Blackjack apps / strategies

[Patrick425]

Why does it seem like there are not any good realistic blackjack apps available. I've tried 4 or 5 different apps now and they all seem to be unrealistic. Winning is either too easy or virtually impossible. Also, I don't like the betting on many of them (like the ones that keep a cummulative tally, but start each individual "session" at zero). I'm going to Vegas in about a month and want to brush up on my Blackjack a little. Not sure why it's so hard to make an app that emulates 6 decks (or better yet, maybe one where you can choose how many decks you want). If anyone is aware of a good blackjack app, please let me know. Also, don't want to have to register...not interested in playing "online".

[support]

This game gives you these choices and was the first one I hit: http://wizardofodds.com/play/blackjack/

 

I would have suggested you play a human for the reality aspect. I agree with you that registering is undesirable but I don't think you will find realism other than from playing another human being. IMHO, all these games are the same, unless you can introduce the human element. Even still, a computer is in full charge of the deck.

 

I would have suggested: http://games.yahoo.com/games/login2?page=bj&ss=1

 

All you need is a Yahoo! account. I have some disposable ones, of which you are more than welcome to one. If you would like one, just drop me a PM. I honestly have no clue what the game is like but it is against another human, who is most likely just playing for fun.

[rondoman]

Man I used to go to this great BJ website but cant think of what it was.

 

They allowed you to pick the number of decks and all that stuff. It was a learning site and I got into it. I was real big into BJ a couple years ago, even started counting and got into how to use different strategys depending on the count. I bought a BJ book as well as had a special BJ deck. I never ened up going big time like some guys do but I raked in a good amount of cash in a year or so visiting different casinos in the state.

 

I will try and find the site if I can.

[rondoman]

Ok I found it!!!

 

Blackjackinfo.com.

 

A lot of great info on that site as well as a strategy trainer.

[Patrick425]

Thanks rondoman and support. However, I'm looking for apps that I can play on my phone or tablet. Also, I'm more concerned about the realistic outcomes of the game than anything else. The dealer shouldn't get blackjack 10 times more than I do or vice-versa. It should be a push 90% of the time when I have a 20 hand, etc. Like I said, most of the games I have tried seem to be slanted way too much either towards the dealer or the player.

 

I did briefly try the site support posted. My first hand I got two 9's and it suggested that I split them. I would never split 9's. I'm not really looking for a site that helps me out with strategy. Blackjack strategy is really not that complicated and no matter how closely you follow "the book of hoyle" rules for playing blackjack, you are still going to lose more hands than you win in the long run. The key to having a chance of winning is using a good betting strategy and knowing when to increase and decrease bets. So, I'm looking more to practice a strategy I have always used in the past called "Oscar's grind". Described here: http://www.fortunepalace.co.uk/grind.html

 

The thing I really like about this is that you can lose more hands than you win and still come out ahead. For example, if you sat down at the table and got this sequence L,L,L,L,W,L,L, W,W,W...you would still win one "unit" even though you had 6 losing hands and only 4 winning hands. The only thing is it takes some focus and concentration to remember what your situation is and what you should bet. Also, you definitly have to set a "session" loss and win limit to have success with this and the loss limit has to be higher than the win limit. For example, if you go to the table willing to lose $100, you have to make sure you stop at $100 and you should not set your win limit higher than $50 (if your loss limit is $100), and again, walk away when you hit this limit.

[RightFieldCoder]

My first hand I got two 9's and it suggested that I split them. I would never split 9's. I'm not really looking for a site that helps me out with strategy..

Why would you never split 9s? It really depends on what the dealer is showing. If they have a weak card (4-6), I would double on anything. I would split 9s the dealer is showing a 7, and maybe even an 8.

 

I could write an app that would allow you to play blackjack. It wouldn't cheat, it would give you realistic odds, you wouldn't know the difference. But why would I do it for free? I'd either want you to pay for the app, or I'd want you to register so I can make ad money. That's why you can't find it.

[Patrick425]

My first hand I got two 9's and it suggested that I split them. I would never split 9's. I'm not really looking for a site that helps me out with strategy..

