A friend and I were having an arguement over the following situation...
A local casino offers a blackjack game that requires a 50 cent "ante" per hand. In exchange for this side bet, they offer 3 black jacks in a row pay $500 and 4 in a row pays $750 and anything over 4 in a row pays $1000. Also 777 pays $50.
Anyways his arguement is that the more you bet the better the game becomes 'better' because the ante is a lower percentage of your bet and thus doesnt hurt you as much.
My thinking was that essentially you are 'forced' to play a 'sidebet' each hand, and that since the sidebet is independent from your black hand/bet that it wouldnt matter how much you bet on your blackjack hand since either way you are losing x dollars per hand regardless of how much you bet.
Any input? Im not really sure on how to do the math on figuring out which viewpoint is correct. Any math would be good.
Thanks
A local casino offers a blackjack game that requires a 50 cent "ante" per hand. In exchange for this side bet, they offer 3 black jacks in a row pay $500 and 4 in a row pays $750 and anything over 4 in a row pays $1000. Also 777 pays $50.
Anyways his arguement is that the more you bet the better the game becomes 'better' because the ante is a lower percentage of your bet and thus doesnt hurt you as much.
My thinking was that essentially you are 'forced' to play a 'sidebet' each hand, and that since the sidebet is independent from your black hand/bet that it wouldnt matter how much you bet on your blackjack hand since either way you are losing x dollars per hand regardless of how much you bet.
Any input? Im not really sure on how to do the math on figuring out which viewpoint is correct. Any math would be good.
Thanks