Cashmio Play Now! 20 free spins - No deposit 200 free spins on 1st deposit Read more
Winner Play Now! 99 free spins - No deposit 200% bonus up to Ā£300 Read more
Royal Panda Play Now! 10 free spins - No deposit 100% bonus up to Ā£200 Read more
Prime Slots Play Now! 10 free spins - No Deposit 100% bonus and 100 free spins Read more
LeoVegas Play Now! 50 free spins - No deposit 200% bonus and 200 free spins Read more
ComeOn Play Now! 10 free spins - No deposit 100% bonus up to Ā£200 Read more

šŸ– NO-HOLE-CARD BLACKJACK

australia-icon

The No Peek 21 Blackjack Device automatically indicates a Blackjack without having to peek at the cards.
The no-peek rule, found in European casinos, is explained here.
This is no peek 21 dealer devise use for blackjack game or 21. You can have this devise installed on your blackjack tables.

It's a Christmas miracle - Huge December Blackjack Win

r/blackjack: A subreddit dedicated to the card game Blackjack for counters and. I see very few non electronic options online and they're very expensive.. are looked for landscape by the dealer rotating the cards 90 degrees before peeking.
Product Description. The ACOT combines an easily accessible 12-tube table game chip tray with a separate no-peek device for blackjack tables. With aĀ ...
European Blackjack plays like regular blackjack, with the difference being that the dealer does. Blackjack Variations: The 'no peek' European Blackjack Game.
CASINO NAME FREE BONUS DEPOSIT BONUS RATING GET BONUS
mrgreen
MrGreen - ā‚¬350 + 100 free spins welcome package PLAY
karamba
Karamba - $100 bonus + 100 free spins welcome package PLAY
thrills
Thrills - 200% bonus up to $100 + 20 super spins PLAY
spinson
Spinson 10 free spins no deposit Up to 999 free spins PLAY
GDay Casino
GDay Casino 50 free spins 100% unlimited first deposit bonus PLAY
royal panda
Royal Panda - 100% bonus up to $100 PLAY
skycasino
BetSpin - $200 bonus + 100 free spins welcome package PLAY
kaboo
Kaboo 5 free spins $200 bonus + 100 free spins welcome package PLAY
leovegas
LeoVegas 20 free spins no deposit 200% bonus up to $100 + 200 free spins PLAY
guts
Guts - $400 bonus + 100 free spins welcome package PLAY
casumo
Casumo - 200% bonus + 180 free spins PLAY
casinoroom
CasinoRoom 20 free spins no deposit 100% bonus up to $500 + 180 free spins PLAY
PrimeSlots
PrimeSlots 10 free spins 100% bonus up to $100 + 100 free spins PLAY

The dealer should peek at their hole card for a blackjack. Ā· Issue #98 Ā· Scrivener07/FO4_Games Ā· GitHub Blackjack no peek

pokie-1

No Peek Device - This is the mirror device that allows the dealer to check for blackjack with out revealing the value of the hole card. Texas Poker Supply.
In olden days, blackjack dealers always peeked at their hole cards. cohorts at the table as to the hole card when there was no blackjack.
If you do play in the anchorman's seat, stick to the chart and don't let other players.. Full No Peek -- The dealer will not check for Blackjack until all players haveĀ ...

starburst-pokieThe dealer should peek at their hole card for a blackjack. Ā· Issue #98 Ā· Scrivener07/FO4_Games Ā· GitHub Blackjack no peek

Casino 4 You | Blackjack peek mirror and frame Blackjack no peek

Bellagio Hotel Blackjack dealer arrested after she stabbed No Peek Device This is the mirror device that allows the dealer to check for blackjack with outĀ ...
The No Peek 21 reader is primarily a security device, designed to lessen the probability that a dealer could either work in. Category: blackjack accessoriesĀ ...
No Peek Device - This is the mirror device that allows the dealer to check for blackjack with out revealing the value of the hole card. Texas Poker Supply.