Why would you never split 9s? It really depends on what the dealer is showing. If they have a weak card (4-6), I would double on anything. I would split 9s the dealer is showing a 7, and maybe even an 8.

 

I could write an app that would allow you to play blackjack. It wouldn't cheat, it would give you realistic odds, you wouldn't know the difference. But why would I do it for free? I'd either want you to pay for the app, or I'd want you to register so I can make ad money. That's why you can't find it.

 

I guess I'm just overly conservative sometimes. I'm sure there are statistical arguments for breaking up 9's in certain circumstances, but I can't bring myself to do it. There are very few times where I double or split (actually, I always split A's and 8's...but that's it). Sometimes I don't even double on an 11 (like if the dealer is showing a 10 - I don't like the fact that I only get one card and it seems like it's always a 4 or something like that). Sometimes I will double on 10 if the dealer has a bust card showing, but even then I'm hesitant to do that. If I place a $10 bet, that's what I want to bet. I realize there are times when the odds are in my favor, but nothing is ever certain. The possible unhappiness of losing $20 when I really only meant to bet $10 outweighs the possible happiness of winning double the amount I was hoping to win.

 

I'd be willing to pay $2-$5 for an app that I know is realistic and has good betting features (did I say somewhere that I wouldn't?). Problem is that I don't know how good the app is until I have paid for it. Also, why would anyone develop any app for free?...but people do. Doesn't seem like it would take that much extra time or effort to make the odds of winning/losing more realistic.

[bani1717]

I guess I'm just overly conservative sometimes. I'm sure there are statistical arguments for breaking up 9's in certain circumstances, but I can't bring myself to do it. There are very few times where I double or split (actually, I always split A's and 8's...but that's it). Sometimes I don't even double on an 11 (like if the dealer is showing a 10 - I don't like the fact that I only get one card and it seems like it's always a 4 or something like that). Sometimes I will double on 10 if the dealer has a bust card showing, but even then I'm hesitant to do that. If I place a $10 bet, that's what I want to bet. I realize there are times when the odds are in my favor, but nothing is ever certain. The possible unhappiness of losing $20 when I really only meant to bet $10 outweighs the possible happiness of winning double the amount I was hoping to win.

 

Patrick, I think you are being overly conservative as you said. I see where you're coming from, but personally, I think it is better to take a longer-term view than one hand at a time. Yes, you could lost $20 instead of $10, but over time, you are likely to win more than you lose by doubling your bets in the right situations. If you're not capitalizing on the situations where you could (and arguably should) double down or split, then you're only increasing the house edge. My theory is that if I'm not willing to double/split on the hands where it's theoretically advantageous to do so, then I probably shouldn't have bet that $10 in the first place. (Again, just my personal preference.)

 

I have a blackjack reference card that I generally use to determine my strategy on any given hand. It says to not double on 11 if the dealer shows a 10 or A. It says to double on 10 if the dealer shows anything except 9, 10, or A. In terms of splitting 9's, it recommends to usually split them, except when the dealer shows 2, 7, 10, or A (I know, that seems like a pretty random strategy).

 

Your betting strategy does sound interesting though. What are the rules you follow for increasing/decreasing bets?

[Patrick425]

I guess I'm just overly conservative sometimes. I'm sure there are statistical arguments for breaking up 9's in certain circumstances, but I can't bring myself to do it. There are very few times where I double or split (actually, I always split A's and 8's...but that's it). Sometimes I don't even double on an 11 (like if the dealer is showing a 10 - I don't like the fact that I only get one card and it seems like it's always a 4 or something like that). Sometimes I will double on 10 if the dealer has a bust card showing, but even then I'm hesitant to do that. If I place a $10 bet, that's what I want to bet. I realize there are times when the odds are in my favor, but nothing is ever certain. The possible unhappiness of losing $20 when I really only meant to bet $10 outweighs the possible happiness of winning double the amount I was hoping to win.

