Quote:charliepatrickI created a little program that takes into account a multiplied pay-out for winning but not for winning any bonus for the next hand. I think, perhaps falsely, that I assumed that when doubling both the parts are paid the multiple so I might need to revisit that

It does multiply both hands from a split or any double. I'm unsure how blackjacks get multiplied.

Quote:

Splitting like crazy seems to be the way, and I think hitting 14-17

We really need to aspire to catch big multipliers. 4-17 always seem to be x2 but 20 and 21 can be x10 or x12. Worth getting your hand up to 20 or 21 if possible.

Where you already have a good multiplier, favour doubling or splitting. I did well even splitting 5s against a six

Quote:charliepatrickThe sole purpose of this post is to say it looks like it might be worth splitting when you have a multiplier coming in. I've not checked the results (except the no effect strategy matches regular BJ).

I created a little program that takes into account a multiplied pay-out for winning but not for winning any bonus for the next hand. I think, perhaps falsely, that I assumed that when doubling both the parts are paid the multiple so I might need to revisit that, but the split ignored the effect of knowing the other hand or allowing subsequent doubling.

NOTE: This ignores the effect of winning and getting a multiplier for the next hand.

Ace : D 11-10; d s18; Split A234 6789

Two : D 12-8; d s20-s13; Split A23 6789X

Three: D 12-7 then as above

Four: D 12-6 then as above

Five: D 12-5 then as above

Six: as five

Seven: D 13-8; d s19-s13; Split A234 6789X

Eight: D 11-9: d s18-s14; Split A234 6789

Nine: D 11-9; d s18-s16; as above

Ten: D 11-10; d s18; Split A23 789

link to original post

Using the infinite-deck model, I get your strategy exactly. (This is the strategy for a multiplier of 2.)

This strategy maximizes the EV of the present hand, and it ignores the possible multipliers on subsequent hands, as you pointed out.

Since this strategy ignores the effects of multipliers on the following hand, the true strategies for 18, 19, and 20 are probably quite different from it.

Edit: I also get soft double 21 vs 5 and 6 assuming blackjack pays only 1 times instead of 3/2 times the multiplier. But of course, the subsequent multiplier from standing on BJ would surely override this.

Thanks for confirming my idea. I also got d s21 but I suspect you're not allowed to double or hit any 21s. (I asked my local once where it was correct to split 10s and double).Quote:ChesterDog[Edit: I also get soft double 21 vs 5 and 6 assuming blackjack pays only 1 times instead of 3/2 times the multiplier. But of course, the subsequent multiplier from standing on BJ would surely override this.

link to original post

They won't let you hit or double soft 21.Quote:charliepatrickThanks for confirming my idea. I also got d s21 but I suspect you're not allowed to double or hit any 21s. (I asked my local once where it was correct to split 10s and double).Quote:ChesterDog[Edit: I also get soft double 21 vs 5 and 6 assuming blackjack pays only 1 times instead of 3/2 times the multiplier. But of course, the subsequent multiplier from standing on BJ would surely override this.

link to original post

link to original post

1 | -0.007 920 921 |

2 | 0.499 344 556 |

3 | 1.089 821 499 |

4 | 1.724 816 958 |

5 | 2.374 416 059 |

6 | 3.031 364 592 |

8 | 4.351 834 756 |

10 | 5.678 450 178 |

12 | 7.005 559 030 |

15 | 8.996 807 367 |

25 | 15.638 537 737 |

Towards the end (25x) you Split A234 6789X (except double 44vs6 and 7), and Double 17- (except 16- vs 5 and 6).

With lower multipliers you stop doubling on 6 or less vs good Dealer's cards,

By 3x and 2x you're not doubling quite so madly, but still splitting 10s (except vs A,9,10)

Of course your EV with no multiplier is actually -1.008, or similar, plus the value of any value carried forward.

When you have an active multiplier (particularly a large multiplier), you want to make deviations from basic strategy that increase your chance of winning, with a lesser incentives to gain a push. On Stand/hits, one might stand a little more often.

