Royal Match and other
Treasure Hunts
10 January 2005
By Mark Pilarski
Dear Mark,
The casino I play in offers Royal Match as a
blackjack side bet. All the blackjack games
offered use a shoe. I am curious as to if this
is a good bet, especially on a shoe game. David
H.
The Royal Match is a side bet in blackjack that
is based on the first two cards dealt to the
player. The rules of this side bet are quite
simple, David. If the player's first two cards
are suited, such as a queen and five of hearts,
the player is paid 5 to 2. If the player has a
royal match, (a suited king and queen) the bet
pays 25 to 1. The final outcome of your hand has
no influence, since the player with a matched
hand is paid immediately, before the hand is
played out.
The casino's advantage on a Royal Match bet
depends on the number of decks used. The more
decks in play, surprisingly, the better the odds
for the player. If playing on a six-deck shoe
game, the casino advantage is 6.67%. On an
eight-deck game, the house edge is slightly
lower at 6.46%. For the player, things get
progressively worse the fewer decks there in the
game. For four decks, the house advantage is
7.08%, for two decks it climbs to 8.33%, and to
a whopping 10.86% on a single deck game. One
exception is a paytable I occasionally see on
some single deck blackjack games, where a
non-royal match pays 4 to 1, and a royal match
pays 10 to 1. The house edge with these rules is
3.77%.
Here's the real skinny, David. I have never seen
a side bet offered by the casino that was a
better wager than the basic game it was on.
Gimmicky side bets typically carry a house edge
of at least 3%, and run as high as 76%. And
although, David, the Royal Match wager is a
healthier side bet than most of the side bets
offered by the casino, it's still a bad deal,
being over this columnist's mandated two percent
tops casino advantage. By ignoring the Royal
Match offering, you keep more of your
hard-earned money in your wallet for a longer
time.
Dear Mark,
I saw a reference in your column regarding
Three-card poker where you advise players to
fold below a Queen-6-4. Is that the correct
strategy? In Vegas, I have always been told to
fold below Queen-9-X. Michael M.
I suggested one of two strategies. The
uncomplicated one was to shadow the dealer. If
your hand contains a queen or higher, play it,
if not, fold. The other strategy comes from
Stanley Ko, the highest authority I know on this
game. His guide, Mastering the Game of Three
Card Poker, recommends making the Play wager if
your hand consists of a Queen-6-4, or better.
Using his optimal playing strategy, the house
edge drops down to 2%.
I have not, Michael, seen an improvement on the
arithmetic anywhere by folding below a Queen-9-X
instead of Queen-6-4. If some reader has set
eyes on some crunched numbers that I haven't,
please pass it along and I'll do a follow-up.
Dear Mark, I have always been an avid blackjack
player but lately have taken a shine to
Three-card poker. Are the odds better on
Three-card poker than blackjack? Christine K.
The house edge on Three-card poker is between
2.0 and 3.4%, depending on your wager and
playing decisions, Christine. Using basic
strategy in blackjack, the casino advantage
drops to less than one percent. I'll let you
decide which game is better.
Gambling quote of the week: "Son, I've made a
life out of readin' peoples faces, and knowin'
what their cards were by the way they held their
eyes." Kenny Rogers, The Gambler
|
