High Tie Bonus bet

[Diver]

I ran into this recently (player's first two cards pays: pair 3:1; BJ 6:1; suited pair 10:1; suited BJ 15:1; Push dealer BJ 25:1). Saw a sim evaluation elsewhere for HiLo indicating 11.6% house advantage off the top and a player advantage in 6D (H17) of 3% at HiLo TC+5 and increasing an additional 3.5% for each TC >+5. My very limited experience playing it at KO +3 to +6 was very nice. If I'd have had an idea of the advantage (saw the above analysis later), I would have been putting more out.

[Automatic Monkey]

I saw that too in CBJN, and that pay table can't possibly be right. I get a house edge over 30% with those rules.

The Wizard Of Odds lists a couple of more realistic pay tables:
http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/ap...8.html#hightie

[Diver]

Originally Posted by Automatic Monkey

I saw that too in CBJN, and that pay table can't possibly be right. I get a house edge over 30% with those rules.

The Wizard Of Odds lists a couple of more realistic pay tables:
http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/ap...8.html#hightie

At least for the game I played recently. I haven't run a sim so can't comment on that. My own experience in playing it at a positive KO count (+3 & up) was tainted by ridiculously good results that would only have been exceed by a BJ match with the dealer.

[Kasi]

Originally Posted by Diver

At least for the game I played recently. I haven't run a sim so can't comment on that. My own experience in playing it at a positive KO count (+3 & up) was tainted by ridiculously good results that would only have been exceed by a BJ match with the dealer.

The HA for that paytable is 11.6% like u said in the first post.

As to the value of it at higher TC's, I have no idea. Were you really saying that the player's advantage increases by 3.5% for each TC above +5, assuming you made the side bet?

Pretty wild if so.

[Diver]

Originally Posted by Kasi

The HA for that paytable is 11.6% like u said in the first post.

As to the value of it at higher TC's, I have no idea. Were you really saying that the player's advantage increases by 3.5% for each TC above +5, assuming you made the side bet?

Pretty wild if so.

That's how it was described at a noted BJ newsletter this week, citing the increased prevalence of BJ and pairs at higher counts. It does open some interesting possibilities, doesn't it? Might even offset the clobbering I'm taking now on CV when my paired faces are getting drubbed by dealer BJ and draws to 21.

[Kasi]

Originally Posted by Diver

That's how it was described at a noted BJ newsletter this week, citing the increased prevalence of BJ and pairs at higher counts. It does open some interesting possibilities, doesn't it? Might even offset the clobbering I'm taking now on CV when my paired faces are getting drubbed by dealer BJ and draws to 21.

Well it was the increased chances of BJ at higher counts that made me wonder and even dream it might be possible to overcome a 11.6% HA. But I think I've seen BJ's going up to 7% or more at higher counts. Frequency of pairs at higher counts I don't know much about except of course there are alot more pushes at 20.

Interesting possibilities? - are u kidding me? ! lol.

[EmeraldCityBJ]

Originally Posted by Automatic Monkey

I saw that too in CBJN, and that pay table can't possibly be right. I get a house edge over 30% with those rules.

The Wizard Of Odds lists a couple of more realistic pay tables:
http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/ap...8.html#hightie

I'm the one who ran the sim and reported the info to CBJN. The paytable I observed at this particular casino is different from any of the ones published at Wizard of Odds, or anywhere else I could find information about the game. However, you can use the probabilities posted by Wizard of Odds to arrive at the 11.6% reported by my sim. The casino's paytable is the same as "Version 1" on the Wizard of Odds page, except the top payout for a BJ push is 25:1 rather than 50:1. This means the return for the top payout is 5.4% rather than 10.8%. This increases Wizard's HA calc of 6.2% by another 5.4%, which matches the 11.6% I observed by running the sim.

I am reasonably confident in my sim and the other numbers I reported, but would welcome and encourage anyone to run a similar sim or to do further analysis to prove/disprove my results. Using HiLo, my sim suggests that the edge is 0.00% at TC=+4, and the player has a 3.2% edge at TC=+5. At TC=+6, the player edge was somewhere around 6.7-6.8% (I don't have the detailed results handy at the moment, so this is from memory).

[EmeraldCityBJ]

Originally Posted by Kasi

Well it was the increased chances of BJ at higher counts that made me wonder and even dream it might be possible to overcome a 11.6% HA. But I think I've seen BJ's going up to 7% or more at higher counts. Frequency of pairs at higher counts I don't know much about except of course there are alot more pushes at 20.

Certainly, the increased probability of a BJ is what makes this bet interesting during high counts. The probability of a pair also increases marginally with high counts (and also very negative counts) since you're more likely to pair up two cards if the remaining pack is defficient in some ranks and has a surplus of other ranks. The same effect impacts the Match the Dealer side bet, but the count has to get pretty extreme before the player has an advantage.

[Dog Hand]

Originally Posted by EmeraldCityBJ

I'm the one who ran the sim and reported the info to CBJN. The paytable I observed at this particular casino is different from any of the ones published at Wizard of Odds, or anywhere else I could find information about the game. However, you can use the probabilities posted by Wizard of Odds to arrive at the 11.6% reported by my sim. The casino's paytable is the same as "Version 1" on the Wizard of Odds page, except the top payout for a BJ push is 25:1 rather than 50:1. This means the return for the top payout is 5.4% rather than 10.8%. This increases Wizard's HA calc of 6.2% by another 5.4%, which matches the 11.6% I observed by running the sim.

I am reasonably confident in my sim and the other numbers I reported, but would welcome and encourage anyone to run a similar sim or to do further analysis to prove/disprove my results. Using HiLo, my sim suggests that the edge is 0.00% at TC=+4, and the player has a 3.2% edge at TC=+5. At TC=+6, the player edge was somewhere around 6.7-6.8% (I don't have the detailed results handy at the moment, so this is from memory).

ECBJ,

Hmm... I ran a billion-hand sim and got a house edge of 9.992% with a standard error of 0.03. Also, my player didn't have an advantage on the side bet until HiLo +6, at which his edge was only 0.078%. His edge did grow rapidly with TC: 2.9% at +7, 5.8% at +8, 8.9% at +9, and double-digit edges for +10 & above. For reference, I was simming a 6D, S17, DA2, DAS game with 75% pen for a heads-up player.

I'm puzzled... your HA results are in good agreement with the WoO's calcs. Can you describe your sim params?

Dog Hand

[Automatic Monkey]

Originally Posted by EmeraldCityBJ

I'm the one who ran the sim and reported the info to CBJN. The paytable I observed at this particular casino is different from any of the ones published at Wizard of Odds, or anywhere else I could find information about the game. However, you can use the probabilities posted by Wizard of Odds to arrive at the 11.6% reported by my sim. The casino's paytable is the same as "Version 1" on the Wizard of Odds page, except the top payout for a BJ push is 25:1 rather than 50:1. This means the return for the top payout is 5.4% rather than 10.8%. This increases Wizard's HA calc of 6.2% by another 5.4%, which matches the 11.6% I observed by running the sim.

I am reasonably confident in my sim and the other numbers I reported, but would welcome and encourage anyone to run a similar sim or to do further analysis to prove/disprove my results. Using HiLo, my sim suggests that the edge is 0.00% at TC=+4, and the player has a 3.2% edge at TC=+5. At TC=+6, the player edge was somewhere around 6.7-6.8% (I don't have the detailed results handy at the moment, so this is from memory).

If that's the case, then I probably screwed up the sim. I'll try it again.