, so does that make this game positive?

Quote:SilentBob420BMFJAccording to some $400 blackjack software I have (CVData), this game is POSITIVE. Betting $1 flat, adjusting every little aspect, no card counting (what this software is for), this game will return $.07/hr. You'd think you'd earn more with a +.033% EV. So ya, not saying you should bet the $25 maximum, but don't feel guilty playing this game if you're the type to only play positive games.

I found an error in my calculation for the effect of no doubling. I'm lowering that to 1.37%, making the player edge 0.07%.

Quote:SilentBob420BMFJAccording to some $400 blackjack software I have (CVData), this game is POSITIVE. Betting $1 flat, adjusting every little aspect, no card counting (what this software is for), this game will return $.07/hr. You'd think you'd earn more with a +.033% EV. So ya, not saying you should bet the $25 maximum, but don't feel guilty playing this game if you're the type to only play positive games.

Something doesn't seem right with my simulator claiming .04% player edge x 250 hands/hr = $.07/hr. But doing it by hand, .0004 x 250 = $.10/hr, so I guess it's close enough. Hard to believe 10 cents an hour is all you get betting $1. If it's as Wizard says, with a .07% player edge, then it's gonna be .0007 x 250 = $.18/hr. Why not bet more? Because my bankroll is only like $100.

If you want to play this +EV blackjack game, you actually have to contact 5Dimes once it hits 2 ET on Friday. I've played this game for 3 weeks now, and every time I've had to remind them to put it up. I complained in a "just curious" type of way, but they basically told me just contact them to remind them. This goes for Saturday's full pay Deuces Wild as well.