Given the choice of playing a game with 6:5 blackjack with a bet spread from $10 to $75 versus playing a game with 3:2 Blackjack with a minimum bet of $25 but one can spread only from $25 to $75, which game makes more sense?
The better rules are with the higher minimum but my session BR is only $1000.
IMO playing 6:5 is spinning your wheels at best.
Yes, I'm yelling.
If this is a single deck 3:2, with at least RO6, 1-3 can make around $25 an hour. However, ror is around 70% with $1000 br.
1. You NEVER play 6/5 BJ
2. You never play a $10 minimum game with just $1,000
If you are limited to a choice of playing a 6:5 game where you can do a 1-7 spread and a 3:2 game with a 1:3 spread because the minimum bet is higher, which one would you choose?
How many decks are you referring to ?
What are the rules:
Unrestricted doubles ?
Double after the Split ?
Resplit to 3 hand ? 4 hands ?
Late Surrender ?
Resplit Aces ?
The most important factor is how "deep" the penetration is.
That is - how many cards are cut-off. 50%, 67%, 75%, 84% ?
A 3-1 spread essentially guarantees that you will lose over the long run in ANY shoe game.
A 6::5 SINGLE DECK game generally requires about a 12 or 15 to 1 spread to be profitable.
So � a 7-1 spread is a certain loser.
You need to supply specifics on both games for an accurate answer, but barring extremely unusual conditions, both options are likely to be losing games.
So your best option would be to not play. If you insist on playing, then you are more interested in having fun than making money. If that's the case, then try to maximize the fun. Play the game with the more attractive dealer.