Blackjack no peekcasinobonus

blackjack no peek If neither dealer nor player has a blackjack, the player then decides how he wants to proceed with his hand.
He may take no more than that one extra card.
If the rules allow it, he may also double down after splitting.
Both hands are then played out independently of each other.
As with doubling, optimal splitting strategy should 21 completa blackjack espaƱol latino be followed to the letter.
In the event that the player busted his hand, the dealer is not required to play out his own hand and wins automatically himself.
If the dealer has a blackjack, the insurance bet wins at 2 to 1, the original bet loses and the player ends up breaking even for that hand.
If the dealer does not have a blackjack the insurance side bet loses and play continues.
This is a popular move for many players as it seems to represent a guaranteed win, preferable to risking a push in the event the dealer also has a blackjack.
Like many others in the casino, insurance is a sucker-bet.
For more details, see the.
Blackjack basic strategy In order to achieve the best possible payback you have to make correct playing decisions; is it mac blackjack mackie onyx stand or a hit?
A hit or a double?
A double or a split?
However, since blackjack offers up to fully five choices for how to play each of those combinations hit, stand, double, split and surrenderthe actual expectation is dependant on whichever option the player ultimately selects.
The option with the highest expectation for the player is clearly the correct way to play the hand.
As such, the correct play for 33 v.
Although blackjack no peek games recommended in the subsequent articles have different rules and different adherent strategies, I would recommend that you learn this generic strategy as it forms the basis of all the subsequent variations.
For comprehensive strategy charts covering almost all online games available see the Basic Strategy section in the menu, as well as my for almost all possible rule combinations.
The rules for the game this strategy applies to are: DOA, DAS, OBO see the below.
The player totals are listed down the left and the dealer upcards are along the top, with hands divided into hard totals ace counts as 1soft totals ace counts as 11 and pairs.
What makes the difference is the many different rules blackjack games use and the number of decks involved.
However, since for the purposes of this site the only games under consideration are single-deck games we can dispense with a very large percentage of everything else on offer and concentrate on rules.
The dealer must stop drawing cards when his total is at least soft 17.
Rather than dealing himself two cards, the dealer draws just one, then waits for the players to complete their hands before drawing his second card.
An alternate format is for the dealer to wait until the players complete their hands before checking for blackjack, but only collecting the initial bet and returning to the players any doubles or splits in the event of a dealer blackjack.
The result is the same.
An early version of Cryptologic used this format.
The player may double down only on an initial two-card total of nine, ten or eleven.
The player may double down only on an initial two-card total of ten or eleven.
The player may double down on the first two cards of any initial hand.
The player may double down on the first two cards of any split hand.
The dealer will check for blackjack before the option is offered.
If the player is dealt an ace pair and goes on to receive a third ace on one of them, he may split to a third hand.
When aces are split, usually only ONE card is dealt to each ace.
In DTSA, the player may request additional cards to his aces as if he were playing a non-split hand.
Doubling is always advantageous when done in accordance with correct strategy - hence DAS and DOA are player-friendly, whilst the restrictive D9 rule is not.
LS late surrender is very mildly advantageous to the player when used correctly, as is RSA.
Rule values Here are the actual percentage values for each rule.
Failing any other option, you can input these values into any game to establish the overall return.
A single deck game with the following rules - S17, DOA, no DAS, no surrender, OBO - has a of almost exactly zero, which equates to a player average return of 100% assuming accurate play - the perfect gambling game!
From your 100% return figure, subtract 0.
Ascertaining the exact rules is not always easy.
For the purposes of this site this is not an issue, since all the games under consideration are fully explained.
Standing on 16 vs blackjack no peek is an even more typical play but it costs much less overall.
If you always misplay 15 vs 10 you sacrifice an additional 0.
This is a heck of a large increase for just one hand.
Other hands, such as 14 or 13 against 10, are even more expensive if misplayed, but players tend to hit them, and so play them correctly, more often.
This is always a bad play, but splitting them against a dealer 10 upcard is the single most expensive of all basic strategy errors read more purely masochistic plays such as doubling on 20costing fully 1.
This is almost treble the house edge for optimal play, and it increases it overall to almost 2%.
It makes very little difference whether you double or just hit.
But again, doubling is the marginally better go here, so why not make it?
If you want the precise EV numbers, the hit yields 0.
To put that in context: on a Ā£5 bet, the doubling is worth an average profit of Ā£0.
Pull a pair of 10s and you've now got two 18s.
If the dealer draws a 10 on his 7, you win both hands.
The mathematics bear out the intuition, also - this hand carries the single biggest difference between all best and second-best plays in blackjack: hit, and you lose on average about half your bet -0.
Yet I still see players standing on this hand; standing is the worst of the three options.
If a player has to sit and think about whether he should play this hand as a starting total of 10 which, behind 11, is the second best non-complete two card starting total in the game, or split that 10 into two hands with a starting card of 5, which is the second-worst player upcard, that player should probably consider stopping thinking about blackjack right there and then.
I can't attribute even the fuzziest logic to this decision.
This ignores the fact that although 10 is certainly a great starting card, two of them together making a 20 is far better, but the fuzzy logic is perceptible.
