If There Is A High Count, Do You Take Even Money?
- Thread starter SilentBob420BMFJ
- Start date
The same difference
It makes no difference either way. What you are doing is taking a side-bet as to if the dealer has a ten underneath. The only superficial difference is the fact that you have a BJ yourself. The same rule applies to both situations. If your count indicates that there is a >2:1 ratio of 10's vs. non-10"s then you take the side-bet, regardless of what your hand is.
It makes no difference either way. What you are doing is taking a side-bet as to if the dealer has a ten underneath. The only superficial difference is the fact that you have a BJ yourself. The same rule applies to both situations. If your count indicates that there is a >2:1 ratio of 10's vs. non-10"s then you take the side-bet, regardless of what your hand is.
Not sure, but i think it was stanford wong or arnold snyder, said it almost makes sense to take ins. on good hands like BJ, 20, and 11 at a slighty lower count. I think this actually helps levels out fluctuations. Just like sometimes i insur 1/4 my bet at a TC of +2. Maybe someone could chime in abd verify this.
PS No, i wasnt aware of ctr+z(tx)
Did you say this fixes the problem or most likely caused it?
PS No, i wasnt aware of ctr+z(tx)
Did you say this fixes the problem or most likely caused it?
Yep, the even money decision is basically the same as the insurance decision.
Even money has the added benefit of not requiring you to pull out additional chips to place the insurance bet.
I've had a few times when I have a huge (for me) bet out, the dealer gets an Ace, and I don't even have enough chips to afford an insurance bet. And going into my wallet for a "money plays" insurance bet would just be weird.
Even money has the added benefit of not requiring you to pull out additional chips to place the insurance bet.
I've had a few times when I have a huge (for me) bet out, the dealer gets an Ace, and I don't even have enough chips to afford an insurance bet. And going into my wallet for a "money plays" insurance bet would just be weird.
Yes
Personally I would take even money at a break even or profitable point. I would take it at a break even point because taking even money is common play made by a lot of ploppies so I will just look like the average player when the dealer gets blackjack. That being said it is less likely you will get profitable even money situations than insuraning an 11 when you have no 10's. However i would not insure a bad hand at a break even point, Iwould only insure bad hands at profitable points.
Personally I would take even money at a break even or profitable point. I would take it at a break even point because taking even money is common play made by a lot of ploppies so I will just look like the average player when the dealer gets blackjack. That being said it is less likely you will get profitable even money situations than insuraning an 11 when you have no 10's. However i would not insure a bad hand at a break even point, Iwould only insure bad hands at profitable points.
Let's say you are dealt a blackjack on a $50 Dollar Bet, and the dealer has an Ace showing. The true count is greater than +3 so you place your insurance bet of $25. In terms of your insurance bet, there are 2 things that can happen.
1. The dealer does not have blackjack-your hand will have a payoff of $75 ( 3/2 x $50), and you will loose your $25 insurance bet, for a net profit of $50.
2. The dealer has blackjack-your blackjack will push the dealer's blackjack, and your insurance bet will pay $50 (2x $25)
In either case, your net profit will be an even money payout of $50.
In short, take even money at +3 or greater.
1. The dealer does not have blackjack-your hand will have a payoff of $75 ( 3/2 x $50), and you will loose your $25 insurance bet, for a net profit of $50.
2. The dealer has blackjack-your blackjack will push the dealer's blackjack, and your insurance bet will pay $50 (2x $25)
In either case, your net profit will be an even money payout of $50.
In short, take even money at +3 or greater.
Last edited:
Mathematicly there is no difference what your hand is.
Remember the insurance bet is simply a side bet as to whether the dealer has blackjack. Your specific hand makes absolutely no difference to the insurance bet because it is not involved. It has always seemed strange to me how most players won't take insurance unless their hand is blackjack. It is one of those odd inconsisties players have like the ones who split eights, just to receive another eight, which they don't split. Come on, if it was the right move the first time, why isn't it the right move the second time? Then again if players were rational they wouldn't be at the casino.
Remember the insurance bet is simply a side bet as to whether the dealer has blackjack. Your specific hand makes absolutely no difference to the insurance bet because it is not involved. It has always seemed strange to me how most players won't take insurance unless their hand is blackjack. It is one of those odd inconsisties players have like the ones who split eights, just to receive another eight, which they don't split. Come on, if it was the right move the first time, why isn't it the right move the second time? Then again if players were rational they wouldn't be at the casino.
i figured it makes no difference, as i knew there wasnt one bit of difference when your playing bs, so how would it be dif now? i had to ask tho, its one of those dumb questions u realize you shudnt have asked..
i just read about that, and yes, you should insure good hands at break even, or SLIGHTLY below even (to reduce fluctuations), because you are trading in your wins/losses for ties.. and ctrl+z is undo, and ctrl+y is redo (sometimes ctrl+shift+z)
i just read about that, and yes, you should insure good hands at break even, or SLIGHTLY below even (to reduce fluctuations), because you are trading in your wins/losses for ties.. and ctrl+z is undo, and ctrl+y is redo (sometimes ctrl+shift+z)