Blackjack probability question for BJ players

[dave_r]

Clayman,

Just curious if you ever resolved your differences with the Wiz on his "BJ Switch" strategy. I know you were communicating on a regular basis with Geoff Hall, the games inventor, and am curious if the Wiz now agrees or disagrees.

Also, I'm glad we both play Spanish 21 regularly. I have never run into another player anywhere who hits on a 3 (or more) card hard 17 vs dealers ACE. I do it all the time. Every dealer I run into seems to think I've lost my mind. One time I made this play with a $500 bet on the table and got a six card 21, which payed 2-1. I had to argue with the dealer who payed me wrong 3 times, and then got furious with me for calling the supervisor.

Guess who got the last laugh.

 

[DrNo888]

Seems a bit unusual you could lose 2 200-unit bankrolls consecutively in 3600+ hands or less in each account of wagering. I'd think your risk of ruin would be less than 1% in each case. Way less with fewer hands.

Did you change the auto-play table appropriately?

How many hands did you actually play on each account?

Well, I didnt make the changes since I didnt know about them. But I doubt those changes would have save me.

Anyways, just deposited into the Phoenician for the reload. With the changes, the bonus account got as low as $128 before coming back up to $140 after the WR. Was able to transfer $50 after some wins at baccarat before busting out. Working on real account now so I can cashout. Hopefully, with a profit.

 

[pokeraddict]

Going back to this issue

In one session I played 100 hands, the dealer had 18 blackjacks, I had 4 so I did a more detailed session which is below

On 12-11 around 2pm ET I played 148 hands at $2 each.

The dealer had 8 BJ's I had 4
The dealer was dealt 20 24 times, I was dealt 20 13 times

The dealer busted 16 11 of 18 times
I busted 16 6 of 9 times

The dealer busted 15 2 of 10 times
I busted 15 5 of 8 times

The dealer busted 14 4 of 17 times
I busted 14 1 of 9 times

The dealer busted 13 9 of 14 times
I busted 13 3 of 8 times

The dealer busted 12 3 of 15 times
I busted 12 4 of 15 times

If either of us hit a number and did not bust, I would count the number in the next figure if they hit again. For example if I hit 12 and did not bust, and then busted 16 I would mark 12 no bust, 16 bust.

I lost 25 units in 148 hands my W/L/P was 54/81/13

Do I have enough hands for anything useful or do i need more?

The number of dealer blackjacks is baffling here. In my 6 tracked session my closest to his number was the 8-4. In my others he has beat me by at least 4 times. Time to send an email to their casino department?

 

[vinylweatherman]

MG Blackjack

I have done a table analysis of Aztec Riches Blackjack, using the amended strategy table. MG streakinness can cause a 40x level stake variance over only 200-400 hands, slightly on the down side due to the inevitable house edge. I have lost out at 32 Red on this due to the 2 min stake. At 50c, you should stand to lose $20 of your $100 quickly if you hit a bad patch. I once noted a loss of 50x level stake, but did not chart it. I analysed 2000 hands in this experiment, taking readings every 100 at first, then 3 sessions of 500. The stats tables showed nothing odd, so it must be how dealer and player hands interact, rather than how the cards are dealt for the hands. Often at MG I find dealer repeatedly pushes my good hands with his good ones, and beats them with his best, dealers bad hands coincide with my bad hands, so dealer wins or pushes on a few of these too. In a streak payoff, this pattern reverses, player bad hands are won because the dealer repeatedly busts 12s and 13s, and the player gets nice double down opportunities, like 10 or 11 versus dealer 5 or 6, and seems to get the 10 on the double down too!
Incidentally, why does doubling down on 10 or 11 in MG spanish keep giving me 4s? I know 10s are removed, but didn't think they were replaced with 4s

 

[Clayman]

Clayman, Just curious if you ever resolved your differences with the Wiz on his "BJ Switch" strategy. I know you were communicating on a regular basis with Geoff Hall, the games inventor, and am curious if the Wiz now agrees or disagrees.

Sorry for the delay in replying. I was away for a week and there sure is alot of reading to catch up on here!

It took a while but I'm happy to say all BJSwitch players who follow the posted Wiz BS table now enjoy a reduction of -0.021% from -0.083% to -0.062% in HA compared with his previously published BS table. The Wiz did indeed accept the changes to the 6 marginal BS plays that were originally in error due to his infinite-deck assumption versus the 6 decks actually being used in the Playtech game. I think he made the changes somewhere around April of 2004.

However, following the Play/Switch decisions based on his EV tables still costs the player -0.008% making the HA of the game -0.062% vs a perfect-play scenario of -0.054%.