Dear Mark,
I have noticed a trend in some casinos where the payoffs for blackjack were
6:5 instead of the customary 3:2. It didn't seem to matter whether it was
single, double deck or shoe; it was 6:5 for a blackjack in those places. Is
this a trend? And how does this affect the overall dealer advantage? Hal M.
When I first started this column eight years ago, I advised players to play
by preference on single deck blackjack games. Why? Because perfect basic strategy
on a single deck game, shrinks the house edge to a meager 0.15%. Most casinos
back then had single deck 3:2 games. But today, they are rarities, replaced
by the single deck game which is 10 times worse than it was a decade ago.
The ruse going on now is that some casinos are advertising the return of Single-Deck
Blackjack, but only offering 6:5 for a blackjack. In this new single-deck version,
a player's blackjack gets paid only 6:5 rather than the usual 3:2. That
means that if you bet $5 and get a blackjack, you get only $6 instead of the
$7.50 you once received. The house will keep your buck and a half with a nice
smile. Consequently, where the house edge against the perfect basic strategy
player was once a measly 0.15%, the house edge on this game has spiraled to
1.45%.
Given a choice between a six-deck game and 6:5 single-deck blackjack, avoid
the latter. A six-deck shoe game is three times more advantageous than 6:5 single-deck
blackjack.
Bottom line, Hal: Casinos that advertise Single-Deck Blackjack, or any blackjack
game that pays only 6 for 5 for a blackjack are simply trading a marketing gimmick
for your dough—for which you had spent hours of hard work. Sign up for
Shunning 101.
Dear Mark,
Why is it that so many gamblers think they are winning, but in actuality, they
are losing? My brother is a perfect example, always bragging that he is winning.
Could he possibly have that kind of luck? Helen P.
Gamblers fall into two categories: Those that lose and tell you they lose,
and those that lose and tell you they win. My own dear Mother, Frances, no doubt
now quibbling with St. Peter on why Heaven's machines are so tight, would
say things like; "Look, I just won 200 credits, I'm a winner"
But Pete would have to gently tell my Mom that she had been playing quarters,
and had already contributed $200 dollars to her favorite one-armed bandit. Mom
never subtracted the money that she had to spend ($200) in order to win those
200 credits ($50). She only remembered the last scanty jackpot that paid her,
not the $150 she was in the hole.
One enlightened way to get accurate accounting from your brother would be is
suggest that since he is winning so much, that he should buy dinner. Then, perhaps
a light will flash above his noggin and he'll tell you how much he's
really losing.
Gambling quote of the week: "There are only two sorts of people
walking the streets of Las Vegas at 2 a.m. on a winter's night: muggers
and broken souls not worth mugging."—Anthony Holden, The Big Deal
