Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 133
  • Posts: 15243
November 10th, 2021 at 9:34:13 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

I have started a new page on Lightning Blackjack. So far, it has an introduction and rules only.

I welcome any corrections.
link to original post



I think Evloution's website comes close to confirming the rule that pays are on the Lightning Fee only:

https://www.evolution.com/our-games/lightning-blackjack

Quote:

In Lightning Blackjack players are always guaranteed a randomly generated multiplier of between 2x and 25x on a winning score. If the player’s hand wins, they will receive a multiplier of either 2x, 5x, 8x, 10x, 15x, 20x or 25x.

The multiplier is saved for the next game round, and the payout is increased by this multiplier if the player wins in that next round.

If players have to leave the game before getting a chance to play their awarded multiplier, that’s not a problem – the multiplier remains available for them to use for up to 180 days.



You'll notice that the verbiage says, "...and the payout is increased by this multiplier if the player wins in that next round," so my tendency is to think that is always Lightning Fee (previous hand) amount * multiplier added to base game winnings. Otherwise, I would think that the verbiage would be, "Any winnings are multiplied by your multiplier total in the next round."
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 133
  • Posts: 15243
November 10th, 2021 at 9:34:52 AM permalink
Quote: Glunn11

Quote: Wizard

I have started a new page on Lightning Blackjack. So far, it has an introduction and rules only.

I welcome any corrections.



Thanks for putting this together, Wiz. I'll try to confirm the double payouts later.

I also saw in the documentation the claim that the maximum multiplier is actually 25x. I haven't seen it myself but I'll holler if I run into it. I can contribute to your multiplier samples.
link to original post



It is 25x maximum, Evolution's site says so.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1403
  • Posts: 23725
November 10th, 2021 at 10:29:33 AM permalink
Quote: Glunn11

I did want to make sure the thread is aware of Evolution's peculiar peek policy, which I confirmed this game uses (at least the dealer confirmed in chat). They peek with A showing, but not with face/10 showing.
link to original post



Thank you.

In Neil's video at one point the dealer has a 10 up, he plays his hand, and then the dealer reveals a blackjack.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 133
  • Posts: 15243
November 10th, 2021 at 11:03:21 AM permalink
RE: Peek Policy

Do you happen to know, based on the dealer not peeking when a ten is up, whether the player loses the full amount bet or just the original bet to a dealer natural? As I understand it, if the player would lose the original bet only, then it doesn't mathematically matter whether or not the dealer peeks.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
charliepatrick
charliepatrick
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 2510
Thanks for this post from:
Mission146
November 10th, 2021 at 12:10:52 PM permalink
Quote: Mission146

...As I understand it, if the player would lose the original bet only, then it doesn't mathematically matter whether or not the dealer peeks...

Off topic - it makes a minute difference if the dealer has peeked as you know that card isn't an Ace. As an extreme in Single Deck case, if the dealer doesn't peek you would only know (say 6,5 vs 10) there are 4xA, 4x2, ...3x5, 3x6, ... 15x10 left. However if they have peeked your chances of getting an Ace are slightly higher (as they can't have one) and the other cards slightly lower (as there's a chance, about 3,4 or 15 in 45 the dealer has one). In practice I doubt it makes much difference, but if you're looking at finite decks it's something to be considered to get an accurate EV calculation. (I once spent ages trying to find why my figures were different and this was the reason!)
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1403
  • Posts: 23725
Thanks for this post from:
Mission146
November 10th, 2021 at 12:58:13 PM permalink
Quote: Mission146

RE: Peek Policy

Do you happen to know, based on the dealer not peeking when a ten is up, whether the player loses the full amount bet or just the original bet to a dealer natural? As I understand it, if the player would lose the original bet only, then it doesn't mathematically matter whether or not the dealer peeks.
link to original post



The player would lose the full amount bet.

I agree if he loses the original bet only, then it's mathematically the same as peeking.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 133
  • Posts: 15243
November 10th, 2021 at 1:23:35 PM permalink
Quote: charliepatrick

Quote: Mission146

...As I understand it, if the player would lose the original bet only, then it doesn't mathematically matter whether or not the dealer peeks...

Off topic - it makes a minute difference if the dealer has peeked as you know that card isn't an Ace. As an extreme in Single Deck case, if the dealer doesn't peek you would only know (say 6,5 vs 10) there are 4xA, 4x2, ...3x5, 3x6, ... 15x10 left. However if they have peeked your chances of getting an Ace are slightly higher (as they can't have one) and the other cards slightly lower (as there's a chance, about 3,4 or 15 in 45 the dealer has one). In practice I doubt it makes much difference, but if you're looking at finite decks it's something to be considered to get an accurate EV calculation. (I once spent ages trying to find why my figures were different and this was the reason!)
link to original post



Deck composition---good point, thanks!
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1403
  • Posts: 23725
Thanks for this post from:
MrCasinoGames
November 11th, 2021 at 5:04:56 PM permalink
Okay, I've spent the good part of the week on this game. That said, please see my analysis of Lightning Blackjack. Warning, my analysis is based on conventional basic strategy, which is not appropriate for this game. If you do play basic strategy, expect to lose 17.63% of your original bet, on average.

I welcome all comments.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
ChumpChange
ChumpChange
Joined: Jun 15, 2018
  • Threads: 57
  • Posts: 2645
November 11th, 2021 at 5:15:00 PM permalink
When you only win half a unit on a BJ and 1 unit on a DD/Split after losing the Lightning Fee, is 17.63% even accurate? Oh yeah, you might hit a big win on the next hand with the multiplier, but even that average is under 3X. I'd be expecting the HA to be around 117%, not 17%. Winning your Lightning Fee back would be a whole 'nother calculation. But I would subtract 1 unit from the win side, or add another unit to the loss side of the 3rd chart to account for a Lightning Fee that is lost on a 0X multiplier.
Last edited by: ChumpChange on Nov 11, 2021
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 133
  • Posts: 15243
Thanks for this post from:
Wizard
November 11th, 2021 at 5:35:27 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

Okay, I've spent the good part of the week on this game. That said, please see my analysis of Lightning Blackjack. Warning, my analysis is based on conventional basic strategy, which is not appropriate for this game. If you do play basic strategy, expect to lose 17.63% of your original bet, on average.

I welcome all comments.
link to original post



Great page! The game is an even bigger disaster than I would have guessed re: not making decisions that deviate from conventional strategy.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219

  • Jump to: