Blackjack Hand Payout Assistance Requested

[aksplace]

As an avid blackjack player over the years I already know the answer to this question but need resolution as a particular company thinks differently. I have set an example to show in a simple form and if your familiar with the game and the 3/2 payout structure this answer should come easy to you. (of if your good with a calculator or math)

Starting Balance: $100.00
Amount Risked: $100.00
Player Hand Result: Blackjack
Dealer Hand Result: 19
Players Finishing Balance: (you fill in the blank)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$100 Chip + $150 for winning blackjack hand
The answer should be $250.00

[cwil]

You are correct, obviously, and I'd love to know what casino is saying differently.

[aksplace]

You are correct, obviously, and I'd love to know what casino is saying differently.

The amounts have been changed but here is the explanation they have provided:

Once again. Step by step. >:-|

Step 0. Original balance: 229
Step 1. She bet 25. Balance: 204
Step 2. She got BJ. BJ pays 3 to 2. 3 to 2 of 25 is 37.5. So balance is 204 + 37.5 = 241.5

Which is wrong as the balance should be 229+37.50 =266.50

The casino in question is a good fast paying company clearly unaware how the game is paid out. Which will probably come out as a huge embarrassment to them. I do not want that to be the case but will be publishing a full report shortly enough as I have received a complaint. I have already requested they do a full massive audit to repay members previously who was previously underpaid.

[masterluc]

He is talking about my casino and we had a dispute about it.

I say "BJ pays 3 to 2" means "House takes 2 and pays 3". So having initial balance $100, then risking $100 result balance would be $150.

And in regular round "House pays 2 to 1" means "House takes 1 and pays 2". So having initial balance $100, then risking $100 result balance would be $200.

Following askplace scheme, that would be following:

On BJ 3:2 initial $100, result $250 (Actual payout 2.5:1 instead of 3:2).
On regular 2:1 initial $100, result $300 (Actual payout 3:1 instead of 2:1).

This is nonsense.

[masterluc]

The casino in question is a good fast paying company clearly unaware how the game is paid out. Which will probably come out as a huge embarrassment to them. I do not want that to be the case but will be publishing a full report shortly enough as I have received a complaint. I have already requested they do a full massive audit to repay members previously who was previously underpaid.

Sorry man, but it is you unaware about game. If my scheme is wrong, why your balances have +3000% winnings? If I replace 3:2 to 2.5:1 as you propose - you will have 100500%. I am not a donator and know math well.

[bit777]

He is talking about my casino and we had a dispute about it.

I say "BJ pays 3 to 2" means "House takes 2 and pays 3". So having initial balance $100, then risking $100 result balance would be $150.

And in regular round "House pays 2 to 1" means "House takes 1 and pays 2". So having initial balance $100, then risking $100 result balance would be $200.

Following askplace scheme, that would be following:

On BJ 3:2 initial $100, result $250 (Actual payout 2.5:1 instead of 3:2).
On regular 2:1 initial $100, result $300 (Actual payout 3:1 instead of 2:1).

This is nonsense.

In BJ all hands pay out 1:1, Which means if you have starting balance of 100, you bet 100, and win 200 (with ending balance of 200). If you have BJ, you win 250 (with ending balance of 250).

[aksplace]

He is talking about my casino and we had a dispute about it.

I say "BJ pays 3 to 2" means "House takes 2 and pays 3". So having initial balance $100, then risking $100 result balance would be $150.

And in regular round "House pays 2 to 1" means "House takes 1 and pays 2". So having initial balance $100, then risking $100 result balance would be $200.

Following askplace scheme, that would be following:

On BJ 3:2 initial $100, result $250 (Actual payout 2.5:1 instead of 3:2).
On regular 2:1 initial $100, result $300 (Actual payout 3:1 instead of 2:1).

This is nonsense.

It is not nonsense it's truth.. Your a paying quality advertiser this comes out in no disrespect but your clearly unaware on how to pay out with blackjacks. I have to not only be fair to sponsors but also folks who use the recommended list as a place to bet with which is why this complaint has moved forward.

I say "BJ pays 3 to 2" means "House takes 2 and pays 3". So having initial balance $100, then risking $100 result balance would be $150.

That is incorrect the resulting balance (including the wagered amount) should be a total of $250 not $150

[aksplace]

He is talking about my casino and we had a dispute about it.

I say "BJ pays 3 to 2" means "House takes 2 and pays 3". So having initial balance $100, then risking $100 result balance would be $150.

And in regular round "House pays 2 to 1" means "House takes 1 and pays 2". So having initial balance $100, then risking $100 result balance would be $200.

Following askplace scheme, that would be following:

On BJ 3:2 initial $100, result $250 (Actual payout 2.5:1 instead of 3:2).
On regular 2:1 initial $100, result $300 (Actual payout 3:1 instead of 2:1).

This is nonsense.

In BJ all hands pay out 1:1, Which means if you have starting balance of 100, you bet 100, and win 200 (with ending balance of 200). If you have BJ, you win 250 (with ending balance of 250).

Thank You Bit777 for chiming in and trying to help another casino understand the payout rate. Masterluc you need to trust me I have been an avid BJ player for over 2 decades.

[masterluc]

In BJ all hands pay out 1:1, Which means if you have starting balance of 100, you bet 100, and win 200 (with ending balance of 200). If you have BJ, you win 250 (with ending balance of 250).

Okay, looks like I am wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackjack

Wins are paid out at 1:1, or equal to the wager, except for winning blackjacks, which are traditionally paid at 3:2 (meaning the player receives three dollars for every two bet), or one-and-a-half times the wager. Many casinos today pay blackjacks at less than 3:2 at some tables.

[masterluc]

I will recalculate balances shortly.

[aksplace]

I will recalculate balances shortly.

Like I was mentioning your payouts have always been quick and the bonuses offered are more than fair.Thank you for rectifying players balances and is just another reason your rating holds at A-

[masterluc]

Balances recalculated.

This was misunderstanding from my side and I am sorry.

[ar8003]

Wow that is really scary...  Why would you play at a place that does not understand what a 3:2 blackjack is when there are so many other options lol.