|
|
Reason #3 why the Wizard likes Bodog:
Excellent Odds
In my opinion many online casinos are too stingy when setting the odds on their games. They think they will make more money that way but I believe they are misguided, because when players lose too quickly it's not fun, and those players might not come back. Bodog is one of the few casinos that understands this. They offer generous odds to let you play longer and get you a better chance of winning. Among their generous offerings are Full-Pay Jacks or Better returning 99.54%, six other video poker games paying over 99%, single-zero roulette, two blackjack variants with a house edge under 0.2%, and my favorite, Pick 'em Poker, returning 99.95%! Kudos to Bodog for not being afraid to give their players a good gamble. (Visit Bodog) One click and you're in:
No popups, no download, no registration, no B.S., just the game. See important note about Bodog payouts & deposits. |
|
|
|
|
||
See important note about Bodog payouts & deposits. |
||
|
Home • What's New • Advice & Strategy • Ask the Wizard • Gambling online • Play for Fun |
||
I think I noticed an error in your splitting strategy with a back-betting player for blackjack. It states that you should only play one hand if the person you are
back-betting splits 10s vs. 8 (this is the selfish chart). But a hard
10 (no double) vs. 8 still has a positive expected value. — Mason from D.C.
The reason is that my table assumes the front-player will keep resplitting, if he can. That depresses the value of a single 10, because I assume the front-player will keep making the same mistake, if he can. I just added that condition to that page. January 13, 2008
First, great site. Second, sorry if this is in the wrong category, I did my best. Finally, Appendix 3B mentions a program used to come to all of the composition dependant strategy. I was wondering if this program was available for purchase or if you could just give me the formula used to determine what any given hand's optimal play would be given the removal of any number of other cards (like the perfect play calculator at gamblingtools.net). Thanks. – Chuck from Spring, TX
Thanks. My program is not very user friendly. I would recommend you use the blackjack calculator at gamblingtools.net, which will give you perfect advice for any situation and deck composition.
October 17, 2006
Should I use your basic strategy exceptions after splitting? - Mick
That is a good question. Personally I eyeball the borderline plays based on what has already been played, especially on the second hand to be played. If forced I would say using the exceptions is better than the basic strategy only. However the way the basic strategy exceptions were created was on the initial hand only, so they are not entirely accurate for splitting, because the deck composition will be a little different.
Dec. 26, 2005
Wizard, I have been reviewing your site in preparation for a trip to Vegas, because it is the best gambling site period. I was intrigued by the analysis from your December 4, 2001 column about when to stand with 16 vs. dealer 10. Being a math person myself I want to maximize the odds, but also understand the slim gain. Like many basic strategy players, I've always hit 16 vs. dealer 10 when I hold a 2, 3, 4, or 5. I'm curious, since this was brought to your attention, have you altered your play to gain that "one unit every 5 years", or have you stuck with just hitting the 16 every time? Thanks for all you do! - J Thanks for the kind words. If I'm playing basic strategy (as opposed to counting) I tend to stand if there is already a four or five in my hand. If it is a face-up game, with other players, I scan the table and just use my best judgment. Feb. 11, 2006 In your blackjack appendix 9 you indicate that the player has a positive expectation hitting 10 against a 10? For example with six decks and the player's 10 is composed of a 6 and 4 you state the player advantage is 0.026796. Won't both player and dealer hit until 17? This should give the dealer an advantage because the dealer will win if both bust. The reason is because the player's next card could be an ace but not the dealer's. I stated in the explanation to that appendix that I already assume the dealer does not have a blackjack. That is why the player has a slight edge in that situation, after the dealer peeks and confirms he does not have a blackjack. Dec. 20, 2004 Wong states in Professional Blackjack on page 23 the following, "If you get to twelve by 10-2 or 2-10 (where 10 means any 10-count card), and two or fewer decks are being used (or seven or fewer if the dealer stands on soft seventeen), you should hit." Is that correct? I can see it for a one or two deck game where composition-dependent strategy has a certain amount of value to it, but he's saying that you should hit a 10-2/2-10 when SEVEN decks are used (S17)! That doesn't sound right to me. Wong is referring to a player 12 against a dealer 