Interesting game I saw

Blue Efficacy

Well-Known Member
#1
I found a game at a remote store that is a unique variation on BJ, I think it was called triple action or something like that. There are 3 bets you can make, a BJ bet, a poker bet, and a casino war type bet based on the first card vs the dealer upcard. Surely the poker bet is a sucker bet, and it is optional. You have to make equal bets on the BJ bet and the war bet.

If the war bet ties, you lose half of your bet.

It is single deck, BJ pays 3:2, not sure about restrictions on splits or doubles or if those are even allowed... seems like based on these factors it could be a decent game. You do have the disadvantage of having to place the high card bet. Am I correct in assuming that the disadvantage for this is fixed?

How much of a disadvantage is this high card bet anyway? Also for this bet having only one deck likely is favorable, slightly fewer ties.\, I would think.
 

Sucker

Well-Known Member
#2
Much more than SLIGHTLY less chance of ties. You'll tie one out of 17 times. So for every 34 hands, you can expect to win 16 bets and lose 17. Using the formula for advantage: Ev = (wins-losses)/ (wins+losses), this means that the house advantage is 1/33; or about 3.33%.
 

Blue Efficacy

Well-Known Member
#4
Sounds like a tough game, they probably have restrictions on splits and doubles too, but the pen was pretty deep and it was single deck 3:2. It is fun to think the EV from the BJ could overcome the -EV from the high card bet, but an over 3% HA is a tough hill to climb. Maybe you can bet more on the BJ hand, I guess I am just going off my experience when I was there, the ploppies were all betting the minimum on each.
 

shadroch

Well-Known Member
#5
My friend Emilo dealt this game at Harrahs for a long time. He had quite the personality and would have the whole table engaged in having a realy good time. He told me hardly anyone ever won, and the few that did almost always hit some rare poker hand- straight flush or better.
 

tensplitter

Well-Known Member
#6
It's actually a 1.5% house edge because you lose half your bet on ties, not the entire bet. That would mean you get an advantage at +4 true count. The house edge of the war bet would be higher at very high and very low true counts.

Do tens, jacks, queens, and kings all count as "ten" in the war bet? Also, does it play like standard casino war in which the first tie goes to war, and the second tie is a loss? The former would greatly increase the house edge, and the latter would reduce it.
 

Sucker

Well-Known Member
#7
tensplitter said:
It's actually a 1.5% house edge because you lose half your bet on ties, not the entire bet.
Think about it: For every 34 hands you will win 16, lose 16, and tie 2. That works out to be a net loss of 1 bet for every 34 hands; 3.33% HA.

tensplitter said:
That would mean you get an advantage at +4 true count. The house edge of the war bet would be higher at very high and very low true counts.
??????? These statements are utter nonsense. There is NO possible count at which the player would have an advantage. The BEST you could POSSIBLY do would mean that there would have to be 13 or less cards left in the deck; all of different ranks, so that no pairs were possible. In that case, and no matter WHAT ranks those cards WERE, the odds WOULD be exactly even.

tensplitter said:
Do tens, jacks, queens, and kings all count as "ten" in the war bet? Also, does it play like standard casino war in which the first tie goes to war, and the second tie is a loss? The former would greatly increase the house edge, and the latter would reduce it.
In this game, the 10's, Js, Qs, & Ks DO keep their rank, as they do in the standard version of war. Also, ties do NOT go to war in this game.

One more correction, about the game of "Casino War" (as it is played in most casinos): You're right that the first tie "goes to war" (if the player so chooses), but if it ties AGAIN, the player WINS instead of loses.
 
Top