BJ online in williamhill
- Thread starter obayashi
- Start date
tezzadiver
Well-Known Member
I`ve played there. Software seems to be fair and the wagering requirement is quite low.
Payouts quite quick from what I remember:eyepatch:
tezzadiver
Well-Known Member
Software. Can be streaky at times but low wagering normally saves the day.
tezzadiver
Well-Known Member
Uh, I have to disagree. I have made a few thousand during the good old bonus hunting days. And there are still some tidbits out there if you look hard enough.
Now playing without a bonus- I`d have to agree.
tezzadiver
Well-Known Member
They do deal a fair game or else they would have been out of business a long time ago.
Remember this is BJ we are playing! Dealer miracle 21`s and 20`s are standard,
If you understand variance you will understand you can win and lose many hands in a row. Does not mean that there is cheating involved.
Our edge in BJ- only through CC is so small that it means we will still lose many bets when the deck is in our favour!
Remember WH live has a bout 50% pen so you are not going to get many good counts for counting cards anyway. Plus you are only allowed to play 1 spot.
What you can do though is flat bet table minimum and have a good chance of winning from their deposit bonuses.
Years ago fortunes were made from these, now pickings are a much slimmer.
FLASH1296
Well-Known Member
tezzadiver said: "Our edge in BJ- only through CC is so small that it means we will still lose many bets when the deck is in our favour!"
Not exactly.
When you push out your chips to place a bet you are NOT favored to win the hand - not even at a high True Count.
Your expectation at a ZERO True Count is to win 43% and push 9% of your hands.
At high True Counts both of those percentages grow — but not by very much.
Card Counting only works because our doubles work better at high true counts and we receive more blackjacks.
Not exactly.
When you push out your chips to place a bet you are NOT favored to win the hand - not even at a high True Count.
Your expectation at a ZERO True Count is to win 43% and push 9% of your hands.
At high True Counts both of those percentages grow — but not by very much.
Card Counting only works because our doubles work better at high true counts and we receive more blackjacks.
tezzadiver
Well-Known Member
I stand corrected. Thanks for the better wording.:eyepatch:
farmdoggy
Well-Known Member
FLASH1296
Well-Known Member
No need to define "High"
The HIGHEST true count will be when all the remaining cards are 10's and
Aces, so you will push almost all of your hands and sometimes either you
or the dealer has a BJ. Occasionally someone will have a pair of Aces, and
at that time, you will be able to split them while the dealer cannot.
I suppose that in such a HYPOTHETICAL situation - without small or
medium cards - you would win 50.x% (of the non-pushed hands),
few as those would be.
"Facts on the ground" are that you will never see a T.C. that will
raise the player's winning chances on a hand to > 50%.
farmdoggy
Well-Known Member
Yes this is a purely hypothetical situation... But should the situation exist the player will certainly win more often than the dealer... And I mean WAY more than 50.x%. Think about... If the dealer shows an ace as his up card, there is virtually no way the house can win unless the player makes a mistake. After buying insurance, either pair would be split and resplit to the max if he doesn't have it. Similarly, if the dealer shows a 10 and doesn't have it, either pair would be split and resplit to the max. And finally, if no player pair, there is no way he can lose after the dealer has checked his hole.
Last edited:
FLASH1296
Well-Known Member
All of that presumes that the player is not playing Basic Strategy.
It also presumes "Resplit Aces" are in effect.
It also ignores the fact that when the dealer shows an Ace the player doesn't take Insurance
[if playing Basic Strategy]; but if counting cards Insurance will always be taken. When the
dealer has a BJ the player breaks even, but when the dealer doesn't - the player loses the
Insurance bet, but ALWAYS wins the regular bet.
In any case, such a situation does not ever exist.
My original point is accurate as stated; that the player
does not have a 50% win rate on an upcoming hand.
Last edited:
I'll give you a "virtual no way" example.
You hold A-A against 10. You split, and get dealt A-A and A-A. You lose both split hands.
Most of your hands will push, as you either get 20 or 21 (with 20 more likely), especially if you split 10s against a dealers 10.
The only distribution of cards where you will win all of your hands is, when only Aces and 2s are left. The dealer will only be able to draw to 18 (S17) or 19 (H17), while you can savely hit any 19.
farmdoggy
Well-Known Member
Assuming no RSA.
Edit: Also, my "virtual no way" example was for when a dealer shows an Ace up. Even if resplitting Aces isn't allowed, the dealer still has to make a hand starting with A-A of his own... He has to draw 5 more Aces in order for you to lose both split hands. Not nearly as rare as GETTING to this situation, but I think you get my point. If the count reaches the maximum pretty much the only way the house can win any money is with a 10-up blackjack. If no RSA, then a small amount can be won from an A-A vs 10 hand too. OBVIOUSLY though, the player will win MANY more hands in this situation.
At what count will the player win more hands than the dealer? I don't know... And it's probably a waste of time to figure that out. But I would guess it would be at/around the index for splitting 10's vs. a dealer 10. Astronomically high, but yes, "High" does need to be defined.
Last edited: