Is Queensland BJ game "Dealer Peeks"?

[garygo]

I am an Australian living in Queensland. I just want to make sure: what exactly does "Dealer Peeks" mean?

In my local casino (Jupiters on the Gold Coast), if you split against dealer's Ace and dealer has a Blackjack to beat you, you only lose your original bet. Is this Dealer Peeks (US Style) or not?

Thank you.

[StudiodeKadent]

Originally Posted by garygo

I am an Australian living in Queensland. I just want to make sure: what exactly does "Dealer Peeks" mean?

In my local casino (Jupiters on the Gold Coast), if you split against dealer's Ace and dealer has a Blackjack to beat you, you only lose your original bet. Is this Dealer Peeks (US Style) or not?

Thank you.

Yes. If you only lose your original bet against a dealer BJ, the game is mathematically identical to US-Style dealer peeks.

[garygo]

StudiodeKadent

Thank you very much for the prompt reply.

1) So when I use the BJ basic strategy engine to generate the correct BS for this game, I should check "Dealer Peeks" box? In another word, I should use this BS table: http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bjbse.p...rr=ns&peek=yes

2) Why is OBO mathmatically identical to Dealer Peeks? And doesn't Dealer Peeks mean the dealer gets two cards with one face-up, so he "peeks at" his hole card (as in the US), which is not the case here in Queensland, Australia? I don't see any connection between the two.

Thank you again for your clarification on this.

Gary

[Canceler]

Originally Posted by garygo

2) Why is OBO mathmatically identical to Dealer Peeks? And doesn't Dealer Peeks mean the dealer gets two cards with one face-up, so he "peeks at" his hole card (as in the US), which is not the case here in Queensland, Australia? I don't see any connection between the two.

US: Dealer has two cards, checks for BJ and has it, takes everyone’s bet.

OZ: Dealer has one card, everyone plays their hand, dealer gets second card and has BJ, takes everyone’s original bet, but NOT any splits or double-downs.

They come out to being the same.

[Katweezel]

Originally Posted by Canceler

US: Dealer has two cards, checks for BJ and has it, takes everyone’s bet.

OZ: Dealer has one card, everyone plays their hand, dealer gets second card and has BJ, takes everyone’s original bet, but NOT any splits or double-downs.

They come out to being the same.

So ENHC and Hole Card are basically the same. Thank you Canceler.

[Canceler]

Originally Posted by Katweezel

So ENHC and Hole Card are basically the same.

Not that I know of. I thought ENHC referred to when you DO lose your splits and double-downs to a dealer BJ. That is a different animal.

Don't try to confuse me, you're likely to succeed!

[garygo]

Thank you canceler. It is very clear to me now.

I reckon in the US case they don't ask for Insurance, right? You know if the dealer gets a Blackjack before you play your hand.

In the OZ case, you have the chance to bet for Insurance when the dealer's first card is an ACE (of course Insurance is not a good bet without card counting).

On the other hand, the US style is more time-saving. You know if the dealer has a Blackjack or not immediately, without wasting time to think about options like doubling down or splitting.

[Canceler]

Originally Posted by garygo

I reckon in the US case they don't ask for Insurance, right?

In the US, if the dealer has an ace up, you will be given a chance to place the insurance bet before the dealer checks for BJ.