|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| Subscribe to CP Archives | |||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
|
Don't be fooled into thinking you're protecting your money
by Henry Tamburin |
|||||||||||||||||
|
Pssst
Wanna make a bet that will double your money? All you have to do is pick any card from this shuffled deck. If its a 10 or picture card, Ill pay you twice your bet. If its not, you lose only your original bet. Wanna play? If I asked you how many 10 and picture cards are in a single deck of cards, what would you say? Of course, there are 16 10-value cards: the four 10s, Jacks, Queens, and Kings. We also know that the rest of the 36 cards in the deck are non-10-value cards. With this tiny amount of information, we can analyze the above proposition. Since there are 16 10-value cards, this means youve got 16 ways to win and 36 ways to lose. The odds of winning are therefore 36-to-16, or 2.25-to-1. Compare this to the payoff odds in the proposition, which are 2-to-1 (you bet $1 and win double, or $2). Since the odds of picking a 10-value card from the deck (2.25-to-1) exceed the 2-to-1 payoff odds, youve got the worse of it. In fact, you would lose $4 on average for every $52 you bet on this proposition, giving your opponent a massive advantage of 7.7 percent. You would be stupid if you got suckered into making this proposition bet. So whats all this got to do with blackjack? Plenty, because what I described is in fact the identical proposition that the casino offers its blackjack players, only its disguised as an insurance bet. Let me start by stating this fact: The insurance bet in blackjack has absolutely nothing to do with insuring your original hand from a loss. Zippo. Nada. Zero. Yes, our friends from the casino industry would like you to believe that the insurance bet is there for your protection, especially when you are holding a good hand like a 20. After all, no one with a 20 wants to lose to a potential dealers blackjack. So they let players insure their bet so that if the dealer winds up with a blackjack, players end up with a push rather than loss. Thats very nice of them, but the plain matter-of-fact truth is that, in the long run, the insurance bet is a big loser for the player and a big winner for the casinos. The mechanics of the insurance bet are pretty straightforward. Whenever, the dealer shows an Ace face card, he will ask the players if they want to make the insurance bet. Its an optional and separate bet in which the player is betting that the dealers hole card is a 10 or picture card. The amount that the casinos let you wager on the insurance bet is equal to one-half the original bet. If the dealer ends up with a 10 or picture card in the hole, your insurance bet will win at 2-to-1 odds. If the dealer doesnt have a 10 or picture card, the players insurance bet is lost. Suppose, for example, that you make a $10 bet on your hand, you do not have a blackjack, and the dealer shows an Ace. You decide to make the insurance bet, so you place a $5 chip above your original bet, on the semicircular portion of the layout labeled Insurance pays 2-to-1. Lets assume the dealer checks his hole card and its a 10, giving him a blackjack. Heres what happens: You lose your original $10 bet on the hand to the dealers blackjack, but win $10 on the $5 insurance bet. Overall, you pushed. Of course if you did not take the insurance bet, you would have lost your original $10 bet because the dealers blackjack would have beat you. This is the reason the experts will tell you that you are better off to push on the hand by making the insurance bet, rather than lose it all. Seems logical doesnt it? But here are the true facts about the insurance bet: |
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||