Switcheroo allowed with
this blackjack hybrid
23 February 2007
By Mark Pilarski
Dear Mark: I just returned from a stay at
Harrah's Reno where they were pushing a new game
called Blackjack Switch. The player must make
two bets of equal size and is dealt two hands.
The player then can switch the second card of
each hand to improve one or both hands before
standing or hitting. The catch is that a Dealer
"22" is a push, not a player win, and a player's
blackjack pays even money.
Gee, why do I smell a trap here? Only the second
cards can be switched, the house doesn't lose
when the dealer busts with 22 (the player loses
with 22), and a player's blackjack is even money
even if dealt before switching. Was I right to
give this "opportunity" a wide berth? Mike H.
You're not smelling a trap, Mike, but perfume.
What is considered cheating, that of trading
cards between two hands, is now legal for those
who play Blackjack Switch. Players must make two
bets of equal size and they are then allowed to
switch the second card dealt to each hand. For
example, you are dealt a seven and then a six on
one hand, and a five followed by a three on the
other. Normally this would give you a 13 and an
8. With Blackjack Switch you can now switch the
second card dealt, the six with the three, and
you now have two great hands to double down with
5+6 (11) and 7+3 (10).
Granted, Mike, a winning player's blackjack is
paid even money, and the dealer is compensated
with a push on 22, but, using perfect basic
strategy similar to, but -- due to the push on a
22 -- not exactly like conventional blackjack,
the house edge is 0.16% with six decks and 0.18%
with eight decks.
Dear Mark: I was recently playing in a
tournament, and I was on the button. The cards
are dealt and the person first to act goes all
in with her chips (about 3,000). The next guy to
act re-raises her all in to 6,000 and everyone
else folds. When it comes around to me, I call
the 6,000 raise, and when they get back to the
lady that went all in with her 3,000, she throws
her hand in. Another player at the table informs
her that she is already "all-in" for her 3,000
chips, to which she replies, "I don't care, I
cannot win." But, after some convincing from the
player, she asks the dealer for her cards back,
which he gives to her. When I asked if this was
legal, I was told it was because her cards did
not actually touch the muck pile, or another
dead card. I thought that the "act" of her
throwing her cards in was enough. Can you
clarify for me? Eric R.
As for casino Hold'em games, Eric, the rule is
that "cards speak." Your poker hand is what it
is, regardless of how you call or miscall it.
Any verbal declaration as to the content of a
player's hand is not binding. If she claimed
that the hand is worthless, but in fact she had
a straight, her cards speak, and her hand is
viewed for its genuine value, that of a
straight. Her about-face was legit as long as
her cards didn't touch the muck, the pile of
discarded cards in front of the dealer, or
another player's cards.
That said, I have seen a poker room manager foul
a hand of a player who continuously miscalled
their hands; but it's discretionary, and it did
correct the behavior.
Gambling Wisdom of the Week: "You can't gamble
by the clock. Time can place a limitation on
pleasure." Nick the Greek Dandalos
|
