Reason #2 why the Wizard likes Bovada:

No-hassle practice games

Most online casinos spend more effort trying to separate you from your money than they do trying to give you a good experience. They have all kinds of popup windows, they usually make you download their software, and if they do offer play-in-browser games then you have to register an account before you can play. And if you register they start sending you emails trying to get you to deposit real money.

But Bovada is different. They have no popup windows at all, and their practice games play right in your browser, with no download, and no registration required. You don’t even have to give up your email address. It couldn’t be simpler: just one click and you’re playing the game.

I wish all online casinos showed this much respect for their players. Other casinos practically ask for your first born child to play for free. Meanwhile Bovada is patient and does not twist anybody’s arm to play for real money. You can play as long as you like for free with no obligation. The real-money games are available if that’s your preference, but if not, you can play the free practice games for as long as you like without hassle.

Visit Bovada

Ask the Wizard #21

Edition Date: Jul 30, 2000

I’m a dealer at Casino Niagara and want to know what the odds of a dealer making a hand are when the up card is a 5. It seems to me and the other dealers that we all agree that we make a hand more times than not, and usually a good one at that. Also, what are the odds of a dealer having a blackjack with an ace as an up card?
— John from Niagara Falls, Canada

You’re right, it is more likely the dealer will make a pat hand. From my blackjack appendix 2 the following are the probabilities of the dealer’s final hand given a 5 as an up card. This assumes the dealer stands on a soft 17, which I believe is what you do.

17: 12.23%
18: 12.23%
19: 11.77%
20: 11.31%
21: 10.82%
bust: 41.64%

Assuming 8 decks there are 16*8=128 10 point cards in the deck. Eliminating the ace there are 52*8-1=415 possible cards under the ace. Thus the odds of a blackjack are 128/415 = 30.84%.

I have been playing lotteries and sweepstakes now for two months straight, will I ever hit a jackpot? and when?
— Mavis from Mattapan, U.S.

The short answer is no, you will never win. The odds of winning the usual 6/49 lottery are 1 in 13,983,816. You would have to play the game ln(.5)/ln(1-1/combin(49,6)) = 9,692,842 times to have a 50/50 chance of winning at least once. Assuming you bought 100 lottery tickets a day this would take 265.6 years. To have a 90% chance of winning it would take 882.2 years.

I’ve had this argument with several friends and I hope you can help. They say horse racing is a bad bet because of the "takeout". It’s true the track has a takeout that varies from about 16% to 30%, depending on the type of wager, but my contention is that there is no factually correct way to determine a horses "true odds". If you figure a horse has a 50% chance of winning, but the odds are 3-1, isn’t that a good bet, no matter what the takeout is ? I know some handicappers that set their own odds and only bet when they feel the odds are in their favor, and some do well.
— Kevin from Van Nuys, California

A good bet is a good bet, regardless of whom it is against. However you can’t ignore the high house cut at the track. You also can never be sure of what the true odds are at the track. If I thought a horse had a 50% chance of winning but paid 3:1 then I would doubt by own judgement that the horse really had a 50% chance of winning. Along the same lines when choosing a mutual fund you should consider not only the historic rate of return but also how much is charged in commissions.

I have read a couple of articles about ’Parrando’s Paradox’. Is there a way that you could explain what is going on as it is extremely counter-intuitive that two losing games played in a certain sequence could add up to a winner - I thought I understood the mathematics of gambling / probability! I can see that there is a subtle link between games A & B as game B is dependent on capital that is affected by game A; I am unable to carry the logic any further. Does Parrando’s Paradox have any implications for negative expectation casino gamblers? I doubt it but would love to hear it from someone with a greater understanding.
— Gavin from Burt St Edmunds, England

Parrando’s Paradox states that two suboptimal games of chance can show a long term gain if played alternately. However the games can not be independent of each other, which eliminates any comparison to casino games. To learn more there is a New York Times article here: http://oll.temple.edu/economics/Econ_92/Parrando/012500sci-statistics-paradox.html.

