Threading Thru a
Blackjack Scam
19 April 2004
By Mark Pilarski
Dear Mark,
I have noticed a trend in some casinos where the
payoffs for blackjack were 6:5 instead of the
customary 3:2. It didn't seem to matter whether
it was single, double deck or shoe; it was 6:5
for a blackjack in those places. Is this a
trend? And how does this affect the overall
dealer advantage? Hal M.
When I first started this column eight years
ago, I advised players to play by preference on
single deck blackjack games. Why? Because
perfect basic strategy on a single deck game,
shrinks the house edge to a meager 0.15%. Most
casinos back then had single deck 3:2 games. But
today, they are rarities, replaced by the single
deck game which is 10 times worse than it was a
decade ago.
The ruse going on now is that some casinos are
advertising the return of Single-Deck Blackjack,
but only offering 6:5 for a blackjack. In this
new single-deck version, a player's blackjack
gets paid only 6:5 rather than the usual 3:2.
That means that if you bet $5 and get a
blackjack, you get only $6 instead of the $7.50
you once received. The house will keep your buck
and a half with a nice smile. Consequently,
where the house edge against the perfect basic
strategy player was once a measly 0.15%, the
house edge on this game has spiraled to 1.45%.
Given a choice between a six-deck game and 6:5
single-deck blackjack, avoid the latter. A
six-deck shoe game is three times more
advantageous than 6:5 single-deck blackjack.
Bottom line, Hal: Casinos that advertise
Single-Deck Blackjack, or any blackjack game
that pays only 6 for 5 for a blackjack are
simply trading a marketing gimmick for your
dough—for which you had spent hours of hard
work. Sign up for Shunning 101.
Dear Mark,
Why is it that so many gamblers think they are
winning, but in actuality, they are losing? My
brother is a perfect example, always bragging
that he is winning. Could he possibly have that
kind of luck? Helen P.
Gamblers fall into two categories: Those that
lose and tell you they lose, and those that lose
and tell you they win. My own dear Mother,
Frances, no doubt now quibbling with St. Peter
on why Heaven's machines are so tight, would say
things like; "Look, I just won 200 credits, I'm
a winner" But Pete would have to gently tell my
Mom that she had been playing quarters, and had
already contributed $200 dollars to her favorite
one-armed bandit. Mom never subtracted the money
that she had to spend ($200) in order to win
those 200 credits ($50). She only remembered the
last scanty jackpot that paid her, not the $150
she was in the hole.
One enlightened way to get accurate accounting
from your brother would be is suggest that since
he is winning so much, that he should buy
dinner. Then, perhaps a light will flash above
his noggin and he'll tell you how much he's
really losing.
Gambling quote of the week: "There are only two
sorts of people walking the streets of Las Vegas
at 2 a.m. on a winter's night: muggers and
broken souls not worth mugging."—Anthony Holden,
The Big Deal
|
