I know that the fewer the number of decks in a shoe, the less the house edge is and and the better it is for the player.
I was wondering what it would be like to have a blackjack game using only a quarter deck ..... just the hearts from 2 through Ace. 13 cards. (Of course any suit could be used).
It would be a single player versus the dealer.
The deck would be shuffled after each round.
Several thoughts immediately occurred to me:
(1) Only picture cards could be split -- assuming anyone would want to do so -- because there would only be a single 2, a single 3, a single 4, etc.
(2) You could not have a player blackjack versus a dealer blackjack since there would only be a single Ace.
(3) Card counting would not apply to betting strategy of course. But it could be extremely effective in terms of playing strategy, particularly since the counter would know exactly what cards remained in the deck (though, of course, not their sequence).
(4) For the sake of this game, let's assume these favorable rules for the player. Namely: dealer peeks at hole card for possibly blackjack; insurance allowed; double down allowed on any two cards; dealer stands on soft 17; late surrender; no re-splitting of pictures. I would allow re-splitting of pictures except I think that to do so might make it technically possible to run out of the 13 cards.
[Double down after splitting would be allowed but I assume never used since only pictures are allowed and I would doubt that one would want double on a soft-11 or a 12 or higher (guaranteed on at least one of the hands).]
I assume that since it is only player versus dealer that -- with the above rules -- it would be impossible to run out of cards.
I am wondering if basic strategy for this game would be very similar to basic strategy for a single deck game or whether there would be some drastic changes.
I guess if a player is dealt two non-10-value cards and the dealer shows an Ace then insurance would probably be a good bet since 4 out of the unseen 10 cards would be 10-value cards.
What significant deviations from basic strategy might be made during play (assuming there are any)?
Finally ..... with best play ..... what would be the player advantage over the house?
This may seem silly to some of you. But I am intrigued by this in the same way I might be intrigued by fantasy chess where slight variations may be made to the rules of that game.
I was wondering what it would be like to have a blackjack game using only a quarter deck ..... just the hearts from 2 through Ace. 13 cards. (Of course any suit could be used).
It would be a single player versus the dealer.
The deck would be shuffled after each round.
Several thoughts immediately occurred to me:
(1) Only picture cards could be split -- assuming anyone would want to do so -- because there would only be a single 2, a single 3, a single 4, etc.
(2) You could not have a player blackjack versus a dealer blackjack since there would only be a single Ace.
(3) Card counting would not apply to betting strategy of course. But it could be extremely effective in terms of playing strategy, particularly since the counter would know exactly what cards remained in the deck (though, of course, not their sequence).
(4) For the sake of this game, let's assume these favorable rules for the player. Namely: dealer peeks at hole card for possibly blackjack; insurance allowed; double down allowed on any two cards; dealer stands on soft 17; late surrender; no re-splitting of pictures. I would allow re-splitting of pictures except I think that to do so might make it technically possible to run out of the 13 cards.
[Double down after splitting would be allowed but I assume never used since only pictures are allowed and I would doubt that one would want double on a soft-11 or a 12 or higher (guaranteed on at least one of the hands).]
I assume that since it is only player versus dealer that -- with the above rules -- it would be impossible to run out of cards.
I am wondering if basic strategy for this game would be very similar to basic strategy for a single deck game or whether there would be some drastic changes.
I guess if a player is dealt two non-10-value cards and the dealer shows an Ace then insurance would probably be a good bet since 4 out of the unseen 10 cards would be 10-value cards.
What significant deviations from basic strategy might be made during play (assuming there are any)?
Finally ..... with best play ..... what would be the player advantage over the house?
This may seem silly to some of you. But I am intrigued by this in the same way I might be intrigued by fantasy chess where slight variations may be made to the rules of that game.
Last edited:
