Opinion on "even money" and max bet BJ.

[ZeeBabar]

Say you have a max bet out, get a BJ with the dealer showing Ace, do you take even money or go by count? Some AP's say they make an exception with a positive count (even if under TC2) and take even money, others say, follow the count for the decision.

i was playing DD, heads up. TC reached +5 with a deck to go, I had two hands of $150 each, received BJ on both hands, dealer had an up card of A. Thus, TC is really now at 0. I took even money, dealer flipped and had a 5 under. Did I make a mistake? Do you do otherwise?

I usually take "even money" only if I have a BJ and TC is 2 or more.

[Bubbles]

I take insurance only when my insurance count calls for it. I've met some people who always insure their blackjacks because they think it is cheap enough cover.

[Freightman]

Say you have a max bet out, get a BJ with the dealer showing Ace, do you take even money or go by count? Some AP's say they make an exception with a positive count (even if under TC2) and take even money, others say, follow the count for the decision.

i was playing DD, heads up. TC reached +5 with a deck to go, I had two hands of $150 each, received BJ on both hands, dealer had an up card of A. Thus, TC is really now at 0. I took even money, dealer flipped and had a 5 under. Did I make a mistake? Do you do otherwise?

I usually take "even money" only if I have a BJ and TC is 2 or more.

Zee, one of your better questions, and if which I'm sure that you will get differing opinions. I recall don, the purist, essentially saying that he didn't take out insurance at TC 2.9, because it was under the threshold. (Or whatever the numbers were).

From a technical perspective, you did the right thing. From a practical perspective, with 2 snappers, others at tc 0 would have taken even money. It is safe. And it dies give you 2 max bets, though not 3. I would have been inclined to take even money on 1, and play the other.

Ive had dual snappers many times, with bets ranging from 100 to 500. The most disappointing one was 2 snappers with dealer getting a back door snapper. Sheesh, this is beginning to sound like one if those steamy novels that you like .

Playing 1 spot, I tend to take even at $100 plus, even if under index, and go for the bonus with less. Not unlike taking insurance a bit below index on a good hand.

Questions such as this can easily lead one to believe that you are not as stupid as you appear, and that you are playing the crowd, so to speak. I have considered that thought for you for some time.

[Meistro123]

i was playing DD, heads up. TC reached +5 with a deck to go, I had two hands of $150 each, received BJ on both hands, dealer had an up card of A. Thus, TC is really now at 0.

I would probably take insurance in this scenario, because the three aces you have seen, which you are counting as -1 but for the purposes of insurance really count as +1, urge you to do it. If you are going to play double deck with hi lo you should really employ the ace side count or your insurance decisions are going to be wonky. But if my ace surplus / deficit adjusted count was TC 0 I would definitely not take even money. I am sympathetic the idea that we should insure or insure for less good hands close to the index, especially when wagering aggressively but TC 0 is just too far away to make any sort of insurance play

[Freightman]

but TC 0 is just too far away to make any sort of insurance play

Agreed, normally. In this case, he had dual snappers with max bets. Playing the middle by playing out one, and even money on the other seems to be a reasonable compromise.

[stopgambling]

because the three aces you have seen, which you are counting as -1 but for the purposes of insurance really count as +1

the count probably didnt change and still at tc 5. i would take even money. also , someplaces you almost must take even money. there is that much heat associates with insurance sometimes.

[jimmybond007]

I ran some sims comparing "cover insurance" to see the difference. I found the cost to be little. There are times where I will take money under the index. There are many times like this where the count drops when you get a natural in that round. I would say a majority of the time I will take the money in that situation, knowing the cost is little and there is an element of risk aversion to consider as well especially When you have your max bet out, I and many probably do not fault you for taking even money.

Consider this, you refuse the even money, the dealer happens to have BJ and your natural pushes, NOW you have your max bet out there and the count next round is even or negative. You know have to either let the bet sit out there or try and take it down. I feel you can more easily get your bet down if you take the even money and pull your money back... You dont want to get into a habit of adjusting bets too much and lowering bets after a push is not something ploppies do very often.

Same thing for insurance, you can insure your "good" hands like 19 or 20 slightly under the index. While technically an incorrect move you are paying a small price for reducing variance. Its not a bad idea to sometimes toss out insurance with your min bets out as well. You want to make it harder for the the eye or floor to see a correlation between you insuring your hand and the amount of money you are betting.

[BoSox]

Consider this, you refuse the even money, the dealer happens to have BJ and your natural pushes, NOW you have your max bet out there and the count next round is even or negative.

No problem so far, you did the right thing.

