Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1403
  • Posts: 23725
November 11th, 2021 at 9:05:45 PM permalink
Quote: Mission146

Great page! The game is an even bigger disaster than I would have guessed re: not making decisions that deviate from conventional strategy.
link to original post



Thank you.

There are a lot of ingredients that go into a successful casino game. Lightning Blackjack has most of them:

1. It's based on a familiar game.
2. The rules are not that complicated. They did a bad job of explaining them, but I think once you start playing, you catch on quickly.
3. The volatility is high, which most players like.
4. The speed (under normal playing conditions) is fast. Granted the live dealer/infinite player version is slow, but that can't be helped.

Where it fails is the strategy is not intuitive. The recreational blackjack player, using basic strategy, will get killed. Even Neil (from the video) said to not let the multipliers change your strategy.

I'm trying to make contact with Evolution to publish whatever math they have on the game. I'm not sure I can justify two weeks on the clock to develop one myself.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
ssho88
ssho88
Joined: Oct 16, 2011
  • Threads: 48
  • Posts: 583
November 12th, 2021 at 12:45:51 AM 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




Based on your defined game rules and average multiplier values, as well as conventional basic strategy, my 1 billion trials simulation results show that the house advantage is 18.09%. A little bit different from yours, I don't know where I went wrong.

The current hand strategy largely depends on (current hand EV1 + next hand EV2), multiplier has a great influence on the basic strategy, and the correct basic strategy requires more accurate multiplier values.

Another question : Suppose you split, lose one hand and win the other. Is your multiplier still active in the next round ?
Last edited by: ssho88 on Nov 12, 2021
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1403
  • Posts: 23725
November 12th, 2021 at 6:18:30 AM permalink
Quote: ssho88

Based on your defined game rules and average multiplier values, as well as conventional basic strategy, my 1 billion trials simulation results show that the house advantage is 18.09%. A little bit different from yours, I don't know where I went wrong.



I'm actually happy we are that close. This is a difficult game to simulate as there are lots of different game states. It is possible the error is on my end too.

Quote:

The current hand strategy largely depends on (current hand EV1 + next hand EV2), multiplier has a great influence on the basic strategy, and the correct basic strategy requires more accurate multiplier values.



I agree.

Quote:

Another question : Suppose you split, lose one hand and win the other. Is your multiplier still active in the next round ?
link to original post



I interpret the answer to that question as yes. You need just one win to earn a multiplier. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
OnceDear
Administrator
OnceDear 
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
  • Threads: 51
  • Posts: 6112
November 12th, 2021 at 6:30:59 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

Quote: ssho88

Based on your defined game rules and average multiplier values, as well as conventional basic strategy, my 1 billion trials simulation results show that the house advantage is 18.09%. A little bit different from yours, I don't know where I went wrong.



I'm actually happy we are that close. This is a difficult game to simulate as there are lots of different game states. It is possible the error is on my end too.

link to original post

Woah!!!!
Are you guys saying the house edge is of the order of 18%?
My casino has this game and the help screen says the optimum theoretical return to player is 99.56%

How do we reconcile that?
Beware. The earth is NOT flat. Hit and run is not a winning strategy: Pressing into trends IS not a winning strategy: Progressives are not a winning strategy: Don't Buy It! .Don't even take it for free.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1403
  • Posts: 23725
November 12th, 2021 at 6:38:28 AM permalink
Quote: OnceDear

Are you guys saying the house edge is of the order of 18%?
My casino has this game and the help screen says the optimum theoretical return to player is 99.56%

How do we reconcile that?
link to original post



The 99.56% return is based on optimal strategy, which nobody here has calculated yet. The 18% house edge is based on regular blackjack strategy. The takeaway should be to not play unless you know the mystery strategy.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
OnceDear
Administrator
OnceDear 
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
  • Threads: 51
  • Posts: 6112
November 12th, 2021 at 6:39:24 AM 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

Wouldn't it make a strategy difference? I.e. Peek on ten, you double an ace against 10, knowing he doesn't have blackjack. No peek, you would hit rather than double an ace against ten?
Beware. The earth is NOT flat. Hit and run is not a winning strategy: Pressing into trends IS not a winning strategy: Progressives are not a winning strategy: Don't Buy It! .Don't even take it for free.
billryan
billryan 
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 206
  • Posts: 12388
November 12th, 2021 at 6:46:57 AM permalink
Wouldn't it be better to tell your readers to avoid this game entirely? A game that looks like BJ but has a house edge like the Big Six seems like a dream come true for the casino. Even our members who constantly defy the laws of math may struggle with such a game.
At what House edge do you advise folks to run away? Especially when the game itself is stating the house edge with perfect play is under 1%?
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
DRich
DRich
Joined: Jul 6, 2012
  • Threads: 79
  • Posts: 8259
Thanks for this post from:
Wizard
November 12th, 2021 at 7:14:39 AM permalink
Quote: billryan

Wouldn't it be better to tell your readers to avoid this game entirely? A game that looks like BJ but has a house edge like the Big Six seems like a dream come true for the casino. Even our members who constantly defy the laws of math may struggle with such a game.
At what House edge do you advise folks to run away? Especially when the game itself is stating the house edge with perfect play is under 1%?
link to original post



If that was the case wouldnt you just advise to not play any negative EV game? If a player chooses to play a negative EV game then it is on the player to determine at what level would they accept. Many people are happy and get entertainment value out of play 20% hold slot machines. Obviously it is not for all of us.
Order from chaos
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1403
  • Posts: 23725
November 12th, 2021 at 7:18:14 AM permalink
Quote: billryan

Wouldn't it be better to tell your readers to avoid this game entirely? A game that looks like BJ but has a house edge like the Big Six seems like a dream come true for the casino. Even our members who constantly defy the laws of math may struggle with such a game.
At what House edge do you advise folks to run away? Especially when the game itself is stating the house edge with perfect play is under 1%?
link to original post



I told my readers the house edge is 18%. I'm not going to insult their intelligence by simply saying "don't play." They should be able to make that conclusion themselves.

I try to avoid shoving advice down my readers' throats. I lead them to water and let them decide to drink it or not.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
billryan
billryan 
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 206
  • Posts: 12388
November 12th, 2021 at 7:24:57 AM permalink
Quote: DRich

Quote: billryan

Wouldn't it be better to tell your readers to avoid this game entirely? A game that looks like BJ but has a house edge like the Big Six seems like a dream come true for the casino. Even our members who constantly defy the laws of math may struggle with such a game.
At what House edge do you advise folks to run away? Especially when the game itself is stating the house edge with perfect play is under 1%?
link to original post



If that was the case wouldnt you just advise to not play any negative EV game? If a player chooses to play a negative EV game then it is on the player to determine at what level would they accept. Many people are happy and get entertainment value out of play 20% hold slot machines. Obviously it is not for all of us.
link to original post



I would think there is a point where it is better to advise people to avoid the game. I don't see anyone trying to work out a basic strategy for Pick Six because unless you find a person spinning by rote, no " smart" play can overcome the house edge.
I'd hope that a forum based on real math would absolutely advise its readers of the dangers of playing slots.
With casinos offering dozens of versions of BJ, this game seems based on appealing to people's greed and desire for bigger possible payouts. When I first read the rules a week or so ago, it seemed like a game designed to entrap suckers. The math seems to prove that.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.

  • Jump to: