Evaluating Six-deck Games

For the purpose of this article we utilize computer-generated six-deck game simulations. In this case we set the number of players to four, the total bankroll is set to $10 000 and the risk of ruin is a constant (5%). Wonging and semi-Wonging play styles, unlike single-deck and double-deck games, are included here. As you can see in the tables below, the most commonly found rule combinations for six-deck games are presented, with the inclusion of late surrender.

What do tables reflect?

The first column of each table shows the true count.

The second column shows the optimum betting ramp for the respective game. In six-deck games the bet spread used is 1-12 units.

The third column shows the near-optimum bets, or bets which correspond to the optimum bet to the closest whole unit.

The fourth column shows the traditional betting ramp for the respective game.

The fifth column shows the betting ramps for the Wonging style. A player enters a particular game at a true count of +1 for six-deck games. The player will usually participate in the game only when the true count is at the above mentioned level or higher. He/she will usually exit the game as soon as the true count slips below that level.

The sixth column shows the betting ramps for the semi-Wonging style. By taking advantage of this play style, the player is able to approach a newly shuffled multi-deck game and participate in it as long as the true count is at 0 or higher. When the true count slips below 0, the player will usually exit the game.

Each of the tables listed includes four additional rows, which present valuable information. First, we have the expected value in terms of units for every 100 hands played using one of the three styles of play – the play-all style, Wonging and semi-Wonging. In this case, we have all three of them.

Next, we have the number of units a player needs to bet, so that he/she plays to a risk of ruin of 5% using a bankroll of $10 000.

Below it, we have the unit size required, which is denominated in US dollars.

And the last table row shows the earnings a player could anticipate per 100 hands played when using the unit size in the third table row. This last row may be used for the sake of comparison between different games and betting styles.

Best Online Blackjack Bonuses

HarrahsCasino.com

100% up to

$100

+ 100 Spins

100% up to

$100

+ 100 Spins

Visit Read Review Visit

Sloto'Cash Casino

100% up to

$500

100% up to

$500

Visit Read Review Visit

Uptown Aces

150% up to

$750

150% up to

$750

Visit Read Review Visit

Lucky Tiger Casino

No Deposit Bonus

$ 55

No Deposit Bonus

$ 55

Visit Read Review Visit

Shazam Casino

Exclusive No Deposit Bonus

$ 50

Exclusive No Deposit Bonus

$ 50

Visit Read Review Visit

Vegas Casino Online

No Deposit Bonus

$ 20

No Deposit Bonus

$ 20

Visit Read Review Visit

Additional points to note

When it comes to betting amounts, the tables below reflect the precise bet a player needs to make in a particular situation. Note that nobody could place a bet of $9.37 at the table (six-deck game with H17, DAS, LS and 83% penetration). Thus, in order to use the tables as a betting guide, you need to divide your total bankroll by the number of units presented for every game and every style of betting and round the result to the closest whole unit or even to the closest $5 unit. If you bet strange amounts such as, say $9 or $12.50, it will only slow the dealer down, as he/she determines the payout for blackjacks or insurance.

When it comes to risk of ruin, the dollar amounts in all tables correspond to 5% risk of ruin and a bankroll of $10 000. However, risk of ruin is not a linear category. If the table for a particular game shows that you need to bet 540 units for 5% risk of ruin, reducing the amount to 270 units will not boost that risk to 10%, but in fact, it will be boosted far beyond that level. In order to play to a different risk of ruin level, you can do the following: to reduce the risk of ruin to 1%, you need to multiply the number of units presented in the Risk of Ruin (5%) table row by 1.54. If you choose to play a six-deck game with H17, DAS and 75% penetration using the near-optimum betting ramp, you need to multiply 2087 by 1.54. In this case, you need a total of 3 214 units, so that you could play to a risk of ruin of 1%.

If you want to play to a higher risk of ruin, say 10%, you need to divide the number of units presented in the Risk of Ruin (5%) table row by 1.30. Taking into consideration the same game, you need a total of 1 606 units to do so. If you want to expose your play to an even greater risk of ruin, 15%, you need to divide the number of units presented in the Risk of Ruin (5%) table row by 1.58. Taking into account the game mentioned above, you need a total of 1 321 units to do so. Such simple calculations can be applied to any of the games presented in the tables.

When it comes to bet spreads, a spread of 1-12 units is given for six-deck games in the tables below. It is the spread, which would produce at least a decent amount of profit. In case a smaller spread is employed, the profit will be axed to the point that the game will become not worth the effort. A bet spread of 1-4 units or 1-6 units will produce quite a small if any profit in six-deck games. By employing a much greater bet spread, say 1-16 units, the player has the potential to score higher earnings per hour. However, in doing so, he/she will be exposed to a higher risk and there is also a greater possibility that casino surveillance recognizes him/her as a card counter.

Tables

From the tables above, it becomes evident that there is a considerable difference between games with a good penetration level and games with a poor penetration. Let us look back at the tables. The six-deck game with S17, DAS and 67% penetration level could potentially bring in $7.99 for every 100 hands, if near-optimum bets are used. On the other hand, the six-deck game with S17, DAS and 92% penetration level could generate potential $41.86 for every 100 hands, if near-optimum bets are used. That is an incredible 423.90% increase compared to the first example.

Another key moment to note is the importance of carefully choosing the betting unit for any game you intend to play. As we said, the table results are based on a static bankroll size and a constant risk of ruin. So, if you have a bankroll of $10 000, you would probably not participate in a six-deck game using $25 bets, but you would rather take part in a number of single-deck games. If you were to participate in a single-deck game with H17 and 60% penetration level, you could use $25 bets. If, on the other hand, you are willing to keep your risk exposure to 5% and participate in a multi-deck game, you will need to modify your betting units. In case play conditions become more favorable, you will, logically, boost your betting units. More favorable play conditions open the door to a larger array of opportunities to play at positive counts and, therefore, to use greater betting units.

What also needs attention is the fact that as the number of decks in a game increases, the difference between optimum, near-optimum and traditional betting ramps also grows. However, as the game improves in terms of rules and penetration levels, a convergence between optimum betting and traditional betting is to be observed. Let us look back at the tables. If you choose the six-deck game with H17, DAS and 67% penetration level, employing the traditional betting ramp will produce a profit of 78 cents for every 100 hands, while the optimum betting ramp will generate a profit, which is over five times larger ($4.04). If, however, you choose the six-deck game with H17, DAS and 92% penetration level, employing the traditional betting ramp will potentially bring in a profit of $30.98 for every 100 hands, while the optimum betting ramp will potentially generate $32.54. The much smaller difference between the two betting ramps, in this case, is obvious.

Last but not least, the tables reflect how valuable the late surrender option is. Let us consider the six-deck game with S17, DAS and 83% penetration level and the six-deck game with S17, DAS, LS and 83% penetration level. The game, which excludes the late surrender option, could potentially bring in a profit of $22.47 for every 100 hands when the optimum betting ramp is used. The game, which offers the late surrender option, could potentially generate a profit of $34.83 for every 100 hands at the optimum betting level. Now, if one uses the semi-Wonging style in the six-deck game with the late surrender option, the potential earnings surge to $48.82 for every 100 hands. If one uses the Wonging style in the six-deck game with late surrender, the potential earnings rise even further, to $56.35 for every 100 hands.

If one uses the semi-Wonging style of play in the six-deck game without the late surrender option, the potential earnings will be $32.96 for every 100 hands. If one uses the Wonging style of play in the six-deck game without late surrender, the potential earnings will be $39.43 for every 100 hands. The conclusion is that the late surrender option is more valuable to a card counter than it is to a player using basic strategy.