Lucky Ladies

[dukejava1]

Is there a true count that makes this sidebet profitable?

 

[21forme]

+7

 

[zengrifter]

See - Analysis of Lucky Ladies

 

[dukejava1]

Thanks,so using hi/lo a true count of +4 makes money on lucky ladies,if this is accurate I should start a progression betting system starting at +4.

 

[Sonny]

...I should start a progression betting system starting at +4.

No, just bet the table max ($25) every time the bet is positive. The advantage is so big that a progression system will just reduce your profit.

-Sonny-

 

[21forme]

Thanks,so using hi/lo a true count of +4 makes money on lucky ladies,if this is accurate I should start a progression betting system starting at +4.

Where did you get +4 as being profitable?

 

[dukejava1]

Sorry,read chart wrong T+7(2.72%adv)

 

[EmeraldCityBJ]

No, just bet the table max ($25) every time the bet is positive. The advantage is so big that a progression system will just reduce your profit.

-Sonny-

Since a significant chunk of the EV in this game is from the top payouts (two Queen of Hearts - preferably with a dealer BJ), you also want to know the aggregate payout. For example, if the max bet is $25, but the per hand aggregate is $5,000, you're only going to get 200:1 rather than 1000:1 on the top payout. I would recommend placing a bet which is 1/1000 of the aggregate. The aggregate (or max payout) is usually posted at the table. If you don't see it there, ask.

 

[zengrifter]

Since a significant chunk of the EV in this game is from the top payouts (two Queen of Hearts - preferably with a dealer BJ), you also want to know the aggregate payout. For example, if the max bet is $25, but the per hand aggregate is $5,000, you're only going to get 200:1 rather than 1000:1 on the top payout. I would recommend placing a bet which is 1/1000 of the aggregate. The aggregate (or max payout) is usually posted at the table. If you don't see it there, ask.

That would only be $5.00 bet. He should mostly bet the full $25. zg

 

[zengrifter]

Sorry,read chart wrong T+7(2.72%adv)

Bet at +6 with the best LL payoff (ie, suited=10-1 and QQh = 200-1). zg

 

[EmeraldCityBJ]

Bet at +6 with the best LL payoff (ie, suited=10-1 and QQh = 200-1). zg

Is this true even for a 2D game? You'll usually only see these higher payouts in double-deck.

 

[zengrifter]

Is this true even for a 2D game? You'll usually only see these higher payouts in double-deck.

In Vegas the 6D often has the higher pay too. zg

 

[aslan]

See - Analysis of Lucky Ladies

Question: Would the LL bet be just as profitable at +7 in a 6 or 8 deck game, as I am assuming you're talking about single or double deck?
These are the only games available in AC.

 

[zengrifter]

Question: Would the LL bet be just as profitable at +7 in a 6 or 8 deck game?

More profitable. zg

 

[EmeraldCityBJ]

Question: Would the LL bet be just as profitable at +7 in a 6 or 8 deck game

Assuming the pay schedule is constant, the house edge is lower with more decks (or, the player edge is higher if the count is high).

 

[rdorange]

LL and DD

I've never seen the LL offered in DD. I have only seen this side bet offered on shoe games. Anybody else?

 

[zengrifter]

I've never seen the LL offered in DD. I have only seen this side bet offered on shoe games. Anybody else?

Many 2D games in LV offer it. I hit QQh w/ 25 bet 4 times in 90-days (all 2D), in 2005 when I played it regulary. zg

 

[Split10]

yesterday was the first time I tried it with a +7 TC (6D).
It works pretty well.:cool2:

 

[zengrifter]

I get others to place the bet for me too, but it could lead to a payment dispute. zg

 

[rollem411]

Say you get a +7 count at a LL table. Since the advantage to the player is so significant has anyone tried placing a max side bet in another players spot to make the most of it? EV would rise a sh*t load. I don't know if they will even allow this though.