Percent Game

Percent Game

Many blackjack players know what "the book" says to do in adverse situations. But they sometimes honor their intuition over the laws of the universe anyway. For instance, they'll stand rather than hit 12 versus two- or three-up. Certain solid citizens flout the rules of Basic Strategy under favorable conditions as well. An illustration is hitting in lieu of doubling 11 versus 10-up, thinking the dealer too strong to put extra money on the line.Hands on which blackjack buffs tend to go their own ways are typically close calls. The chances of one such option "working" better than another in a specific instance don't differ much. The "cost" of breaching Basic Strategy in these cases is also usually low. And it's not even a real loss, but a theoretical forfeiture.Pretend you bet $10 and get 12 versus a two-up. You're the underdog no matter what you do. Hitting, the statistically projected damage is around $2.50. Standing, it's about $2.90. Basic Strategy says hit, to save 40 hypothetical cents. No big deal. If the butterflies in your stomach are less agitated by doing so, you may be better off standing and letting the dealer's hand decide your fate, instead of drawing and sweating an instant bust or reaching 17 through 20 and still being clobbered. Minimizing expected loss, as opposed to personal anxiety level, on a particular round is one take on the question. Another is selecting a strategy, and adhering to it, by considering its bearing on the edge the casino gets over a period of time.With a $10 initial bet the statistical penalty for violating Basic Strategy by standing on 12 versus two-up, standing on 13 versus three-up, and hitting 11 versus 10 up is roughly $0.40, $0.20, and $0.60, respectively. When you make these decisions consistently, their effect on the overall edge in the game goes further and involves how often the hands are expected to occur. Players see 12 versus two- or three-up on the average of 7.5 per 1,000 playable hands each; it's 13.6 out of 1,000 for 11 versus 10-up. The corresponding increases in edge are the sizes of the penalties multiplied by their probabilities of occurrence. The products are 0.030 percent for 12 versus two-up, 0.015 percent for 12 versus three-up, and 0.082 percent for 11 versus 10-up. The drop dead edge a casino gets in a six deck blackjack game with doubling allowed on any two cards, resplitting pairs, and doubling after splitting is about 0.46 percent. The three indicated departures from Basic Strategy add 0.127 percent to this value, bringing it to 0.587 percent. Assume that in a representative session, you make 200 bets averaging $10 each. Were you to follow Basic Strategy to the letter, the casino would expect to earn $9.20 from your action. The theoretical "take" with the three departures would be $11.74, an additional $2.54.On an absolute scale, the 0.127 percent gift you're giving the house, the $2.54 for the 200-round session with $10 average bets, is hardly a bankroll buster, dollar-wise. It also barely alters your ultimate session prospects. For instance, on a $100 buy-in, the likelihood you'll still be in action after 200 rounds with perfect Basic Strategy is 44.9 percent. These three frequently encountered deviations only cut that chance to 44.4 percent.For all practical purposes, in the limited number of rounds a person plays in a casino visit of reasonable duration, common violations of Basic Strategy have minor impact. Still, the edge for optimal play is small and the illustrated changes represent an increase of over 27.5 percent of the advantage the bosses are willing to accept. Add a few more "errors," such as standing on soft 18 when Basic Strategy is either to double or hit, and edge increases by 50 percent. Mix in insurance whenever the dealer shows an ace and you more than double the minimum edge.How far are you willing to go before you decide to teach those butterflies in your belly some arithmetic? Or, at least, to calm them with this couplet by the punter's poet, Sumner A Ingmark? Though benefits lost are incremental, The peril is not coincidental.

Everyone in gambling talks about it but it remains an obscure muddled subject. The topic is further muddled by those who confuse money management with sure-fire betting systems almost all of which lead to a precarious crossroad where more and more money is risked in the misguided hope of recovering that which is already lost. In the long history of gambling, from the earliest recorded history to the modern era, there has yet to surface a single betting system that is a proven winner. Like the medieval quest to turn lead into gold and water to wine, all attempts have failed. These systems have exotic names like Martingale, Grand Martingale, Fibonacci, D'Alembert but don't be fooled. The most logical money management system is simple but effective: bet less when losing and more when you are winning. Casinos understand that if you are losing, the chances increase you might "chase" your losses with even larger bets to get even. The worst time to start throwing larger bets out is when you are losing. You are probably not thinking clearly and would do better to change tables, lower your bet, or stop altogether.If you find that you are winning steadily, try betting a little more. Even betteradvice is to leave when you have won. If your initial buy-in was for $100 andyou have doubled your money, you could do a lot worse than leave. You might thinkyou are giving up potential losses but the odds are with the casino that thelonger you stay and play, the better chance you have of losing it. In the gamblingworld, there is nothing worse than winning some money, then losing it and more.

There are historical debates concerning the exact source of the game, although many feel it is Italian in origin, while others claim the French invented it. Wherever it was invented, baccara (Italian) or baccarat (French) both translate to "zero" in English. The importance of this name is borne out by the tens and face cards, the majority of the cards in the deck, sharing that value. There are numerous varieties of the game played throughout the world. Chemin de fer and straight baccarat were both brought to America and introduced at the racetrack and spa at Saratoga and the ritzy Palm Beach resort in 1911. Each was met with shrugs from the nouveau riche. Both games lapsed in popularity in America due to a distinct lack of interest.The game remains most popular in Europe and Asia. In the European versions, a player or group of players "bank" the game, with other players involved getting paid by or directly paying the game's backers and the House taking a percentage or cut. The most common contemporary American version, in which the House provides the financial backing for the game owes its immediate lineage to George Raft's Capri Casino in Havana, Cuba dating from pre-Castro days. There is a debate as to the exact time and place in which the American version was re-introduced. It came about in Las Vegas in either 1959 or 1960 at the Dunes or the Sands casino. Its originator Tommy Renzoni, stated in his (out-of-print) book , Renzoni on Baccarat, that Punto-Banco as it was called in Cuba, was brought to Las Vegas by him in the late 1950s, as Castro was about to take possession of the island.Renzoni wrote that his game owed it roots to European chemin de fer via ArgentinaHe claimed that the night of the game's first modern American play, the Sandslost $250,000. While still carrying the status of the casino's most exclusive game, baccarat is offered in at least two or more different varieties, making it accessible to almost anyone who wants to play.

Pays Roulette | Percent Two Edge | Percent Bet Bets | Places Correct | Percent Online Bets