 

Patrick, I think you are being overly conservative as you said. I see where you're coming from, but personally, I think it is better to take a longer-term view than one hand at a time. Yes, you could lost $20 instead of $10, but over time, you are likely to win more than you lose by doubling your bets in the right situations. If you're not capitalizing on the situations where you could (and arguably should) double down or split, then you're only increasing the house edge. My theory is that if I'm not willing to double/split on the hands where it's theoretically advantageous to do so, then I probably shouldn't have bet that $10 in the first place. (Again, just my personal preference.)

 

I have a blackjack reference card that I generally use to determine my strategy on any given hand. It says to not double on 11 if the dealer shows a 10 or A. It says to double on 10 if the dealer shows anything except 9, 10, or A. In terms of splitting 9's, it recommends to usually split them, except when the dealer shows 2, 7, 10, or A (I know, that seems like a pretty random strategy).

 

Your betting strategy does sound interesting though. What are the rules you follow for increasing/decreasing bets?

 

You are probably correct bani, but I have a fear of putting extra money on the table that I did not plan to, especially if I happen to have a larger bet on the table at the time.

 

I've seen similar suggestions for splitting 9's (except what I have seen also suggests splitting when the dealer shows 2). Doesn't seem random and I understand the thought process when you assume that the dealer's hidden card is 10. You would not split them when dealer is showing a 7 because you already have him beat.

 

The rules I follow for increasing and decreasing bets is based on the link I provided in one of my previous posts. There is more detail in that link than I care to go into right now, but the basic strategy is to win one "unit" at a time (you determine the base unit you are playing...$5, $10, $20, etc). Each time you win one unit you start over. You only increase your bet when you A) win a hand and B) you have not completed the goal of winning a unit. You increase it by one (over your previous bet), but you never bet more than what it would take to get you to your goal of winning one unit. Again, this is explained much better in that link.

[fondybrewfan]

I am running my first ever 1/2 marathon on Saturday at Miller Park. The most I have ever ran is about 9.25 miles. I am banking on competition and water along the way getting me to 13.1 miles. I will never do this again as training is a pain in the butt; but atleast I will be able to say I did it (hopefully). I think I can handle 13.1 miles from a conditioning standpoint; I just don't know if my knees and hips will hold up with all the hills. My goal is 2 hours.

 

Any other BFers running the race?

[rwa12]

Patrick, I rarely split 9s either. IMO, and it differs from your strategy, the only way to win at BJ consistently is to win the Double Downs and Splits. I play a cumulative strategy. I increase by one chip when I win a hand, and reduce to initial bet at the end of the streak. I am very aggressive with double downs, and I can say that I win more than I lose. I'm fine with any strategy at a table, so long as it is consistent. If you sit on 16s, do it every time. I hate when people try to time the deck, and change strategy based on what they "feel" is coming. It's a 6-8 deck shoe, a third of which is spoiled, you can't have any idea what is coming next. Besides the obvious basics, I hit a 12 against a 2, I double anything playable against a bust card, and I always try to sit at 1st or 3rd base. I go in assuming I'll lose my buy in, so once at the table, I don't really worry about individual bet denominations. I tend to walk away when I get bored, or hit a round number. I'll usually walk when I triple up, or double up if the table is a grind.

[Patrick425]

rwa..I definitely agree with the "you can't have any idea what i coming next" thought. I see so many people at blackjack tables get upset because a "novice" is sitting at 3B and takes a hit on something over 11 when the dealer is showing a bust card. They assume that this can only hurt the table and that they are taking the dealers bust card. So, what they are assuming is that the next two cards in the deck are a 10 (or other large card) followed by a small card. How can they possible know this and how do they know that it's not the other way around and by taking a hit 3b actually saved the table? Drives me nuts when people at a blackjack table get so upset about how other people are playing.

 

I saw a guy split 10's once. I thought it was amusing, so did the dealer.

[pitchleague]

that really aggravates me, also. If I'm playing blackjack, let me play the way I want to. If somebody else is hitting on "no-hit" situations, let them do it. It's the only way they will learn how to play the game. But don't get mad about it. Sit out a few hands or move to a different table. Advise them. Be friendly about it.

