I went to AC yesterday and played my $30 Direct bet voucher

I took my $30 Direct Bet voucher and put it on red and 00 came in.

The dealer replaced my voucher with 3 red chips ($15). At this point I could have walked away with the $15 but I decided to leave it there.

They spun the wheel and red came in again. I now had $30 in chips. I pulled back $15 and left $15 on red. If I lost I still had the $15.

They spun the wheel and red came in again. I pulled back $15 and left $15 on red. If it lost I still had $30 in my hand.

They spun the wheel and red came in again. I had $30 in my hand and $30 on the table. I picked up the $30 and walked over to the cage and cashed in $60.

That's why you should always bet red.

You better listen to him Flounder. He's pre-med.

???

In AC they return half your even money bet if 0 or 00 comes up. They adopted part of the European imprisonment rule.

It doesn't seem at all obvious that Blackjack isn't a good bet when accounting for both the match play coupon and your money wagered. Since the blackjack pays 3 to 2, the argument earlier in the thread for the field bet applies to some extent for blackjack as well.

The basic idea is that the coupon gets taken if you win or lose, so the part of the EV that comes from getting your money back doesn't matter. This means you want higher variance bets. Blackjack is a way of getting higher variance in a supposed even money situation.

I understand not doubling or splitting for the full amount is a disadvantage, but the blackjack bonus seems like a big advantage if you think about how often BJs are hit and the field bet example.

Does anyone know how to figure out the optimal strategy deviations for half splits and doubles?

I was assuming someone is walking through the tables to get to the poker room, or buffet, or bar.

If you are going to sit down and play blackjack for an hour, then wait until you have an 11 to the dealers 6 with a good card count, and play it with your double-down.

This matchplay system takes 2 people but seems 100% +EV. Lets say a casino is offering you $100 matchplays. You bet $100 + $100 match play on player or banker in baccarat and then have your friend bet the opposite. Best outcome you in $100 worst outcome is a push..

a push is not +EV

a push as part of a range of outcomes can be very +EV. Would you claim that in soccer totals under 2.5 -110 and under 3 -110 are the same bets? They win with the exact same frequency.

the entire range of outcomes can be +EV only if other outcomes in the range are +EV.

the push itself is not +EV

And a matchplay is obviously +EV, so what is the point of your original comment?

kim's system claims to be 100% +EV because sometimes it wins and sometimes it pushes. I believe that to be a contradiction because a push is not +EV, so his claim of a system that provides 100% +EV is false.

So, shoving with AA preflop isn't +EV because sometimes it will push?

You're confusing Expected Value with Guaranteed Profit.

Does anybody know the Venetian's restrictions on Table Match Play? I'm going there shortly, have a bunch coming and want to know the best way to use them.

Thanks.