Talk:Blackjack

the controlling player

what exactly does a controlling player do as it is not made clear from the article ; nor is it made clear what constuties a controlling player although it seems that it is a player whose bet is highest ==BBLLAANNKK TR41N== (talk) 08:45, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Five card charlie

It redirects to Blackjack#Rule_variations_and_effects_on_house_edge, but there's nothing relevant to it in that section. 89.64.70.62 (talk) 22:55, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this is not a rare occurrence. Sometimes an article is created, goes through AfD, results in redirect, and overtime the target changes to move or even remove the relevant reference. There are others ways this happens too. Solutions might include updating the redirect to a better target on this or another page, updating this page with the content inferred by the redirected page name, or even deletion of the redirect. —¿philoserf? (talk) 00:56, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

So, is anyone knowledgeable enough to "update this page with the content inferred by the redirected page name"? 37.47.205.253 (talk) 09:43, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Insurance edge

@ShadowRug: Thank you for your edit. However, your edit on insurance edge would be correct only for six decks with a fixed number of rounds dealt. But no casino does this. They use a cut card which causes what we call the cut card effect. That can substantially change the odds. It's also varies by number of decks and six is not the only number of multideck shoes in the world. Alas, not even the most common these days. O3000, Ret. (talk) 17:00, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

That's why I specified approximations. It is an example that proves a point. I can't exactly do the math for every deck size now can I. The information is useful in explaing why insurance is not recommended and ads to the article which never provides a reason basic strategy makes this recommend. 66.56.139.88 (talk) 17:04, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

But it's wrong for any number of decks because it ignores the cut card effect. For six decks, it's around 5%, although that varies somewhat by penetration. For a CSM it is also different and they are all too common these days. Of course for a counter it is positive EV for the player. But it was reverted because the citation is not from a reliable secondary source as defined by: WP:RS. O3000, Ret. (talk) 17:12, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't intentionally ignore anything. The section does lack depth in explaining why. It just states over time it loses money and has no explanation or source. Why is that better than my entry? 66.56.139.88 (talk) 17:36, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

What is better is text without incorrect numbers. We can't accept that in an encyclopedia. In any case, that's not why it was reverted. A blog is not an accepted source. One of the five pillars of Wikipedia is Verifiability. Read WP:V. Also, please login when you are posting. Switching between an IP and a username is not allowed. O3000, Ret. (talk) 17:44, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

Discourage play altogether?

"Casinos generally compensate by tightening other rules in games with fewer decks, to preserve the house edge or discourage play altogether." If they wanted to discourage play altogether, wouldn't they just close the table? Assambrew (talk) 22:27, 26 September 2025 (UTC)