Penalty for standing on all hands

[Oscar21]

I am looking to find the harm done if i stand on all my hands in the typical blackjack game. How can i calculate this?

[umbrellaman]

I assume you mean stand on all bustable hands. If you do this you're playing at a 4% disadvantage. Colin Jones made a video on it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeHXyImbC10

Don't do it.

[[email protected]]

You will never bust , but will never improve your hand , I assume it’s probably not a winning strategy or everyone would do it , what have been the results if you have tried it ??????

[ShipTheCookies]

There is no "assume" about it. It is not a winning strategy.

[Oscar21]

Sorry i should have been more specific. I meant literally standing on all my hands. I know its a horrible losing strategy, I have other reasons for wanting the edge on alternative ways of playing. That's good to know that not busting is 4% disadvantage, but believe it or not I wanted the edge on never touching any hands. So if it is 4% for not busting then it is much worse for never taking a hit, splitting, or doubling. I was looking for the fastest way to play with a disadvantage of 5% or less. I want the perfect way to play with a compromise between speed and accuracy. If my simple math is correct then i can give up around 5% for something else I am getting.

[21forme]

Sorry i should have been more specific. I meant literally standing on all my hands. I know its a horrible losing strategy, I have other reasons for wanting the edge on alternative ways of playing. That's good to know that not busting is 4% disadvantage, but believe it or not I wanted the edge on never touching any hands. So if it is 4% for not busting then it is much worse for never taking a hit, splitting, or doubling. I was looking for the fastest way to play with a disadvantage of 5% or less. I want the perfect way to play with a compromise between speed and accuracy. If my simple math is correct then i can give up around 5% for something else I am getting.

This is really stupid.

If you want to play a game with 5% disadvantage, just play slots.

[Oscar21]

It definitely might be but you don't know all the details. It is not just traditional blackjack....

[Oscar21]

I want to make sure I understand the house edge. If I am playing a game with a disadvantage of .5 it means that I lose 50 cents per 100 total bet, regardless of whether it is $100 on one hand or 100 one dollar hands , correct? Then .05 disadvantage is 50 cents per $1000?

[Freightman]

I want to make sure I understand the house edge. If I am playing a game with a disadvantage of .5 it means that I lose 50 cents per 100 total bet, regardless of whether it is $100 on one hand or 100 one dollar hands , correct? Then .05 disadvantage is 50 cents per $1000?

No, no, no. Disadvantage of .5 assumes perfect basic strategy. If you play like a moron, Or simply substandard basic, house edge rises.

[Oscar21]

I just wanted to make sure I understand the concept of house edge in general, not based on the way of playing I was suggesting. I understood that it was at least a 4% disadvantage. I could then figure out for sure what I am giving up but then factor in everything else to see if it is worthwhile.

I said above "I want the perfect way to play with a compromise between speed and accuracy". Actually I described it wrong because there really is an importance on speed more than accuracy. Sorry if my posts are confusing and vague. I am just trying to figure out all the factors involved but don't want to describe it all here.

[DSchles]

So, let's cut to the chase. Neither I nor anyone else here can give you the answer you're looking for, because no one has ever played the game that way nor even researched what the (horrible) result would be.

We understand that you're not dumb enough to play that way without some offsetting potential compensation that you're not willing to discuss on an open board. So, the only thing that I can tell you, without putting a monetary value on it, is that your disadvantage playing with never hitting any hand, never doubling, and never splitting is unspeakably worse than 4% by several orders of magnitude.

Don

[21forme]

I can think of one reason to play this way and I've done it myself under the right circumstances. I will not comment further other than saying another forum member helped me with the math on one such opportunity.

[ummagumma]

Isn't that how Don Johnson made his money, by negotiating a loss rebate ?