But I can't see any way of arguing yourself into splitting one great starting hand into two awful ones.
Yet this uniquely kamikaze move is one that I've personally seen players make.
Don't make this huge mistake.
In fairness to the players who take it almost allit's not an expensive error, costing an average of just over one hundredth of a percent overall; it also reduces the volatility of the game slightly, as you always receive a one-to-one payment, as opposed to sometimes receiving three-to-two, sometimes nothing.
Still, refusing even money makes you more money overall than if you take it; why would you go out of your way to make less?
It's quite easy to work out why even money is bad: there are thirteen possible ranks of cards for the dealer to drop on his ace: ace, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and the four 10s.
If you take even money you receive one unit for each of the thirteen ranks, so 13 in total.
If you don't take even money, you receive a one and a half unit payment for the first nine ranks, or 13.
I also touch on this subject in the page.
I once saw a player ask for even money when the dealer had a 10 upcard!
With only four aces in each 52-card deck this would be a hugely expensive play.
Since it's against the rules, on this occasion the casino saved the player from himself and refused the request.
Actually, blackjack no peek never is - it is never correct to stand on soft 17.
You should always take another card, unless the dealer has 3, 4, 5, or 6, in which case you should double if soft doubling is allowed.
Many players baulk at the prospect of doubling at all, and it's true that several correct double plays are not at all intuitively obvious.
I hope that the two sections below put to rest any and all fears about doubling.
With 11 you have an almost fifty percent chance of making 19 or better and almost one third chance of making 21.
With 10 the chances are a lower but still good.
With 9, many players start to hesitate: the best you can make is 20, if you hook an ace, and the more likely 10 only gives you 19.
Any smaller and you're stuck with 18 or less.
Consequently, many players shy away from doubling down on 9, particularly against a dealer 3.
In fact, players will hesitate about doubling even on 10 or 11 when the dealer shows either a low or a high card, particularly a 2 or a 9.
None of the above decisions is remotely marginal.
The closest is 10 vs 9, where the double yields fully twenty five percent more value than the hit.
Never be afraid of these doubles.
If basic strategy says to double, put your faith in the numbers and push that extra chip into the box.
People who otherwise play sensibly, hitting their 15s and 16s against dealer high cards and not hitting bustable hands when the dealer card is low, seem to go all to pieces when faced with soft hands.
As I mentioned above, many players routinely stand on A6.
Standing with A7 does seem to have more solid intuitive logic about it: 18 is a decent hand against a low dealer upcard, and in fact it carries positive expectation against all dealer upcards except 9, 10 and ace.
However, it remains the case that doubling down on A7 against dealer 3, 4, 5 and 6 is still more profitable than standing.
Some soft hands are very marginal.
The difference in blackjack no peek between hitting and doubling with A2 against 5 and A4 against 4 is extremely small.
Still, if there's more value to be had by doubling, however small the difference may be you should always double.
One hand that even today causes me to scratch my head is A5 against 4.
This double to me somehow just looks awkward.
And yet doubling this hand yields almost twice the value of just hitting.
Correct soft doubling adds fully 0.
That's a substantial difference.
Always soft double when it's correct to so do, trust the arithmetic and don't try to over- analyse your way out of it.
Splitting explained Doubles require an extra bet.
When you split, sometimes more than one bet is needed.
In fact, if you can split multiple times and double after split it wouldn't be impossible to have ten bets riding on one hand - five splits and five doubles.
Although that's an extreme scenario, having at least three bets on one hand, where a double opportunity presents itself after a split, is very common.
Although every double is not intuitively obvious - some players will watch you in open-mouthed amazement when you double A6 against dealer 3 - the concept of doubling is pretty easy to get your head around: you're in a strong position and you can take advantage of that strength with an extra bet.
Some splits are fairly obvious: with two 8s against dealer 7, your current total of 16 looks pretty grim, whereas splitting it away into two hands with a fresh downcard of 8 for each looks very promising against the dealer card.
But what if you've got a pair of 3s against dealer 7 rather than two 8s?
Nothing looks particularly strong here for the player, and the dealer has a good upcard.
Why not just hit and lose one bet rather than splitting and losing two?
Extend that to a pair of 8s against a dealer 9 and the logic really seems to fly out the window.
However, when it's correct to split, as in a pair of 3s against dealer 7, although neither hit nor split is positive for the player splitting is better because it's less negative - you lose less in the long run.
A useful way of getting your head around tricky splits is to think about exactly what your starting total is with and without splitting.
This is the worst of all the upcards for both player and dealer.
If you now look at the hand as a split, you have two hands with a starting total of 3.
The 3 is not a particularly good starting card but it's a lot better than 6.
Since, perhaps surprisingly, it's actually over two times less bad for the player than the 6, then putting out that extra bet for the split is the correct play.
This way you can rationalise the most perplexing splits, the 8s against dealer 9 and 10.
With those two hands, our intuition really does work against what the numbers tell us is correct.
So put that intuition aside and think about what you've got right now - 16 - and what you'll have if you split - two starting 8s.
It's true that an 8 doesn't fair well against a dealer 9 or 10, but it's vastly better than starting with 16.
The numbers for two 8s against dealer 10 are even closer, but it's still slightly better to split, because you lose less money.
