Laughlin Marauder: Question regarding Dollar games that pay 6:5

[Laughlin Marauder]

Last night I won 18 units (no not dollars) by employing a different strategy to this game. The Casino was dead and no double deck games were open. So I plopped down on the single deck 1$ table and bought in for red. Here is what I did.

Off the top of the deck I bet 1 red, and bet normally based on the positive side of the count. If however the count went negative I would bet 1 dollar. I would bet as much as 5 red and as little as 1 dollar effectively employing a 1 - 25 spread. I also doubled down on any black jacks in high counts (TC of +3) where dealer was showing 8 or less to get rid of their 6:5 payout.

My question is using this strategy can this game be consistently beaten with the 1 - 25 spread kept in mind.
SD dealt to about 35 - 40/52
Double 10 and 11 only
Nats pay 6:5 (but you double down in higher counts with dealer showing 8 or less)

[WallStRunoff]

> Last night I won 18 units (no not dollars)
> by employing a different strategy to this
> game. The Casino was dead and no double deck
> games were open. So I plopped down on the
> single deck 1$ table and bought in for red.
> Here is what I did.

> Off the top of the deck I bet 1 red, and bet
> normally based on the positive side of the
> count. If however the count went negative I
> would bet 1 dollar. I would bet as much as 5
> red and as little as 1 dollar effectively
> employing a 1 - 25 spread. I also doubled
> down on any black jacks in high counts (TC
> of +3) where dealer was showing 8 or less to
> get rid of their 6:5 payout.

> My question is using this strategy can this
> game be consistently beaten with the 1 - 25
> spread kept in mind.
> SD dealt to about 35 - 40/52
> Double 10 and 11 only
> Nats pay 6:5 (but you double down in higher
> counts with dealer showing 8 or less)

I thought about doing that myself on my last trip to vegas. Even if it confuses the house for 15 minutes it could be worthwhile. This is really just a 1-25 spread with a $5 opening cover bet. It should work better head-to-head or with at least fewer people at the table.

[Don Schlesinger]

> I also doubled
> down on any black jacks in high counts (TC
> of +3) where dealer was showing 8 or less to
> get rid of their 6:5 payout.

I have no idea what you mean by "get rid of" their 6:5 payout. You want to risk a double instead of a certain payout of 120%? The highest e.v. the double could possibly have might be 80-85% or so, vs. a 5 or 6. This is a monumental mistake, and very costly. It makes no sense at all.

> My question is using this strategy can this
> game be consistently beaten with the 1 - 25
> spread kept in mind.

No, certainly not.

> SD dealt to about 35 - 40/52
> Double 10 and 11 only
> Nats pay 6:5 (but you double down in higher
> counts with dealer showing 8 or less)

Disastrous. Catastrophic. Ridiculous game to play and no chance to win.

Don

[Laughlin Marauder]

> Disastrous. Catastrophic. Ridiculous game to
> play and no chance to win.

Tell me how you really feel:-) I thought with that large of a spread it may be possible to beat this game. I know of no other SD game that deals 70 - 80% and allows a 1 - 25 spread. To me that seems that the SCORE (notice the capitilization) would be quite high.

I guess next time I will just walk down the street to the other casino that allows DA2 and 3:2.

[Parker]

The game you are describing has an off-the-top house advantage of 1.84%!!

This means that you would need to be be at a Hi-lo TC of +4 or more just to overcome the house edge.

Or at least, you would if your counting system worked like it does in a normal BJ game.

It doesn't.

The reduced BJ payout means that the ten value cards are less valuable to the player. In other words, when the TC increases by 1 it no longer corresponds to (roughly) .5% increase in your edge, but something less.

Doubling your BJ's doesn't help, unless you have discovered a way to win every single double.

The game is unplayable, even with a 1-100 spread.