 

If you're going to get mad while sitting at the $5 tables, then maybe blackjack isn't your game. Move to the high roller section. The people at the $5 tables are primarily there for fun, not to make money.

[rwa12]

I agree that table stakes helps to define a strategy. If I'm playing for fun, and at a $5 table, I don't care what happens. I get slightly more irritated at the $25 tables. At that stake, I expect you to have a basic understanding of blackjack rules. I'm not a big drinker, so the extremely inslopsicated at the tables always annoy me. I actually had a pretty amusing argument at a table in some Indian casino in Florida. They were using a constant shuffle machine, with what I believe was a 6 deck shoe. Basically, after every hand, the cards were placed back in the machine and reincorporated in the shoe. No stopping to shuffle, non stop action for the casino. Eliminates any and all strategy, as you are basically resetting after every hand. There was a gentleman who was irate over some young woman's erratic play. I tried to tell him that with the setup they had, each hand was basically independent of all others. He was sure she was "screwing up the deck". Why give your money away when you don't even understand the rules of the particular table? Winning at that table could only be described as luck. You might as well have been calling heads/tails or playing WAR.

[Patrick425]

Eliminates any and all strategy,

 

Hmmm..unless you are counting cards or trying to keep a rudimentary tally of how many face cards have been dealt, it really should not change the strategy at all. The only thing, other than keeping the action non-stop, that constantly shuffling the deck does is keep anyone from trying to figure out what cards are "out of play" because there are no cards out of play (other than the other player's cards that you can see on the table during a hand).

 

Whether it's a $5 table or a $100 table, no one will be able to convince me that a person not playing by the "rules of blackjack" will hurt the table more than help it. Sometimes it hurts the table (that's when people get angry), sometimes it helps the table (that's when people mumble words about that person being "lucky" that didn't cost them). In the end it all evens out.

 

Didn't realize that there would be such a lively blackjack discussion. I should have started a seperate thread!

[1992casey]

I should have started a seperate thread!

 

Done.

[Patrick425]

So..just got back from Vegas. I think it was the 5th time I have been there. My first time was over 20 years ago...so much has changed there over that time period (especially in regards to BJ tables). This post could also fit in the "What's bugging me" thread, but since it's blackjack related I'll put it here. Here are my rants:

 

- Over the years it has gotten harder and harder to find $5 minimum tables. Pretty much now, if you are going to play at one of the major casino's on the strip, you better be prepared to play $10 minimum and at some peak times, even those are hard to find.

- NY, NY always has 2 tables open, but they are always full. I also found several $5 tables at Excalibur, but they only paid 6-5 for blackjack.

- Speaking of 6-5 blackjack, that seems to be a trend, at least for 1 or 2 deck tables (which there seemed to be a lot more of than I remember before). Unless you are trying to count cards, 1 or 2 decks does not give you any advantage over a 6 deck shoot, so why would you take 6-5 BJ payoff instead of 3-2? I refused to play at a table that only offered 6-5, so there were times where I did a lot of searching.

- Blackjack tables in Vegas, in general, are decreasing in numbers and being replaced by alternate card games like Pai Gow, blackjack "switch", some "mini-form" of Texas hold em, and others. None of which I have any interest in.

- Some casinos in general were just useless if you wanted to play $10 minimum and get 3-2 payoff for blackjack. On a Friday afternoon I could find no such options at Cesar's Palace, Paris, Mandalay Bay or Planet Hollywood.

 

On the plus size...casino's I really liked and where I could find the tables I like were the Tropicana (love how bright it is in that casino!), Excalibur, and Luxor. We stayed at MGM. Usually I could find tables I liked there...but not always.

 

I ended up with net winnings $175 mainly because of following the "Oscar's grind" betting strategy I mentioned in an earlier post (I'm sure I lost more hands than I won..but I still came out ahead). Also because every time I sat at a table I had an winning and losing amount threshold in my head. I feel that most people that sit down at tables, don't have this and end up staying at tables way longer than they should. My feeling is that you have to be willing to risk 2X what you what to win at any session. So, if you want to win $50, then you have to be willing to lose $100.