4 and is quoting The Theory of Blackjack, page 176, by Peter Griffin. Yes, he is right. In a seven deck game the expected value by hitting is -0.210820 and standing is -0.211106, so hitting is higher. However with eight decks hitting is -0.2111161 and standing is -0.211100, so standing is higher. This is such a borderline play that the number of decks does make a difference between seven and eight. Here is an even better example. With A-4 against a 4 you should double all the way through 26 decks but hit with 27 or more. June 5, 2004 Thank you for your composition dependent basic strategy exceptions. However in The Theory of Blackjack Peter Griffin says the player should stand on 4+4+4+4 against an 8 in single deck. Is he wrong or did you overlook this play? Griffin is of course correct. The expected value of hitting is -0.552613 and standing is -0.535787. Some plays I don't list because they are either so obscure I didn't find them or so unlikely I didn't bother to list them. May 22, 2004 Appendix 3b: Composition dependent exceptions to double deck basic strategy where the dealer stands on soft 17. Do these apply to multiple (4, 6 and 8) deck games or is there NO variation from Basic Strategy on these? - Trevor from Northampton, United Kingdom No, these exceptions should not be used for 4-8 decks. There are a few exceptions in 4-8 deck games but they are so border line that it isn't worth the bother to learn them. An interesting rule of thumb for all numbers of decks is that with 16 vs. 10, where the 16 is composed of 3 or more cards, in general the odds favor standing. I like to use your blackjack appendix 3 to fine tune my play in online single deck blackjack. I see you have updated this page in December, and it seems like there are a few new moves in the 2-card section. I don't understand the advice to hit a 10 & 2 against a 4, and particularly against a 6 when the dealer is so likely to bust. And can it really be right to hit these, but not 10 & 2 against a 5?! I'd appreciate any insight you can shed on this. Is the key that the dealer can have an A in the hole with the 6? Hmm, that's plausible. Are these new strategies, and if so, what brought them about? - Rich Sweetman from Londonderry, New Hampshire Yes, I made a couple changes to the two-card list. I removed 9+3 Vs 3 and added 10+2 Vs 6. In a single deck game where the dealer stands on soft 17 and the player has 10+2 against a dealer 6 the expected value of hitting is -0.159436 and for standing is -0.160379. So you lose less on average by hitting. I hate to give sound bite answers to the basic strategy because there are numerous ways the cards can play out. The dealer's probability of busting is greater with the 6. However as you said the dealer is also more likely to get a 17 with a 6 showing than a 5. A 17 is not a good hand and motivates the player to hit and try to beat it. May 8, 2002 I have just read an article that says its proper basic strategy to stand on a multiple card 16, containing a 4 or 5, Vs. a dealer's 10 in a multiple deck (4 or more decks) blackjack game. I checked your web site and I could only find appendixes for multiple card hands in 1 and 2 deck games. Is this article correct? - Rodney B. Kantorski from Clarence, New York Yes! Good question, even I didn't know this. The fewer the decks and the greater the number of cards the more this is true. To test the most likely case to favor hitting, 8 decks and only 3 cards, I ran every possible situation through my combinatorial program. The following table displays the results.
The two right numbers in the bottom row show that the overall expected value for hitting is -0.540355 and for standing is -0.540293. So standing is the marginally better play. Following this rule will result in an extra unit once every 1117910 hands. It would take about 5 years playing blackjack 40 hours a week before this piece of advice saved the player one unit. Dec. 4, 2001 Hi, I just looked at your Microgaming blackjack basic strategy card. I notice that on 7,7 you advise that the player not hit against a 10. Why is this, and does this override the advice to hit on 14 against a 10? - Joseph Teo from Singapore This is the correct play in all my single deck blackjack strategies. The reason is that the probability of getting a third seven is only 2/49, or about 4.08%. Compare this to the probability in double deck of 6/101 = 5.94%. With the low hope of beating a dealer 20 it is better to hit, or surrender if you can. Yes, this does override my advice to hit 14 against a 10. Dec. 24, 2000
©1998-2008 Wizard Of Odds Consulting, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms & Conditions Contact Advertise About Us Links
The Wizard's other sites:
Wizard of Macau,
Sweat the Money,
Math Problems
The Wizard's recommends: Casino Meister, Online Casino City, Online Poker Room Reviews, (See more of the Wiz's picks) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ask the Wizard: