Blackjack....Insurance Question...
Deano
Senior Member
Ok, I understand insurance when the dealer shows an ace and allows you to put half your bet down for insurance against them having Blackjack.
Senario..
Ok, lets say player A bets $200 on a hand and gets dealt a Blackjack. The dealer turns over an ace and offers insurance. Player A lays down insurance of $100. Dealer turns over a Blackjack.
What is the payout?
Thanks, (I never buy insurance but was thinking in this case it would be wise)?
Senario..
Ok, lets say player A bets $200 on a hand and gets dealt a Blackjack. The dealer turns over an ace and offers insurance. Player A lays down insurance of $100. Dealer turns over a Blackjack.
What is the payout?
Thanks, (I never buy insurance but was thinking in this case it would be wise)?
Comments
The net payout would be you win $200. It's the same as taking 'even money' on your BJ. However, unless you are counting, it's horribly -EV to ever take insurance.
From Wikipedia...
"Insurance is a poor bet for the player unless he is counting cards because, in an infinite deck, 4/13 of the cards have a value of ten (10, J, Q, or K) and 9/13 therefore are not, so the theoretical return for an infinite deck game is 4/13 * 2 * bet - 9/13 * bet = -1 /13 * bet, or -7.69%. In practice, the average house edge will be lower than this, because by eliminating even one non-ten card from the shoe (the dealer's ace), the dealer causes the proportion of the remaining cards that are valued at ten to be higher. Even so, the bet is generally to be avoided, as the house's average edge is still more than 7%."
Well said. It's just like hedging, the two bets should be judged on their own.
Thanks much, I agree insurance is never a good bet...I just wondered in this situation if you would be insuring some pay out but if you get paid either way then it still a bad bet.
I think you're still confused. If you DO NOT insure your BJ and the dealer also has BJ, it IS a push, you don't get paid, you just don't lose anything. Taking insurance is what gets you even money on your BJ instead of 3:2, but as has been pointed out, that's a very -EV play (unless you're counting).
Learn to count, take insurance when it's +EV, don't play online blackjack.
I almost included that, wasn't sure if they were still around as I never got into online casino bonus hustling.
Now we have a full answer. :thumbup1:
I appreciate all the explanations. Good info...just had a hand that I never had and got lucky.
Thanks guys,
come on Goats great advice if it was actually feasible. there may be 1% of people in the world who can even do basic counts on a 7 or 6 deck shoe which is what almost every casino in the world uses at this point so your advice on learning to count is pretty useless.
advice to just play perfect strategy would be better IMO as it obviously limits the house edge to the lowest amount possible.
I play a good amount of BJ at the casino and I have always followed the rules that I never take insurance and always take even money on a BJ when the dealer shows an ace.
Your statements demonstrate you don't know very much about counting, so telling me my advice is useless is just silly.
1. Counting is not hard to learn, not hard at all. It just takes basic math skills and practice.
2. The number of decks has very little impact on the difficulty of counting.
3. Agreed, basic strategy (what you referred to as 'perfect strategy') makes the house edge as low as you can make it without counting (or using other techniques to turn the edge in your favor). So if you follow BS, why in the world you insure a BJ? That's not BS; it's -EV.
All that said, there are several reasons not to bother learning how to count, but difficulty is not one of them. I could teach just about anyone with an average IQ to count in less than a week. Hell, I could explain hi-lo (a simple counting system) in 5 minutes, after that it just takes memorizing a chart of plays to know when to deviate from BS and some practice. The problem with counting these days is the condition of the games (lousy rules, catching heat from the pit, etc.) Your edge is also pretty damn small, it can be tedious, and there are far better forms of +EV gambling to engage in (poker, sports, etc.)
As far as memorizing basic strategy charts, that too, in theory is simple. But it can be quite difficult to remember all of the infrequently seen hands (i.e. soft totals) when quickly put on the spot, like when the whole table is waiting for you to decide whether you are going to hit, double, or stand on your soft 17. Then add on the increased complication of varying your strategy based on the count and you've surpassed the majority of players' abilities. And don't forget that all of this has to be done in an environment of numerous distractions, not to mention the need to conceal the fact that you are counting.
I just don't think many people have the mental capability and fortitude to practice card counting at that level.
My advice is to tackle the following steps in order and only proceed to the next step once you have mastered the previous step:
1) play perfect basic strategy (note: you have to know all of the rules to generate the correct basic strategy chart)
2) use a simple counting system to determine when to vary your bet size
3) adjust your basic strategy based on the count
4) use a more powerful counting system
And play only in Vegas and Mississippi/Louisiana where you can get 2 deck games with reasonably favorable rules. With just steps 1 and 2 above, you can get a small edge in player friendly houses.
Most casinos allow you to bring a basic strategy card to the table, just make sure it correlates with the game type you're playing(single deck, double deck, etc.). Also some casinos have different rules like surrender which can affect your basic strategy -proper basic strategy can easily be looked up online if you run a across a game with differing rules (and brought to the table).
A big benefit to card counting is being able up your bet in when you have an edge. This is challenging to do without being detected.
The strategy adjustments can be a big tip-off to an observant pit boss. There are some plays like splitting 10s which are a dead giveaway that you're counting cards so I'd avoid that.. Taking insurance when you should be taking insurance (I believe it's a true count of 3 or >) can also be a tipoff especially if you play at the same casino for a while and are never taking insurance. I'm not saying not to do it, just be mindful of how much your game is being clocked.
just like anything you can tell anyone the system and the rules involved in counting cards however the greater the number of decks the more information said person must be able to retain in order to succesfully count the cards and when you get into the 6 or 7 deck range that is a huge number of cards to be counting especially when the dealer is skilled and the cards come quick.
if counting cards was so easy as you seem to claim than i dont think the MIT blackjack team would have had such difficult testing and training in order to be a part of their team.
im going to sound like an ass for saying this but i have a hard time believing you actually have the ability to count cards due to the fact that you seem to think it is such and easy task.
there are thousands of books written in regards to the subject and if it was such an easy topic to teach and gave such great advantages over the casino either the casinos would remove BJ from their table games or hundreds of thousands of people would be leaving the casinos with huge amounts of money. these things just arnt true just like your claim that counting cards is an easy skill to learn.
I don't think you understand what counting cards is. It's not memorizing every card that is dealt, it's assigning a number (usually 1, -1, or 0) to a card and then adding the numbers together as each card is dealt. It's simple arithmetic that a child could do and the number of decks has very little to no impact on the act of counting itself.
This.
As I said in my original post, Kass, you've demonstrated you don't know very much about counting.
There's probably no sense in going back and forth with you, but others might find this interesting so I'll continue to respond for now. I can assure you I know how to count and it's not very difficult. As I briefly mentioned in an earlier post, making money from counting is difficult and not worth it for most people due to various reasons, but the actual ability to count is not one of those reasons.
You said:
there are thousands of books written in regards to the subject and if it was such an easy topic to teach and gave such great advantages over the casino either the casinos would remove BJ from their table games or hundreds of thousands of people would be leaving the casinos with huge amounts of money. these things just arnt true just like your claim that counting cards is an easy skill to learn.
First, your advantage is TINY, not great, and it often comes with huge variance. Second, Casinos don't have to remove BJ, they have taken other countermeasures over the years to thwart card counters. Some examples...
-they cut off more of the shoe
-they don't allow you to jump in mid-shoe
-they use continuous shuffling machines
-they offer bastardized single-deck where BJ pays 1:1 instead of 3:2
-they make the dealer hit soft-17
All of these changes mean very little to the average gambler, but they mean a lot to the card counter. Lastly, they can and will of course simply not let you play if they catch you counting.
-they don't allow you to jump in mid-shoe
-they use continuous shuffling machines
-they offer bastardized single-deck where BJ pays 1:1 instead of 3:2
-they make the dealer hit soft-17
not the ac casinos i play at, u an hop in mid shoe and they dont hit soft 17
Those are just examples of what some casinos do. Naturally it varies from casino to casino and can even vary from table to table within the same casino. Some casinos in AC actually do not allow mid-shoe entry at certain tables.
AC is interesting in that a card counter took the casinos to court back in the 70's I believe and the court ruled that the casinos were NOT allowed to bar you from playing for counting (they are in other states). However, AC casinos are allowed to flat bet you (order you to never vary your bet size) and/or shuffle early, which is basically the same thing since those measures render counting useless.
I actually got my gambling start in AC, backcounting 8-deckers for peanuts when I turned 21, mostly b/c I thought it was fun and cool to be able to gain an edge over the house. I was betting too small to bother hiding what I was doing, and I still remember when the Sands put in a 4-deck shoe upstairs (everything was 8-decks at the time). After playing for a bit and maybe winning a couple hundred dollars, I had one of their known counter-catchers come over and put his hand on the shoe and basically threaten to shuffle up if I didn't stop. It was pretty silly. I even asked him "so how much can I bet before you shuffle?" He didn't find it as amusing as I did and just shrugged and glared at me. It's amazing how annoyed they got over someone whose hourly expected win was minimum wage.
I clearly understand what and how to count otherwise i would not have given a shit to post in this thread however your response still clearly shows that you are full of shit.
the basic ideas for counting cards are easy like has been said but just like many things in life the idea is much easier than actually putting the skills into action.
you pick and choose what parts of a post to answer in order to keep that "know it all" persona that you use in every thread. yet you than self defecate in order to try and make yourself look like the person who is being wronged.
if like you continue to say counting cards was so easy why did the MIT blackjack team have such stringent testing and teaching before they ever let their students into the casinos and during this entire process have a huge dropout rate in regards to people who tried to join the team.
these people mind you are some of the quickest and sharpest math minds in the world at the time who were young and fresh and had the stamina for quick calculations and long hours.
There are plenty of reasons why it's hard to win money counting, which is why I also mentioned that it's not worth learning, it gives you a tiny edge with high variance, and there are far better forms of +EV gambling to spend your time on.
Why did the MIT team(s) train so hard? My guess is because they were dealing with large sums of money, much of which came from investors who had to trust the kids with their money, and because they had to learn about team play. Of course it depends somewhat on which of the several MIT teams you are referring to, but that's not super important. They certainly didn't spend hundreds of hours learning hi-lo. I'm sure much of their training had to do with cover, signaling teammates, etc. There are many logistical aspects of team play beyond actually learning how to count. But since I was never an MIT team member (though I did have a friend on a similar card counting team), I couldn't really tell you.
In your first post, you said my advice wasn't feasible and that only 1% of the population could learn basic counting, citing that 6+ decks are hard to count. This is just factually incorrect. Anyone of average intelligence can learn something like hi-lo and the number of decks makes almost no difference, You also said you always take even money when dealt a BJ vs. a dealer A, which is a -EV play, even if you're just using basic strategy. So even if you do know how to count and choose not to, at the very least I would expect you to follow basic strategy.
It doesn't matter to me what you do or don't know, but when I give advice I know to be sound and someone calls my advice 'not feasible' and supports that claim with factually incorrect statements and anecdotal evidence, of course I'm going to respond. I'm sorry if you feel I have a "know it all persona," I definitely do not know it all and have no problem admitting when I don't know about a subject. I do know enough about basic card counting, however, to stand by the statements I've made in this thread.