 

Lastly, this isn't a rant or rave, just an observation...but I didn't notice any "training" tables. It seems like every casino use to have these several years ago.

[rwa12]

You're right Patrick, low limit tables have disappeared from all of the trendy casinos. You have to hit the older ones you mentioned to find that kind of action. It gets annoying. I'm going in about a month, and am staying at Ballys, which I think at least offers $10 tables in multitude. The last time I was in LV, we were at NY/NY, a place that I loathe. There were no open spots at any of the tables in the 10-25 range. There were three empty 100 tables. I asked the pit boss to lower the stakes at one of them, as we had a full table of people that would have sat down. She laughed at the suggestion. When I questioned the logic of an empty 100 table (with 2 more available), versus the action of bringing in a full tables worth of $25 players, she just looked at me blankly. I could understand it if I was asking her to lower the 1 high limit table, but it was an off time, and the high rollers weren't out. She had 10 $100 spaces to fill before it was a problem. I didn't ask her to lower to $5, I was a little surprised she turned it down. Money in is money in. Stupid is as stupid does.

[bani1717]

I went to Vegas a couple of years ago for the first time... Agreed that it is hard to find low limit tables. Two casinos on/near the strip with lower limits that I discovered were Hooters (several tables in the $3-$5 range) and Slots-A-Fun (I believe I played for $3 there).

[NeedMoreFans]

You guys missed out on O'Shea's...$1 tables! But, you have to be there before noon, and they deal cards face-down, which I don't like.

 

I remember a dealer saying that some casinos like Hard Rock were paying even for a blackjack in hopes of getting more double downs on the 11 showing. This was especially true on single-deck tables.

[Patrick425]

You guys missed out on O'Shea's...$1 tables! But, you have to be there before noon, and they deal cards face-down, which I don't like.

 

I remember a dealer saying that some casinos like Hard Rock were paying even for a blackjack in hopes of getting more double downs on the 11 showing. This was especially true on single-deck tables.

 

Isn't O'Shea's downtown? I've never been downtown. Every time I go, I plan to go downtown, but never get around to it. Yeah..I wouldn't like the face-down thing or having to handle cards. I sat at a table like that once and had no idea what I was allowed and not allowed to do (in regards to when I could pick up the cards...etc).

 

A guy I work with went to Vegas recently and said he was doubling down on blackjack at 6-5 tables and the dealer told him that it was not unusual for players to do that. I don't care what the odds are, I don't think I would ever risk giving away a certain win. I'm pretty sure "the book" states never to give away a good hand...like splitting 10's or facecards when the dealer has a bust card. I see players do this as well...and I don't get it. Seems overly greedy to me. Just take your win and be happy with it.

 

Hooters is not that far from MGM and I saw the sign that said $3 blackjack. I was going to walk over there, but again, did not get around to it. Also, once I'm done at a table, I like to leave the casino and go to a different casino. Didn't want to walk all the way to Hooters and then end up having a session that only lasts 15 minutes.

 

Unrelated to Blackjack....my wife and I went out Thursday (Halloween) and Friday night. Went to Mix at Mandalay Bay and Voodoo Lounge at Rio. Mix had no cover and I had to pay $30 to get in at VooDoo lounge (wife got in free). Drinks were about the same price they are everywhere in Vegas (expensive). My wife and I were probably 15-20 years older (or more!) than the average patron in each bar, but we had a blast people watching and the views of Las Vegas at both of these places are fantastic (Mix is on the 61st floor and Voodoo Lounge on the 52nd...or something like that). Both places have outdoor balconies...Voodoo lounge has a big outdoor area with a bar, dancing, and DJ. Ended up at a small bar in MGM at 4am on Saturday morning having political discussions with a group of very nice guys from Denmark. It was a great trip.

[NeedMoreFans]

Isn't O'Shea's downtown?

 

It was on the Strip near the Flamingo, but apparently it closed last year and they are building a new development with a giant ferris wheel.