I don't know if I should be saying this, but I just can't seem to see the flaw in how I've figured this out.
Okay, I read online (and it makes sense to me) that the source of the house advantage in Blackjack is the situation of double busting. If both you and the dealer play the same strategy, the house advantage comes from the fact that when you and the dealer bust (or would have both busted), the house gets the chips. If playing the dealer's strategy busts 28% of the time, then the starting house advantage without any strategy is 0.28 * 0.28 (when both you and the dealer bust) = 7.84% house advantage.
It is only because of player options like doubling down and splitting, that people have managed to reduce that number. However, I looked at that calculation (did a little subsequent empirical testing at home) and believe I have figured out a way to reduce the starting house advantage - before player options - to 0.7868...%
Answer: play in a team of four. Why?
Because then, the house advantage looks like this. If all of you bet the same amounts, and use the same strategy as the dealer (or at least as optimal statistically), then the house gains the advantage ONLY when 3 of you bust, or all 4 of you bust. This is because if the dealer busts and 1 or 2 of you bust, the other 2 or 3 people will win - and essentially cancel out the losses of players who busted. It becomes a team vs dealer TIE (or slight win).
So, back to our old calculation. The house advantage now comes when the dealer and 3 people bust, and when the dealer and 4 people bust.
0.28*0.28*0.28*0.28 = 0.00614656% (the chance that the dealer and 3 people bust)
0.28*0.28*0.28*0.28*0.28 = 0.0017210368% (the chance that everyone busts)
0.00614656% + 0.0017210368% = a total house advantage of 0.7868% (rounded)
So, now I'm here with my numbers and my hypothesis, looking for some discussion. The scientific method would be proud. I just hope that if I'm right, casinos don't change the game of Blackjack forever after seeing this =S.
Okay, I read online (and it makes sense to me) that the source of the house advantage in Blackjack is the situation of double busting. If both you and the dealer play the same strategy, the house advantage comes from the fact that when you and the dealer bust (or would have both busted), the house gets the chips. If playing the dealer's strategy busts 28% of the time, then the starting house advantage without any strategy is 0.28 * 0.28 (when both you and the dealer bust) = 7.84% house advantage.
It is only because of player options like doubling down and splitting, that people have managed to reduce that number. However, I looked at that calculation (did a little subsequent empirical testing at home) and believe I have figured out a way to reduce the starting house advantage - before player options - to 0.7868...%
Answer: play in a team of four. Why?
Because then, the house advantage looks like this. If all of you bet the same amounts, and use the same strategy as the dealer (or at least as optimal statistically), then the house gains the advantage ONLY when 3 of you bust, or all 4 of you bust. This is because if the dealer busts and 1 or 2 of you bust, the other 2 or 3 people will win - and essentially cancel out the losses of players who busted. It becomes a team vs dealer TIE (or slight win).
So, back to our old calculation. The house advantage now comes when the dealer and 3 people bust, and when the dealer and 4 people bust.
0.28*0.28*0.28*0.28 = 0.00614656% (the chance that the dealer and 3 people bust)
0.28*0.28*0.28*0.28*0.28 = 0.0017210368% (the chance that everyone busts)
0.00614656% + 0.0017210368% = a total house advantage of 0.7868% (rounded)
So, now I'm here with my numbers and my hypothesis, looking for some discussion. The scientific method would be proud. I just hope that if I'm right, casinos don't change the game of Blackjack forever after seeing this =S.