# How does 6:5 rule gives the house a 2% edge?

#### Steely

##### Member
Hi!

This is my first post here

Im about 3 weeks into learning counting, and I have been thinking of some questions about house edges.

I have heard that playing 6:5 blackjack is a really bad idea because it gives the house a 2% edge, I do not really understand the math behind this,
If 6:5 only pays less on a blackjack but does not change the rest of they way the game is played how exactly does it give a 2% edge?

Sorry if it's a dumb question, I wanna make sure I understand everything possible before I eventually hit the casinos.

Thank You,
D.

#### DSchles

##### Well-Known Member
Steely said:
Hi!

This is my first post here

Im about 3 weeks into learning counting, and I have been thinking of some questions about house edges.

I have heard that playing 6:5 blackjack is a really bad idea because it gives the house a 2% edge, I do not really understand the math behind this,
If 6:5 only pays less on a blackjack but does not change the rest of they way the game is played how exactly does it give a 2% edge?

Sorry if it's a dumb question, I wanna make sure I understand everything possible before I eventually hit the casinos.

Thank You,
D.
To make things easier, suppose we're playing single deck and the favorable rules make the house edge 0.00%, with 3:2 blackjack. Suppose, furthermore, that we play exactly 84 hands per hour (you'll see why in a minute) betting \$10 per hand. But now, naturals pay only 6:5.

It is a fact that, on average, at SD, we get a blackjack almost exactly once every 21 hands, so, in this game, we're going to get four naturals during our hour of play. And, instead of getting paid \$15 for each of them, we're going to get paid only \$12 instead. So, we're shortchanged \$3 on four different occasions, or a total of \$12 for the hour. As we've bet 84 x \$10 = \$840 total action, we're "cheated" by a factor of \$12/\$840 = 1.43%.

We can make similar calculations for, say, a six-deck game, where the starting house edge might be as high as 0.54% or more, depending on rules. In that case, the overall house edge with 6:5 would approach, or exceed, the 2% that you mentioned in your question.

Clear?

Don

#### LC Larry

##### Well-Known Member
Shorting pays on certain hands makes the house edge go up. Increasing them makes it go down. Because they pay out less on the short pays, they in turn, make or save more money.

Don perfectly showed you how shorting a player on a blackjack does this.

#### Steely

##### Member
DSchles said:
To make things easier, suppose we're playing single deck and the favorable rules make the house edge 0.00%, with 3:2 blackjack. Suppose, furthermore, that we play exactly 84 hands per hour (you'll see why in a minute) betting \$10 per hand. But now, naturals pay only 6:5.

It is a fact that, on average, at SD, we get a blackjack almost exactly once every 21 hands, so, in this game, we're going to get four naturals during our hour of play. And, instead of getting paid \$15 for each of them, we're going to get paid only \$12 instead. So, we're shortchanged \$3 on four different occasions, or a total of \$12 for the hour. As we've bet 84 x \$10 = \$840 total action, we're "cheated" by a factor of \$12/\$840 = 1.43%.

We can make similar calculations for, say, a six-deck game, where the starting house edge might be as high as 0.54% or more, depending on rules. In that case, the overall house edge with 6:5 would approach, or exceed, the 2% that you mentioned in your question.

Clear?

Don
Ahh okay, so any way the house can save money on paying players raises the house edge. Thats perfectly clear!

Thank you Don! I really appreciate your help!