even money/insurance in a 6-5 game

In a regular blackjack game, one takes insurance or even money when the true count has 

about 3 extra 10 cards. For my system, AOII, it's a TC of +6 or better.  But in a 6-5 game, 

I believe it's generally advisable to take insurance or even money at a lower true count against a dealer's

ace showing, since the payout is lower if the dealer doesn't have a natural but successful insurance

still pays 2-to-1 like it does in a normal 3-2 game.

My question is, at what true count should one NOT take insurance or even money in a 6-5 game.

As an aside, I know a lot of APs don't like 6-5 games, I get that.  But I do play them when it's 

single deck, deeply penetrated,  a reasonable minimum, and big allowable bet spreads.

Thanks 

Note: This is an edited version of the previous, nearby post.  For some reason, this forum 

adds a second post when you edit it and there's no way to delete an original post (although it

appears you can delete a reply post).

It appears there was a glitch that caused the duplicate post.  I deleted the original post.

I’m not so interested in 6:5 blackjack games, but the concept of true count is supposed to be used in six and eight-deck games. It’s not a good measure for single and double-deck games, I believe. 

Why would you say such a ridiculous thing? True count is used in ALL games. What's wrong with you?

You can't take even money in a 6:5 game. No casino would offer that.

Don

I’ve been thinking about this. Let me use error analysis to explain to you. True Count (TC) equals Running Count divided by Deck Remaining, that is,

TC = RC / DR.

The error comes mainly from estimation of the remaining deck number, that is,

Delta(TC)=RC x Delta(DR) /(DR)^2.

For eyeballing, a reasonable error for the remaining deck umber is 0.25. 

Consider a 6-deck shoe. When RC=+1, DR=1.5,

TC = +1/1.5 = +0.67;

Delta(TC) = +1 x 0.25 /1.5^2 = 0.11.

Consider a 1-deck shoe. When RC=+1, DR=0.25,

TC=+1/0.25 = +4;

Delta(TC)=+1 x 0.25 /0.25^2 = 4.

This comparison indicates that the error of calculating true count is too large for single deck games.

OK, I'll tell that to the thousands of counters who have played single deck over the last 50 years and won millions of dollars. They'll be glad to know that true counting doesn't work.

Don

I’ve been paid even money on a 6:5 game several times. A few years back I got the impression that the casino either did not tell the dealers or did not have a no even money policy. Back then it was more common to be given even money at 6:5 than being told no. Currently it seems that they all have a no even money policy and dealers have been told, but they still forget and some still get even money. More common now to be told no. Also they sometimes pay 3:2 at a 6:5 table especially in places that have very few or only one 6:5 table. I don’t mind occasionally playing 6:5 at single deck. Or if visiting a really nice place where minimus at 3:2 are high but 6:5 has much lower minimums at 2 or 8 deck. Also I figure if I don’t get a blackjack while I’m playing, the games are equivalent 😂

Phil

6:5 increases the house edge of a typical game by about 1.5% regardless of the rules. Even a terrible SD H17 D9 NDAS game has a house edge of about 0.30% at 3:2 and about 6 times that much at 6:5. You are better off playing 3:2 at $25 than 6:5 at $5.

Making that game marginally better by making it DOA reduces the house edge to 0.17% at 3:2. You're now better off playing 3:2 at $45 than 6:5 at $5. It only gets worse as the rules get better.

Even for a typical shoe game, you're losing about 4 times faster with 6:5.

You will be dealt a blackjack once every 21 rounds or so.

Dont fool yourself. 6:5 is in no way equivalent to 3:2 .

These 6:5 blackjack games are a rip-off on players. They should be banned forever!

That's aceside's FIRST EVER   logical post!

I don't quite understand even money insurance on a 6:5 game when both the player and dealer have BJ.

If insurance pays 2:1 and is half the basic bet, the insurance payment would still equal the original bet even on the 6:5 BJ.

So why is it  different if the player requests even money verses actually placing the insurance bet?

Obviously, I haven't played rip-off 6:5 so maybe that is why I don't understand it.

Let me derive the math for you. On a 6:5 game when both the player and dealer have BJ, even money and insurance are exactly the same.  However, they are different when the player has BJ while the dealer does not, because even money pays +1 unit but insurance pays +1.2-0.5 = +0.7 unit. 
 

Therefore, take even money.