insurance

[Momige]

I am reading "Professional Blackjack" and wanted some clarity on insurance. My understanding is that the insurance bet is worthwhile if the HiLo TC is +3 or higher. Is that true independant of your hand, or just when you have a natural?


Thanks

 

[Solo player]

Your taking insurance on your bet not the cards in your hand.

 

[shadroch]

Insurance is a seperate side bet. It has nothing to do with your hand.
When you have reason to believe the dealer has a BJ(ie- the count is high) you place a bet on him having one. When the count is low, you don't place the bet.

 

[Southpaw]

Treat the bet as being independent of your hand-type. However, their has been discussion about possibly considering the hand-type, when considering variance. These ideas, however, are generally rejected, or debated to a great extent.

One thing I'd like to add, though, is that you may consider using an RA index that may be .5-1 TC higher than your current, EV-maximizing one. The insurance bet is typically going to be one of your bigger bets, because it requires the TC to be high. There is no sense in putting out a large bet such as this when the expected return is so low. Simply put, risk versus return. Sure, it may be a marginally favorable bet, but the cost associated with having to decrease your unit size to maintain the same RoR, because of the associated variance, may very well be larger than this return. In conclusion, you might want to not take the insurance until a TC slightly higher than the EV maximizing one, if you have a large bet out.

Maximize your SCORE, not your EV!

SP