I was playing some blackjack tonight. I am pleased to report I won.
My question is this; at least superficially, it seems that unless I’m stupid, my ROI should be positive, since I can do things the dealer cannot, like doubling down and splitting in advantageous situations.
So what, in fact, are my odds? Let us assume the following house rules and conditions:
It’s multi-hand dealing with perfect shuffling and I cannot count cards, so the draws are always random.
Aside from being unable to count cards, in every situation I will always make the statistically optimal, profit-maximizing play based on available information.
The dealer must draw on 16 and below and stand on ANY 17, hard or soft.
Insurance is available if the dealer shows an ace.
No surrendering. No other side bets.
Blackjack pays 3 to 2. A blackjack pushes a dealer blackjack if the dealer has a 10 showing and reveals an ace; if the dealer shows an ace up I must take even money or risk losing the hand.
You can double down, once, on first draw. If you double down on a split ace you get just one card, but can continue drawing on any other hand.
You can split up to playing 4 hands except aces, which can only be split once.
I’m far from a BJ expert, and I’m sure one will come along shortly, but the big advantage the house has is that you can go bust before they even have to bother drawing a card.
Yep. If hands where you bust and the dealer busts were counted as ties, you’d have the advantage. Instead, if you bust, you lose, regardless of what eventually happens to the dealer’s hand.
This is essentially correct. The big player disadvantage is that they are forced (by game rules) to act first. And a bust means game over.
It’s not so bad. Playing “perfect”, with no card counting - the house has a small edge. It’s only a few percentage points, so blackjack is actually one of the better casino games if you go in with proper expectations. Expectations being:
[ul]
[li]Since the house has the edge, I’ll probably lose money[/li][li]But I’m getting free drinks while I play![/li][li]Chatting with the players and dealer while I play is entertainment value![/li][li]Once in a while I’ll just be lucky and end “up” for the night[/li][/ul]
Yeah, you’re not going to make money in the long run. But it’s still a fun game, and short term swings can make a night in Vegas fun and profitable. But yeah, you should go in expecting to come out with less than you entered with.
At least in most Vegas casinos, a tie means a push. You win nothing and lose nothing.
“Lose on a push” - that would be devastating to the player’s odds. I would never play in a casino with that rule, but I’ve never played in one that had it. And I’ve been to a fair number.
The odds depend on the house rules, which for non-complex players always favor the house. Counting how many 10s have been played and betting accordingly can increase the player odds. You will be asked to play something other than blackjack when it becomes apparent that you are doing this.
There are books on blackjack with tables describing the correct play to make in any given situation, depending on the most common variations of house rules. Those books will have a better description of the numerical odds. They are available at most book stores.
Even if you can memorize the entire chart for your house rules, the house still has an advantage unless you count. It is not too difficult to memorize the entire chart. The casinos love it when you have these books, unless you count cards.
Tied hands are money stand-offs with one exception: If both hands bust, dealer wins. This dealer advantage makes up for all the several player advantages.
The House advantage is much smaller than a “few percent.” IIRC, Atlantic City casinos used to allow “early surrender” and other generally favorable rules. If they’d also used a single-deck, I think the player would have had a very tiny advantage with those rules even without counting!
Casino reaction to card counters varies greatly from one casino to another, but it isn’t generally correct to say they automatically barred counters. To the contrary, since many would-be counters defeat themselves due to errors, hunches, etc., card-counting may be a net plus for casino profits! I’ve played in casinos which would bar me (or adopt a tactic like dealing-down) almost as soon as I walked in the door. Other casinos seemed wholly disinterested given my smallish bets. Harrah’s club assigned a floorman to observe my play for 20 minutes before asking me not to play. (I’m sure there are many other blackjack players who’ve been barred from play at all of Harrah’s Nevada casinos, but since I also tagged along on a very strange mission involving Harrah’s IBM mainframe, I may be the only one who’s also been barred from their computer room! )
Disclaimer: My info is very out-of-date. Except for two visits to Cambodian casinos I’ve not even played blackjack this millenium. (I doubt if I ever will play seriously again. Even if my mental acuity and youthful ambition were what they used to be, I’d need laser treatment on at least one eye before my visual acuity would be enough just to read cards at a glance.)
ETA: I read that some LV casinos now pay only 6-5 on Blackjack. That is hugely bad for player.
This only applies for single deck. So, the casinos will advertise single deck blackjack but put the 6:5 in small print.
There are some other variations where you’ll see 7-5 or even money. Needless to say, none of these are ‘good’ deals, but they’re also usually combined with low stakes (sometimes under $1/bet).
This rule is hard to find at the places I’ve played. In Tunica or on the Gulf Coast, dealers hit a soft 17. Only place I’ve played where they stand on a soft 17 is an Indian casino. Dunno about Vegas or other areas.
At all casinos around here (Ontario) the dealer must stand on a soft 17. Maybe not on Spanish 21, I don’t remember, but at regular blackjack tables there’s no dealer draw on a soft 17.
Last night a (very sexy) woman was deciding whether or not to hit her hand on soft 17 against a dealer’s ten and the dealer looked right at her and said “Ma’am, ALWAYS hit on soft 17 against my ten.” I’m surprised he was allowed to say that, though in fairness the entire table was saying the same thing.
I am pretty sure you will find both in Vegas but that standing on soft 17 is more common.
Surprised how? I’ve always found dealers to be very helpful in figuring the odds. They usually will couch the advice in the form of “The Book says…” rather than “Do this…” but the effect is the same. They want you to win. The more you win, the more the house rakes in in the long run.
There are web sites which allow you to enter the rules variations and spit out the house advantage. From what you posted the house advantage should be around .45%. Certainly less than 1% by any interpretation of the rules you posted.
You were up against a house edge of between 1/2 and a whole percent. depending on the number of decks in the shoe or whethere there was a continuous shuffle machine. For calculating odds on any blackjack game, I heartily recommend wizardofodds.com, run by a statistician without compare.
notfrommensa, dealer hitting soft 17 is bad for the player, IIRC it adds about 1/4 percent to the house edge.
I can’t speak to exactly what hitting on a soft 17 does to the odds, but the general reasoning behind it is this. It’s basically a risk free move for you to hit. If the dealer is showing a 10 odds are that he’s going to end up with a higher hand than 17, so you’d want to improve your hand. If the dealer is showing a low card he’s probably going to bust anyway, but in case he doesn’t it doesnt hurt to take a riskless shot at improving your hand.
This is my experience too–dealers are helpful when players are unsure how to play the cards that have been dealt. In my local casino, the pit boss will even give the player a small card containing basic four-deck strategy; and if the new or unsure player doesn’t ask for one, the dealer will ask the boss to give the player one.
I was surprised in that he did not advise or couch his statement in “the book says…” or some such thing.
That doesn’t really make any sense, but in any case, I know a few dealers and they really aren’t rooting for the casino. They make the same wage whether a given player wins or loses.
That place would get shut down and investigated by the Gaming Control in Vegas, the agency which invokes more fear and has more authority than the Metropolitan Police Department. Here in Vegas, we know that the reputation of our gambling establishments is critical to tourism, and we would literally die as a city if that reputation was lost.
)