![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I was reading about this three 7 of spades Blackjack bonus put out by some casinos mentioned in *link removed*.
Here's the deal. If you get three 7 of spades, they give you $5,000 (and you win the hand). I know that Blackjack usually has pretty good payouts. My question is this... Does this three 7 of spades push the payout into the promised land (over 100%)? Odds of getting three 7 of spades: 1/(52 x 52 x 52) = 7e-6 (yup, pretty small) Payout: $5,000 Payout per hand: = payout x chance of getting payout = $5,000 x 7e-6 = 0.035 dollars = 3.5 cents. This doesn't sound like much, but if you play 25 cent hands, it increases the payout by 14%! This means that the payout becomes over 100% and if you play long enough, you'll come out ahead. I thought that strategy charts push the payout of blackjack to around 95-98%. Based on my math, the casino should give you payouts of around 105%??? What do you think? Does this seem correct? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
What do you think? Does this seem correct? [/ QUOTE ] This is a lot like playing B&M progressives after you've established the probability and hold. In slots, you have to man the machine 24/7, and it's still a crap shoot. In BJ there's the adavantage that the JP doesn't disappear -- then there's the disadvantage you may never be paid. Many online casinos are rated by conformance to random models -- and I don't think anybody has a sample large enough to determine if the outcome you describe is being supressed. Personally, I would discount the JP (to about zero) in a decision to play. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Boss Media has a BJ game with something like a 0.1% player edge. So if you have a 500 unit BR and play full time, forty hours a week at a decent rate, you can double your bankroll in a year.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
dont forget they most likely use 6 or 8 decks not just one. And most sites have at least a 1$ min. wager so .25$ cant be done
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
dont forget they most likely use 6 or 8 decks not just one. And most sites have at least a 1$ min. wager so .25$ cant be done [/ QUOTE ] If they use one or two decks, the probability of getting 3 7[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] is exactly zero. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Odds are a lot smaller than that as the early cards are not in the deck anymore.
Assuming 6-deck it's 6/312 * 5/311 * 4/310 coming to 2 cents per hand. It does make it +EV assuming min betsize of $1, but variance is huge. Easier (and more profitable) to just casinowhore. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Here's the deal. If you get three 7 of spades, they give you $5,000 (and you win the hand). [/ QUOTE ] Nitpick: You win or push the hand. The dealer can get 21 too. If the game is played no hole card, the dealer could beat you with a blackjack. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You win or push the hand. The dealer can get 21 too. If the game is played no hole card, the dealer could beat you with a blackjack.
Man, that would suck! So we're saying that the odds aren't over 100% then? I guess they might use a very large (or infinite) number of decks... Then my math would be right. But let me guess, the chances of that are probably small...Agreed? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Why would anyone play to have a .1% edge? I'd stick to poker if I were you. It may be profitable, but it could be a huge investment if it doesn't work.
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|