You know have to either let the bet sit out there or try and take it down. I feel you can more easily get your bet down if you take the even money and pull your money back... You dont want to get into a habit of adjusting bets too much and lowering bets after a push is not something ploppies do very often.

This above quote is absurd! The best move now would be to take a session break. If you elect to continue to play, do not compound your problems, by all means lower that bet. After all if you cannot lower your bet after pushing a blackjack which also gave the appearance of you being a good basic strategy player, who is now upset, then when the hell can you do it ?

Same thing for insurance, you can insure your "good" hands like 19 or 20 slightly under the index. While technically an incorrect move you are paying a small price for reducing variance.

First, taking even money IS the very same thing as taking insurance, and it is nothing more than a side bet. Making the wrong move, and forming bad habits, to cut down on some variance in a single hand is not the way to help beginners. What next not make some soft doubles when they are called for? Don't ever split 88 vs a ten? Where the heck do you draw the line? Being properly bankrolled, and the long term is what it is all about, not the current hand, or session.

[jimmybond007]

This above quote is absurd! The best move now would be to take a session break. If you elect to continue to play, do not compound your problems, by all means lower that bet. After all if you cannot lower your bet after pushing a blackjack which also gave the appearance of you being a good basic strategy player, who is now upset, then when the hell can you do it ?



First, taking even money IS the very same thing as taking insurance, and it is nothing more than a side bet. Making the wrong move, and forming bad habits, to cut down on some variance in a single hand is not the way to help beginners. What next not make some soft doubles when they are called for? Don't ever split 88 vs a ten? Where the heck do you draw the line? Being properly bankrolled, and the long term is what it is all about, not the current hand, or session.

I am WAY more comfortable winning a bet and pulling all the money back and making the next bet rather than moving my money down when the count have so obviously changed to anyone observing. Why make it easier for anyone who may be analyzing you? Also consider the way you play when milking a store for hundreds of hours vs the hit and run approach need to vary. I've seen many counters who just bet in lockstep with the count and just look so obvious.

Of course it is about the long run, and its not about the bankroll or bad habits. I like the assume most beginners have at least got as far as understanding bankroll requirements beforehand. It's about knowing the cost of some alternative plays that you can execute in certain situations. You draw the line when the play is too costly. Have not worried too much about the soft hands my self, the weaker counts are not the best in identifying the best decisions on these plays. 88v10? If the game has no LS then not splitting them is more costly. If the game has LS, the cost of surrendering all 88s vs 10 under the index is very little. Go ahead and run a sim, take even money on all your BJs at any positive count and take insurance on your 11s, 19s and 20s etc at a slightly lower index than optimal. You might be shocked and how little difference it makes.

I'm not saying perform on these "wrong moves" each and every time. Just be mindful of how much cost some cover has. Do I do this stuff every single time. No way. If i'm at a local store vs a distant store I visit much less, I play the game differently.

[BoSox]

Go ahead and run a sim, take even money on all your BJs at any positive count and take insurance on your 11s, 19s and 20s etc at a slightly lower index than optimal. You might be shocked and how little difference it makes.

In an earlier post ZeeBabar wrote:


"Jimmybond 007 says he would consider insuring 19 and 20. I would more likely insure f I have a 2,3 or a 4,5 than I would insure a 19 or 20 because those hands make it more likely dealer has a BJ."


I have to agree on this one with ZeeBabar, although I wish he would practice what he is preaching.

[jimmybond007]

In an earlier post ZeeBabar wrote:


"Jimmybond 007 says he would consider insuring 19 and 20. I would more likely insure f I have a 2,3 or a 4,5 than I would insure a 19 or 20 because those hands make it more likely dealer has a BJ."


I have to agree on this one with ZeeBabar, although I wish he would practice what he is preaching.

I certainly agree with this when you are not counting. When you have information from the count. Your hand composition means nothing. Just go by your count.

[BoSox]

First, taking even money IS the very same thing as taking insurance, and it is nothing more than a side bet. Making the wrong move, and forming bad habits, to cut down on some variance in a single hand is not the way to help beginners. What next not make some soft doubles when they are called for? Don't ever split 88 vs a ten? Where the heck do you draw the line? Being properly bankrolled, and the long term is what it is all about, not the current hand, or session.

What I previously failed to mention about is Risk Averse Approaches which depending upon which ones are used is always a good thing. The reason I did not mention this before is because I believe new players should learn the game in stages, and that approach requires a little more seasoning.

[jimmybond007]

What I previously failed to mention about is Risk Averse Approaches which depending upon which ones are used is always a good thing. The reason I did not mention this before is because I believe new players should learn the game in stages, and that approach requires a little more seasoning.

Agree 100%