|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Which wireless provider? | |||
| Cingular |
   
|
69 | 40.83% |
| T-Mobile |
  
|
15 | 8.88% |
| Verizon |
  
|
50 | 29.59% |
| Sprint |
  
|
22 | 13.02% |
| Alltel |
  
|
2 | 1.18% |
| Other (specify) |
  
|
11 | 6.51% |
| Voters: 169. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#21
10-12-2006, 07:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Absolute Blackjack
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I wasn't trying to mislead you lol. I just think this is a stupid rule and they need to change it. [/ QUOTE ] It's not a stupid rule. By splitting 7's you are getting better odds at least 60% of the time. Against a 6 it's much higher than 60%... Playing Blackjack on the other hand is a stupid rule. [/ QUOTE ] Is this 60% your talking about refering to the lucky 7's or my actual hand. The lucky 7s should be seperate from what you do with your hand. For example if you have 7s 7s then hit and get an 8 you should still win the lucky 7s because the first 2 cards were still 7's. You would lose by thier rules. I think they should still pay me 50-1 even if I split and they should pay me even HIGHER if i split and the next card is a 7. 
|
|
#22
10-12-2006, 07:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Absolute Blackjack
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I wasn't trying to mislead you lol. I just think this is a stupid rule and they need to change it. [/ QUOTE ] It's not a stupid rule. By splitting 7's you are getting better odds at least 60% of the time. Against a 6 it's much higher than 60%... Playing Blackjack on the other hand is a stupid rule. [/ QUOTE ] Is this 60% your talking about refering to the lucky 7's or my actual hand. The lucky 7s should be seperate from what you do with your hand. For example if you have 7s 7s then hit and get an 8 you should still win the lucky 7s because the first 2 cards were still 7's. You would lose by thier rules. I think they should still pay me 50-1 even if I split and they should pay me even HIGHER if i split and the next card is a 7. [/ QUOTE ] Hitting also increases your odds in most cases. Hey, it's their game. They can make any rule they want. But figure the odds of standing on 7,7 and winning. I imagine the odds are better than 50:1 which means you are still getting a great deal. They won't and shouldn't pay you...
|
|
#23
10-12-2006, 08:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Absolute Blackjack
HRF, obviously the rule isn't the problem.
The problem is that while the promotion is clearly advertised and the reason many would choose to play, a major condition of it is buried in the T&C.
|
|
#24
10-12-2006, 08:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Absolute Blackjack
[ QUOTE ]
HRF, obviously the rule isn't the problem. The problem is that while the promotion is clearly advertised and the reason many would choose to play, a major condition of it is buried in the T&C. [/ QUOTE ] Exactly. I got my rules from the lucky 7's sign on the main screen which states no where about the splitting/busting etc. I think if they are going to go this route then they need to give everyone one freebie. If you were to sign up for a new casino and play blackjack having not read the T&C for blackjack and it stated that if you win 5 in a row you automatically lose then you would have no reason to complain from your theory.
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
