Reducing Variance betting strategy
Im new to the site. I tried reading other threads as well as some questions on wizardofodds.com but couldnt quite find the answer i was looking for so pardon me in advance if im repeating a question.
I had a two-part question regarding attempts to reduce variance in order to clear an online casino bonus at Blackjack with a rollover requirement. My first assumption is that this is a good idea to begin with. I am assuming that although normally attempting to reduce variance may not be the best idea in the long run as id assume this would only help bring results closer to the house edge, my thinking is that clearing say a 100% bonus with a 40x rollover requirement more than cancels that effect and is worth the effort.
The game is multiple deck continuous shuffle blackjack where dealer hits on soft 17.
Assuming that playing multiple spots (in this case up to three) is a good tool in reducing variance (feel free to correct me if wrong), what would be the ideal way of spreading the chips between your three spots in order to minimize variance? For example, assume 30$ bet total per hand. Would it be better to bet 10 on each of the three spots or would another combination be better? For example 5-10-15, or 7.5-15-7.5?
Second part of the question: In this goal of reducing variance to clear a sizable bonus, would it make sense to make certain calls that are against what the book would suggest? Is the gain in potentially reducing variance worth making "the wrong call" on marginal hands? For example say we get three hard 16s versus the dealer's 10. One would normally assume the correct move to be to hit each spot assuming no surrender. Would it be an OK call, and furthermore a "right" call, NOT to hit one of them to sort of "self insure"? I have no idea if there is merit in this thought but although i know that i should hit after lets say busting on the two first hands, part of me wants to justify standing to maybe let the dealer bust even if i know this is against the odds.
Thoughts?
Thanks guys,
Dante
Quote: DanteHey guys,
Im new to the site. I tried reading other threads as well as some questions on wizardofodds.com but couldnt quite find the answer i was looking for so pardon me in advance if im repeating a question.
I had a two-part question regarding attempts to reduce variance in order to clear an online casino bonus at Blackjack with a rollover requirement. My first assumption is that this is a good idea to begin with. I am assuming that although normally attempting to reduce variance may not be the best idea in the long run as id assume this would only help bring results closer to the house edge, my thinking is that clearing say a 100% bonus with a 40x rollover requirement more than cancels that effect and is worth the effort.
The game is multiple deck continuous shuffle blackjack where dealer hits on soft 17.
Assuming that playing multiple spots (in this case up to three) is a good tool in reducing variance (feel free to correct me if wrong), what would be the ideal way of spreading the chips between your three spots in order to minimize variance? For example, assume 30$ bet total per hand. Would it be better to bet 10 on each of the three spots or would another combination be better? For example 5-10-15, or 7.5-15-7.5?
Second part of the question: In this goal of reducing variance to clear a sizable bonus, would it make sense to make certain calls that are against what the book would suggest? Is the gain in potentially reducing variance worth making "the wrong call" on marginal hands? For example say we get three hard 16s versus the dealer's 10. One would normally assume the correct move to be to hit each spot assuming no surrender. Would it be an OK call, and furthermore a "right" call, NOT to hit one of them to sort of "self insure"? I have no idea if there is merit in this thought but although i know that i should hit after lets say busting on the two first hands, part of me wants to justify standing to maybe let the dealer bust even if i know this is against the odds.
Thoughts?
Thanks guys,
Dante
It has not been my personal experience that it's worth doing any of the rollover bonuses I've had. I've only tried about 20 of them in 4 casinos, most at Bovada, but I think the rollovers compound the HE (which is what they're designed to do) past the point of profitability. I have been ahead nicely well into it several times, but have to stay too long because of the rollover, and the BR drains away.
It's also kind of irritating that the rollover requirement is against the total of your cash deposit and your match bonus, so (for example) if you deposit $200 and get it matched, you actually have to go $100K coin-in to complete the requirement, not $50K. However, you do start with a $400 bankroll, so I guess it's just how I'm looking at it.
I would also say that if you've found someplace that will allow you to play a decent BJ game that only makes you rollover 25x, you're doing very well (again keeping in mind that it's going to be against the bonus+cash, so kind of twice as much as you think). All the places I've played, BJ is at least 40x, and most are 50-80x. You might want to double-check your rollover requirements, because 25x is more typically on slots, not good table games.
I've been happier with simply playing for cash, and to hell with the rollover. If I get up enough money to go through the hassle of withdrawing it, I'd rather not have to survive a rollover play-off qualification.
