Bust It Blackjack Side Bet
I ran across the Bust It blackjack side bet last weekend at the Palazzo in Las Vegas. It seemed countable, so I ran the numbers today. The bet is simple. You make the side bet before the hand begins, and if the dealer busts on 3 cards, you win according to the paytable. If the dealer doesn’t bust on 3 cards, you lose. The basic house edge for a 6-deck shoe game is -6.91%. The EORs are fairly high, as listed below.
Card | EOR | Balanced Count | Unbalanced Count | Simplified Count |
---|---|---|---|---|
Deuce | +0.006589 | +2 | +2 | +2 |
Trey | +0.005042 | +2 | +2 | +2 |
Four | +0.002963 | +1 | +2 | +2 |
Five | +0.000256 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Six | -0.006910 | -2 | -2 | -1 |
Seven | -0.001608 | -1 | 0 | 0 |
Eight | -0.003443 | -1 | -1 | -1 |
Nine | -0.003001 | -1 | -1 | -1 |
Ten/Face | -0.002231 | -1 | -1 | -1 |
Ace | +0.009038 | +3 | +3 | +2 |
If the cut card is placed after the 5th deck, then an ideal count (using perfect shoe composition) yields 14.7% betting opportunities, with an average +6.73% advatange per bet. That’s an average return of about 1.0% per dealt hand.
Practically, you’d use the unbalanced count in the table above and bet with a running count of +25 or more. This practical count yields 14.4% betting opportunities, with an average +6.1% edge per bet. That works out to an average return of +0.88% per dealt hand.
Depending on the side bet limits, counting this bet could be profitable. But, more likely, they’ll limit you to a $25 max bet. So your profit rate would be (100 hands/hr)(14.4% bets/hand)(+6.1% profit/bet)($25/bet) = $22/hr. Of course, you’ll almost certainly have to make the main bet too (e.g., the Cosmopolitan wouldn’t let me make bonus bets on my friend’s blackjack hand). If it’s only $5, and you get good rules @ -0.6%, then your cost would be (100 hands/hr)($5/hand)(-0.6%) = $3/hr, leaving you with a $19/hr job.
The unbalanced count is fairly complicated, with its multi-level taps. Unless your a very skilled counter, you’ll be better off using the simplified count above. It only uses +2 and -1 taps, and it still performs well, yielding 13.5% betting opportunities, with an average +5.3% edge per bet. Bet when the running count is +24 or more.
Also, the standard blackjack counts don’t work for this bet (there’s no correlation, I checked). You can tell that blackjack counts are very different than this specialised count, because Aces are +3 and Sixes are -2. Those are opposite to blackjack values, and they make sense. Ace-rich shoes are bad for 3-card busts. Also, sixes are valuable because of the 15:1 payouts.
Note: a reader says the Palazzo/Venetian deals out of 8-deck shoes. If that’s the case, and they place the cut card @ 6 decks, then the ideal return decreases to 10.7% frequency at an average +4.7% edge. The simplified count return decreases to 8.9% opportunities @ +3.5% edge per bet. You would bet for an RC of +32 or higher.
Dealer Outcome
|
Frequency
|
Probability
|
Payout
|
Return
|
bust with 888 suited
|
240
|
0.001596%
|
200
|
0.003191
|
bust with 888 coloured
|
1,080
|
0.007181%
|
50
|
0.003590
|
bust with 6
|
73,440
|
0.488299%
|
15
|
0.073245
|
bust with 7
|
157,536
|
1.047450%
|
9
|
0.094270
|
bust with 8
|
245,232
|
1.630536%
|
7
|
0.114138
|
bust with 9
|
342,720
|
2.278729%
|
5
|
0.113936
|
bust with 10
|
1,782,144
|
11.849393%
|
3
|
0.355482
|
no 3 card bust
|
12,437,568
|
82.696816%
|
-1
|
-0.826968
|
total
|
15,039,960
|
100.000000%
|
-0.069115
|
Push Your Luck Blackjack Side Bet
I came across the Push Your Luck (PYL) blackjack sidebet yesterday (while browsing, not IRL), and I wondered if it was exploitable in any way. PYL is a simple side bet. You make the bet before you start your blackjack hand, and if you end up pushing your main bet, you win 10:1 on the side bet. The max bet is 1/2 your main bet, and its usually limited to $25.
PYL has been out there for a while, but it’s new to me. It’s pretty simple to code up in my analyzer, which finds the optimal play for the combined (main + side) bet. I don’t know why, but I always expect these bets to be +EV, or somehow exploitable. I’m kind of optimistic that way.