Mike, On my last trip to Vegas, a dealer I’ve come to know said he was "toying with the idea" of standing on a 16 against a dealer’s 7 because only 5 of the 8 cards give the dealer an automatic win. How does this strategy play out?
— Chris from Gaithersburg, Maryland

This would be a bad play. For example my blackjack appendix 9B shows the return both ways by playing 10 and 6 cards against a dealer 7. Hitting has an expected loss of 39.6% of the bet. However standing has an expected loss of 47.89%. There is no easy explanation I can give why hitting is better. You have to consider everything that can happen, weight it by its probability, and take the sum. Overall hitting is much better.

What is your opinion of the continuous shuffle machines now being used at the Blackjack tables in Las Vegas? Do these machines give the house more of and edge even when a person is using basic strategy?
— John from London, Canada

For those who don’t understand what you’re asking there are new machines that take the blackjack discards and place them randomly back in the deck after each hand. If you are using basic strategy it shouldn’t matter on an expected loss per hand basis. It is my understanding that they do provide an honest random shuffle. However the shuffling machine allows the dealer to waste less time shuffling and spend more time dealing. This means you will spend more time playing, and thus more time for the house edge to grind you down. Personally I don’t like automatic shufflers. A dealer shuffle provides a break in the action and a chance to engage in conversation.