Putting out the extra bet and splitting doesn't turn a losing hand into a winner, but overall the value is higher and loses less in the long run.
To show that it's not all doom and gloom with the splits, here are all the hands that go from being losers to winners when you split: 3s vs 5 and 6; 6s vs 5 and 6; 7s vs 4, 5 and 6; 8s vs 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7.
The icing on the cake is those hands that go from being winners to bigger winners by splitting: 9s vs 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8.
As with doubling: when basic strategy says to split, always do so.
Factoring out the pushes, the player wins 47.
The extra value to the player comes from natural blackjacks that pay 3:2, plus correct doubling and splitting.
The 3:2 blackjack payoff approximately five hands in every hundred garners the player an extra 2.
Overall, since this hand is fairly read article, the cost is just 0.
This hand is so common that the overall cost is 1.
The overall cost of this mistake is a miniscule 0.
As such, if you never double, hit and stand incorrectly and always take insurance, you add an extra 7% to the house edge!
The use of a cut card results in fewer rounds containing cards that favour the player - the 9s, 10s and aces - than when no cut card is used.
Intuitively this doesn't seem to make much sense.
Let's say that on average the cut card is placed at a depth that yields fifteen rounds of play: the dealer starts dealing from the top of the shoe, the players receive fifteen rounds of cards, the cut card comes out, play for that shoe ends and the dealer starts the next shuffle.
Now let's assume that, over the course of fifteen rounds of a particular shoe, there has been a marginal predominance of the bigger cards - the 9s, 10s and aces.
These cards have the effect of requiring fewer cards to be dealt per round of play because the hands will need less cards to be complete.
To clarify this, imagine first a round of play where players see only 2s, 3s and 4s: hands using these cards will need as many as six or seven cards for just click for source />For example, with the dealer showing a 2, a player hand might be 2, 3, 2, 4, 3, and no hand will require less than three cards.
Now imagine a round of play which is served by only 9s, 10s and aces: now, with only one exception 9s vs 9, which would be a split no more than two cards per hand will be required, with the players standing on 19, 20 and blackjack.
Consequently, when those small cards predominate they have the effect of getting us to the cut card more quickly.
The big cards are all waiting in the shoe to be dealt, but we don't get to them because the cut card comes out.
However, when the big cards predominate, given that they result in fewer cards per round, we get to the cut card more slowly - and since we've been dealt a predominance of big cards, there are now small cards waiting to be dealt.
In summary: rounds of big card predominance result in an extra round of play which contains small cards, but this is not offset, when small cards predominate, by an extra round of play containing big cards.
The cut card thereby manufactures additional play containing small cards.
And small cards are bad for the player.
When a shuffle machine is in use there is no cut card, so this extra round of bad small cards doesn't exist.
VoilĆ : the "cut blackjack counting cards books effect".
The effect is small, reducing the house edge by about 0.
If the house edge with a shuffle game is 0.
Your results will fall within one standard deviation approximately 67% of the time; within two, 95%, and within three, 99.
Another way of looking at the above figures is that your results fall outside one, two and three SDs 33%, 5% and 0.
The difference between your expected loss 1 and your actual loss 35 is 34.
Your 35-unit loss is therefore a little over two standard deviations; we know that results fall outside two SDs on the negative side 2.
As such, a 35-unit loss out of 200 initial hands will occur, on average, a little more than one occasion in forty.
As such, many blackjack authors advocate progressive betting systems - increasing after a win and decreasing after a loss - in order to capitalise on these apparent non-random tendencies.
For example, row one win, win shows the percentages recorded for all the hands following two wins.
Previous two hands Outcome of this hand Win % Lose % Push % win, win 43.
The tiny discrepancies, 43.
There's a review of Professional Blackjack on the.
The logic here is that the dealer doesn't always have to play out his hand, on those occasions when all hands have been busted, and so wins by default.
This would imply that the casino has more of an advantage with fewer players, as with a full table it's very unlikely that all hands will be busted, whereas with just one player the dealer will often win by default when that one player busts.
To clearly understand this, simply exaggerate one player-friendly rule, for example the natural blackjack payoff of 3:2.
If we simply increase that 3:2 payout to 2:1, or paying double rather than one and a half, the player now has moreorless a 1.
This is irrespective of the fact that the dealer plays last.
https://veronsmeatmarket.com/blackjack/blackjack-dealer-five-cards.html fact, a single deck game with good rules yields in itself a very small player advantage, without any unusual rule changes or additions, and notwithstanding the fact that the dealer plays last as usual.
Blackjack practice The best blackjack practice utilities I can find are, predictably, supplied by Michael Shakelford and Ken Smith: It can be customised for number of decks and different rules.
If you make a mistake, a box pops up with the correct play.
The fast setting I find still a tad on the slow side.
How to weed out the charlatans and learn from the experts.
The various rules are categorised by single, double and multiple decks.
He illustrates the point with the surrender option.
This sort of information is almost invariably reserved for professional card counters, and it's a valuable resource for casual players who want to link their play under control.
A fascinating and absorbing read.
If you were limited to just one blackjack resource across the entire internet, this would be the one to go for.
The house edge figure constantly recalculates as you reconfigure blackjack no peek rules.
You need to hover the mouse over the charts to expand them to full visability. blackjack no peek blackjack no peek blackjack no peek blackjack no peek blackjack no peek blackjack no peek

