Attn: casino staffers .... & also my Friends

Has anyone ever found a casino that would allow the players to put up more than 50% of their main bet for this thing they call ............. "insurance"? I assume not. If I owned a casino, I'd let people bet right up to the table max when buying insurance ....... maybe even more. ;-)

Okay you casino executive azzholes, I know your reading this stuff. That's a money making idea for you to take to the next idiot group meeting. You can even take the credit for something your own little pea brains could never begin to fathom . I'll be okay with it as long as you start giving a little back in some other areas of the game. It is not a very wise financial decision for a casino when they restrict BJ players to only a 50% insurance line bet. Now, let's see who's smart enough to be first to actually implement the idea.

Also, keep messing with the decent rules people, and we'll start picketing your casinos. You'll see.

Stealth Bomber

I'll imagine that in your casino, when the count is sky high, with my max bet ($300) out, you'll see me buy $500 insurance. :-)

Has anyone ever found a casino that would allow the players to put up more than 50% of their main bet for this thing they call ............. "insurance"? I assume not. If I owned a casino, I'd let people bet right up to the table max when buying insurance ....... maybe even more. ;-)

When I played in the DR a year and a half ago, they allowed you insure up the full amount of your original bet.

Not only that, that had early surrender vs. 10. Surrender vs. A was not allowed.

You said:

When I played in the DR a year and a half ago, they allowed you insure up the full amount of your original bet.

So for instance if I understand you correctly, if my original bet in the circle is $100, they would allow me to place a $100 ins bet on the ins line if D is showing an Ace? If this were the scenario, and the D actually did have a BJ, then D takes the original $100 bet in the circle (assuming my two card hand was NOT a BJ) but then proceeds to pay 2 to 1 on the ins line bet, resulting in a $200 payment for the ins bet. Net payoff after the dust settles is $100 rather than the typical break even. Is this correct?

casinos allowed full insurance. One was a cruise out of Singapore. I insured S$3,000 and dealer got blackjack, I won S$3,000 on that hand. The casino closed door later for losing money... The other casino is still offering full insurance but I was barred there.

Obviously you would be better off taking full insurance instead if the count called for it.

On a related note, has anyone managed to get paid even money for BJvA at a 6:5 table?

but I don't remember for sure.