Home Gambling Info Odds Gambling Online Ask the Wizard Play for Fun Blog Radio Video
Reason #2 why the Wizard likes Bovada: No-hassle practice games Most online casinos spend more effort trying to separate you from your money than they do trying to give you a good experience. They have all kinds of popup windows, they usually make you download their software, and if they do offer play-in-browser games then you have to register an account before you can play. And if you register they start sending you emails trying to get you to deposit real money. But Bovada is different. They have no popup windows at all, and their practice games play right in your browser, with no download, and no registration required. You don’t even have to give up your email address. It couldn’t be simpler: just one click and you’re playing the game. I wish all online casinos showed this much respect for their players. Other casinos practically ask for your first born child to play for free. Meanwhile Bovada is patient and does not twist anybody’s arm to play for real money. You can play as long as you like for free with no obligation. The real-money games are available if that’s your preference, but if not, you can play the free practice games for as long as you like without hassle. Visit Bovada	Ask the Wizard #21 Edition Date: Jul 30, 2000 I’m a dealer at Casino Niagara and want to know what the odds of a dealer making a hand are when the up card is a 5. It seems to me and the other dealers that we all agree that we make a hand more times than not, and usually a good one at that. Also, what are the odds of a dealer having a blackjack with an ace as an up card? — John from Niagara Falls, Canada You’re right, it is more likely the dealer will make a pat hand. From my blackjack appendix 2 the following are the probabilities of the dealer’s final hand given a 5 as an up card. This assumes the dealer stands on a soft 17, which I believe is what you do. 17: 12.23% 18: 12.23% 19: 11.77% 20: 11.31% 21: 10.82% bust: 41.64% Assuming 8 decks there are 168=128 10 point cards in the deck. Eliminating the ace there are 528-1=415 possible cards under the ace. Thus the odds of a blackjack are 128/415 = 30.84%. I have been playing lotteries and sweepstakes now for two months straight, will I ever hit a jackpot? and when? — Mavis from Mattapan, U.S. The short answer is no, you will never win. The odds of winning the usual 6/49 lottery are 1 in 13,983,816. You would have to play the game ln(.5)/ln(1-1/combin(49,6)) = 9,692,842 times to have a 50/50 chance of winning at least once. Assuming you bought 100 lottery tickets a day this would take 265.6 years. To have a 90% chance of winning it would take 882.2 years. I’ve had this argument with several friends and I hope you can help. They say horse racing is a bad bet because of the "takeout". It’s true the track has a takeout that varies from about 16% to 30%, depending on the type of wager, but my contention is that there is no factually correct way to determine a horses "true odds". If you figure a horse has a 50% chance of winning, but the odds are 3-1, isn’t that a good bet, no matter what the takeout is ? I know some handicappers that set their own odds and only bet when they feel the odds are in their favor, and some do well. — Kevin from Van Nuys, California A good bet is a good bet, regardless of whom it is against. However you can’t ignore the high house cut at the track. You also can never be sure of what the true odds are at the track. If I thought a horse had a 50% chance of winning but paid 3:1 then I would doubt by own judgement that the horse really had a 50% chance of winning. Along the same lines when choosing a mutual fund you should consider not only the historic rate of return but also how much is charged in commissions. I have read a couple of articles about ’Parrando’s Paradox’. Is there a way that you could explain what is going on as it is extremely counter-intuitive that two losing games played in a certain sequence could add up to a winner - I thought I understood the mathematics of gambling / probability! I can see that there is a subtle link between games A & B as game B is dependent on capital that is affected by game A; I am unable to carry the logic any further. Does Parrando’s Paradox have any implications for negative expectation casino gamblers? I doubt it but would love to hear it from someone with a greater understanding. — Gavin from Burt St Edmunds, England Parrando’s Paradox states that two suboptimal games of chance can show a long term gain if played alternately. However the games can not be independent of each other, which eliminates any comparison to casino games. To learn more there is a New York Times article here: http://oll.temple.edu/economics/Econ_92/Parrando/012500sci-statistics-paradox.html. Mike, On my last trip to Vegas, a dealer I’ve come to know said he was "toying with the idea" of standing on a 16 against a dealer’s 7 because only 5 of the 8 cards give the dealer an automatic win. How does this strategy play out? — Chris from Gaithersburg, Maryland This would be a bad play. For example my blackjack appendix 9B shows the return both ways by playing 10 and 6 cards against a dealer 7. Hitting has an expected loss of 39.6% of the bet. However standing has an expected loss of 47.89%. There is no easy explanation I can give why hitting is better. You have to consider everything that can happen, weight it by its probability, and take the sum. Overall hitting is much better. What is your opinion of the continuous shuffle machines now being used at the Blackjack tables in Las Vegas? Do these machines give the house more of and edge even when a person is using basic strategy? — John from London, Canada For those who don’t understand what you’re asking there are new machines that take the blackjack discards and place them randomly back in the deck after each hand. If you are using basic strategy it shouldn’t matter on an expected loss per hand basis. It is my understanding that they do provide an honest random shuffle. However the shuffling machine allows the dealer to waste less time shuffling and spend more time dealing. This means you will spend more time playing, and thus more time for the house edge to grind you down. Personally I don’t like automatic shufflers. A dealer shuffle provides a break in the action and a chance to engage in conversation.
Copyright © 1998-2012 Wizard of Odds Consulting, Inc. All rights reserved. • About \| Privacy & Terms \| Site Map \| Links \| Contact The Wizard’s other sites: Wizard of Vegas \| Wizard of Macau \| Math Problems • Recommended: Vegas Click

Ask the Wizard #21

I have been playing lotteries and sweepstakes now for two months straight, will I ever hit a jackpot? and when? — Mavis from Mattapan, U.S.

Mike, On my last trip to Vegas, a dealer I’ve come to know said he was "toying with the idea" of standing on a 16 against a dealer’s 7 because only 5 of the 8 cards give the dealer an automatic win. How does this strategy play out? — Chris from Gaithersburg, Maryland

What is your opinion of the continuous shuffle machines now being used at the Blackjack tables in Las Vegas? Do these machines give the house more of and edge even when a person is using basic strategy? — John from London, Canada

I have been playing lotteries and sweepstakes now for two months straight, will I ever hit a jackpot? and when?
— Mavis from Mattapan, U.S.

Mike, On my last trip to Vegas, a dealer I’ve come to know said he was "toying with the idea" of standing on a 16 against a dealer’s 7 because only 5 of the 8 cards give the dealer an automatic win. How does this strategy play out?
— Chris from Gaithersburg, Maryland

What is your opinion of the continuous shuffle machines now being used at the Blackjack tables in Las Vegas? Do these machines give the house more of and edge even when a person is using basic strategy?
— John from London, Canada