This Might Be the Best Way to Beat the Odds WithOUT Card Counting



The dealer should peek at their hole card for a blackjack. Ā· Issue #98 Ā· Scrivener07/FO4_Games Ā· GitHub Blackjack no peek

Playtech Blackjack Strategy Table Blackjack no peek

In this video, the dealer will learn what to do, if they receive a 10 or ace up card. The dealer will also learn how.
Although it is a very simple cheating method, peeking leaves no evidence, which makes it one of the most convenient ways for the dealer to make a differenceĀ ...
The basic purpose of the No Peek 21 reader is to enable the dealer to determine whether or not the value of his first two cards is twenty-one (21) without havingĀ ...

COMMENTS:


23.12.2019 in 18:00 Shakatilar:

Matchless topic, it is very interesting to me))))



18.12.2019 in 13:24 Voodooran:

You are certainly right. In it something is and it is excellent thought. I support you.



25.12.2019 in 16:43 Tojataxe:

Has casually found today this forum and it was registered to participate in discussion of this question.



18.12.2019 in 22:09 Kejind:

On mine it is very interesting theme. I suggest you it to discuss here or in PM.



18.12.2019 in 12:20 Gazil:

It is remarkable, it is rather valuable information



21.12.2019 in 17:40 Tazil:

What can he mean?



22.12.2019 in 22:23 Mazurr:

Here indeed buffoonery, what that



18.12.2019 in 01:50 Vuzilkree:

It is not logical



22.12.2019 in 01:33 Malataur:

In it something is. Now all became clear, many thanks for the help in this question.




Total 9 comments.