Blackjack and Card Counting Forums - BlackjackInfo.com

  #1  
Old September 10th, 2011, 09:18 PM
TwoHands TwoHands is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 16
Default New Royal 20's Side Bet

Hey guys. I haven't seen any info on if the new version of Royal 20's is beatable by counting. The payouts are different than the original version. In the original, you could win some of the smaller bonuses with a non-face 10, but in the new version, you must have two face card 10's (Jack, Queen, King) to win any of the bonuses.

The good thing about this version however is that it is good on EITHER the player's or dealer's hand with only a single bet.

Payouts are as follows:

5:1 for either a player or dealer face-card 20.
10:1 for either a player or dealer matched 20. (2 jacks, 2 queens, 2 kings - suit doesn't matter)
50:1 for a player AND dealer face-card 20 at the same time.
100:1 for a player AND dealer matched 20 at the same time.

It would seem to me that the big money maker for this bet would be the 50:1 bonus at hot counts. They seem to happen a lot, but the subtraction of the regular 10 from the bonus may hurt more than I think. Any help is appreciated.

Last edited by TwoHands; September 12th, 2011 at 02:35 AM. Reason: Clarification
  #2  
Old September 10th, 2011, 09:56 PM
zengrifter's Avatar
zengrifter zengrifter is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,532
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoHands View Post
Hey guys. I haven't seen any info on if the new version of Royal 20's is beatable by counting. The payouts are different than the original version. In the original, you could win some of the smaller bonuses with a non-face 10, but in the new version, you must have two face card 10's (Jack, Queen, King) to win any of the bonuses.

The good thing about this version however is that it is gone on EITHER the player's or dealer's hand with only a single bet.

Payouts are as follows:

5:1 for either a player or dealer face-card 20.
10:1 for either a player or dealer matched 20. (2 jacks, 2 queens, 2 kings - suit doesn't matter)
50:1 for a player AND dealer face-card 20 at the same time.
100:1 for a player AND dealer matched 20 at the same time.

It would seem to me that the big money maker for this bet would be the 50:1 bonus at hot counts. They seem to happen a lot, but the subtraction of the regular 10 from the bonus may hurt more than I think. Any help is appreciated.
It looks pretty bleak. The most important hands are the non-matching 10s and the suited 20s - these have been gutted. The original R20s was killed by counters, don't expect a newer version to be anywhere close. zg
  #3  
Old September 11th, 2011, 01:32 PM
TwoHands TwoHands is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 16
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zengrifter View Post
It looks pretty bleak. The most important hands are the non-matching 10s and the suited 20s - these have been gutted. The original R20s was killed by counters, don't expect a newer version to be anywhere close. zg
I was hoping that since either the player or dealer could make the "royal 20" would make up for the removal of the non-face 10s and suited bonuses...

When I think about it, it seems at hot counts that a player and dealer both get 20s a lot more than 1 time in 50 hands. But like I said, maybe the missing regular 10 is more important than I realize.

In something like Lucky Ladies, you can win smaller ones a lot, but only the player can get the 20, and the payout most of the time will be the 10:1 or 25:1. And at hot counts, how many times does the dealer pull that 20 instead and kill you? In the new Royal 20s, you'd have some insurance, and if you both got the royal 20, the 50:1 payout is a pretty nice bonus.

The Wizard of Odds calculated the payouts and house advantage of the original Royal 20's side bet and he is supposed to check to make sure the game isn't easily beatable by counters for his clients. It sounds like he didn't do such a good job the first time around. Is it possible that he made another mistake?
  #4  
Old September 11th, 2011, 09:02 PM
zengrifter's Avatar
zengrifter zengrifter is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,532
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoHands View Post
I was hoping that since either the player or dealer could make the "royal 20" would make up for the removal of the non-face 10s and suited bonuses...
Oh, its EITHER for the SAME bet? zg
  #5  
Old September 12th, 2011, 02:34 AM
TwoHands TwoHands is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 16
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zengrifter View Post
Oh, its EITHER for the SAME bet? zg
Yes, either. You only place a single side bet that works for both hands.
  #6  
Old September 12th, 2011, 02:55 AM
Automatic Monkey's Avatar
Automatic Monkey Automatic Monkey is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 5,171
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoHands View Post
Yes, either. You only place a single side bet that works for both hands.
Nice feature, that should smooth out the variance a bit.
  #7  
Old September 12th, 2011, 07:27 PM
TwoHands TwoHands is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 16
Default

So do you guys think it's beatable? If so, how easily? Would the type of count make a huge difference? I use UBZ II. This sidebet is only offered on six deck shoes by the way.
  #8  
Old September 12th, 2011, 07:41 PM
zengrifter's Avatar
zengrifter zengrifter is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 10,532
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoHands View Post
So do you guys think it's beatable? If so, how easily? Would the type of count make a huge difference? I use UBZ II. This sidebet is only offered on six deck shoes by the way.
Anyone? A sim perhaps? zg
  #9  
Old September 12th, 2011, 07:42 PM
tthree tthree is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoHands View Post
So do you guys think it's beatable? If so, how easily? Would the type of count make a huge difference? I use UBZ II. This sidebet is only offered on six deck shoes by the way.
Split your count whatever it is. ie HILO {(J,Q,K -1), (4,5,6 +1)}; and {(A,10 -1), (2,3 +1)}. Combine the counts for HILO. You could really up your correlation for some indices this way. You could weight each count and combine or ignore 1 count. You would need to generate new indices. Big potential gain in both side bet efficiency and PE.
  #10  
Old September 12th, 2011, 08:18 PM
NightStalker NightStalker is offline
Executive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Saint Louis
Posts: 587
Default yes

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoHands View Post
So do you guys think it's beatable? If so, how easily? Would the type of count make a huge difference? I use UBZ II. This sidebet is only offered on six deck shoes by the way.
count will make some difference.That depends upon ratio of main bet to side-bet.. What's the table max on side bet?

It is definitely beatable and better than lucky ladies in all prospects.. It become favorable before LL and the same payour will work great for double decks also. It has lower variance than LL. It can add upto 40$ an hour on 100 max side bet..
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:27 AM.


Forum Software vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005-2011 Bayview Strategies LLC