When you don't have an active multiplier, your deviations from active strategy should be incentivized by the desire to gain a higher multiplier. So, hitting more often.

2. I do agree with the poster (OnceDear?) who said an opinion that no amount of strategy deviations will make up for an 18% house edge. Unless the multipliers are higher than implied by the game video, I don't see how this game can have a house edge under 10%. Unless we've missed something fundamental: something like, maybe, doubling down on hard 12 and13 vs 2-6 whenever you have a high multiplier ???

(a) the exact multipliers for the specific hand might affect some of the decisions

(b) when splitting you know what the first hand did - in this case I assume the first hand plays as if there wasn't a second hand, and the second plays without regard to any carry over. (If running a simulation then one might assume the first hand acts as per this, but the second hand plays differently unless the first hand busted.)

These above two factors might also reduce the calculated House Edge (from about 6%).

Thus please take this with a pinch of salt at this stage, but I do get you hit and split more often than usual and double less. Also note when you hit soft 18.

Ace | H17 noD | A 8 9 | st s18 |

2 | H16 D11,10 | A 2 3 7 8 9 | h s18 |

3 | H16 D11,10 | A 2 3 7 8 9 | h s18 |

4 | H16 D11,10 | A 2 3 6 7 8 9 | h s18 d s18 |

5 | H16 D11,10 | A 2 3 6 7 8 9 | h s18 d s18 |

6 | H16 D11,10 | A 2 3 6 7 8 9 | h s18 d s18,s17 |

7 | H17 noD | A 2 3 7 8 9 | st s18 |

8 | H17 noD | A 2 3 7 8 9 | h s18 |

9 | H17 noD | A 8 9 | h s18 |

10 | H17 noD | A 8 9 | st s18 |

Quote:gordonm8881. I have a strategy thought, namely that it might prove wise to only place the Lightning Bet on hands where you do not have a multiplier.

When you have an active multiplier (particularly a large multiplier), you want to make deviations from basic strategy that increase your chance of winning, with a lesser incentives to gain a push. On Stand/hits, one might stand a little more often.

(edited for relevance)

link to original post

AFAIK, the lightning bet is not optional. It's not a side bet, it's built into the game.

Quote:charliepatrickI'm not totally convinced, so haven't gone into too much detail why my EV is slightly different but it's in the right ballpark, as I get the following EVs (ignoring the value of outgoing multipliers).

1 -0.007 920 921 2 0.499 344 556 3 1.089 821 499 4 1.724 816 958 5 2.374 416 059 6 3.031 364 592 8 4.351 834 756 10 5.678 450 178 12 7.005 559 030 15 8.996 807 367 25 15.638 537 737

Towards the end (25x) you Split A234 6789X (except double 44vs6 and 7), and Double 17- (except 16- vs 5 and 6).

With lower multipliers you stop doubling on 6 or less vs good Dealer's cards,

By 3x and 2x you're not doubling quite so madly, but still splitting 10s (except vs A,9,10)

Of course your EV with no multiplier is actually -1.008, or similar, plus the value of any value carried forward.

link to original post

At casinobloke.com https://www.casinobloke.com/live-dealer/evolution-lightning-blackjack-live/ it says the payout is capped at 36.5:1. Do you think this is correct, and it is included in your EV calculation and basic strategy for doubles and splits when the multiplier is 20 or 25?

But the lightning bet is mandatory. and you don't see the multipliers till after you paid!Quote:gordonm8881. I have a strategy thought, namely that it might prove wise to only place the Lightning Bet on hands where you do not have a multiplier.

When you have an active multiplier (particularly a large multiplier), you want to make deviations from basic strategy that increase your chance of winning, with a lesser incentives to gain a push. On Stand/hits, one might stand a little more often.

When you don't have an active multiplier, your deviations from active strategy should be incentivized by the desire to gain a higher multiplier. So, hitting more often.

link to original post