Well, I was very surprised to find the house edge of the side bet is very low. Even when you max the side bet (@ 1/2 your main bet), the house edge of the combined (main + side) bet is only 0.76% for a 6 deck game with good rules (DAS, SP4, SPA4, H17). That’s like a cost of 0.25%, and you’re getting 10:1 odds! Here’s the auto-generated strategy table:
Hand | Dealer Upcard | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | A | |
Soft Totals | ||||||||||
soft 21 | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S |
soft 20 | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S |
soft 19 | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S |
soft 18 | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | H | S | S |
soft 17 | S | S | S | S | D | S | H | H | H | H |
soft 16 | H | H | H | D | D | H | H | H | H | H |
soft 15 | H | H | H | H | D | H | H | H | H | H |
soft 14 | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H |
soft 13 | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H |
Hard Totals | ||||||||||
hard 20 | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S |
hard 19 | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S |
hard 18 | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S |
hard 17 | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S |
hard 16 | H | H | S | S | S | H | H | H | H | H |
hard 15 | H | H | H | H | S | H | H | H | H | H |
hard 14 | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H |
hard 13 | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H |
hard 12 | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H |
hard 11 | D | D | D | D | D | D | H | H | H | H |
hard 10 | D | D | D | D | D | H | H | H | H | H |
hard 9 | H | H | H | D | D | H | H | H | H | H |
hard 8 | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H |
hard 7 | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H |
hard 6 | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H |
hard 5 | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H |
Pairs | ||||||||||
A-A | P | P | P | P | P | P | P | P | P | P |
10-10 | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S |
9-9 | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | P | S | S |
8-8 | P | P | P | P | P | P | P | P | P | P |
7-7 | P | P | P | P | P | P | P | P | P | H |
6-6 | P | P | P | P | P | P | H | H | H | H |
5-5 | D | D | D | D | D | D | H | H | H | H |
4-4 | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H | H |
3-3 | P | P | P | P | P | P | P | H | H | H |
2-2 | P | P | P | P | P | P | P | H | H | H |
With a max PYL bet, the game gets a little wild where you’re hitting the majority of your under-17 hands, even against low dealer upcards. People must have a fit at this game. But it looks kind of fun, because you’re trying to get a nice 10:1 payout. It’s a good reason to play crazy.
I thought with such a low house edge, and with a 10-to-1 multiplier, the game would be easily countable. However, the EORs are pretty tame, and are very similar to standard blackjack:
Card | EOR |
---|---|
Deuce | +0.076% |
Trey | +0.069% |
Four | +0.056% |
Five | +0.082% |
Six | +0.122% |
Seven | -0.066% |
Eight | -0.057% |
Nine | -0.008% |
Ten/Face | -0.031% |
Ace | -0.142% |
You’ll probably need the proper index plays for (not) hitting your under-17 hands on +EV counts. I looked at the strategy for a small +EV count, and the borderline decisions shift towards standard plays. If I get around to learning the lingo for index plays, I’ll post them here for PYL.
Panda-8 Co-Count with Dragon-7
With the simplified unbalanced count for the EZ-Baccarat Dragon-7, it’s occasionally fun to count a shoe and find opportunities to bet $25 – $100, to try to win $1000 – $4000. But overall, counting the Dragon gets pretty boring. It only takes a second to see the value of the hand, and to update your count. Then you spend a lot of time watching everyone think deeply about their next bets. Hopefully, the count gets to +32, so you can finally make a bet.
Counting the Dragon-7 would be pretty good if you could make about twice the +EV it offers (+52% of a fixed bet per shoe). Or at least it’d be fun if you could easily track the Panda-8 as well, to add some variety to the game. (I’ve previously posted a complicated Panda-8 count and a RCmin table that yields +22% of a fixed bet per shoe.)
Well, I can’t double the EV of the Dragon-7, nor can I easily get you the full +22% of the Panda. But, here’s an ultra-simplified Panda-8 co-count that you should be able to track alongside the Dragon-7. It’s an unbalanced count, for simplicity. It only has a few taps. The few (4) taps it has are equal to those of the Dragon-7 unbalanced count. Also, these are key taps (you focus on the +2 Nines for the Dragon; it uses the same +1 unbalanced Aces; finally, the -1 Fours and Fives are easy to remember, because they add up to 9). You should be able to track your main Dragon-7 count, then quickly scan the hand for its Panda-8 value.
Card | Count Value |
---|---|
Ace | +1 |
Four, Five | -1 |
Nine | +2 |
Starting from a running count (RC) of 0, you should bet the Panda-8 when its count gets to +35. You’ll get an average of about 2 bets per shoe (when 16 cards are placed behind the cut card), and a profit of around +9.0% of a fixed bet per shoe. It’s not a whole lot, but it’ll make sitting around the baccarat table a little more fun/tolerable. Also, it’ll give you more cred with the degenerates watching their Player lines, Panda lines, and their second bankers 🙂
Thanks to Linus B for his initial work on the Panda co-count. I greatly simplified it here for us script-kiddies.
2 comments