Is insurance a good blackjack strategy

[MiaLuca]

When it comes to blackjack, it's worth mentioning that opting for insurance is generally not seen as a wise move. From a statistical perspective, the odds are often stacked against the player, potentially leading to greater losses in the long run. Seasoned blackjack enthusiasts typically advise against taking insurance.

 

[CR7]

I completely agree with your statement. Insurance in blackjack is generally not a recommended strategy because the odds are in favor of the house. Let me explain why.

When a dealer's face-up card is an Ace, players are offered the option to take insurance. Essentially, insurance is a side bet on whether the dealer has a blackjack. It costs half of the original bet and pays 2:1 if the dealer indeed has a blackjack.

The problem with insurance is that it is not a fair bet. To illustrate this, let's consider a hypothetical scenario involving a single deck of cards. In this scenario, there are 16 ten-value cards and 36 non-ten-value cards remaining in the deck after the player's and dealer's initial cards have been dealt.

If we assume that the player has a ten-value card (worth 10 points) as their hand, there are 15 remaining ten-value cards, out of a total of 51 unknown cards. This means that the probability of the dealer having a blackjack is approximately 15/51, which reduces to about 29.4%.

However, the true odds of a blackjack occurring are 9/42, which results in a probability of about 21.4%. This is because 3 of the 9 remaining ten-value cards have already been dealt to the player and 16 ten-value cards remain.

When we compare the true odds of a blackjack occurring (21.4%) with the payout for insurance (2:1, which is 33.3%), we can see that the insurance bet is not in the player's favor. This discrepancy between the probabilities and the payout makes insurance an unfavorable bet in the long run.

Furthermore, taking insurance can also affect the player's overall strategy. Instead of focusing on the main objective of blackjack, which is to beat the dealer by getting closer to a total of 21 without going over, players who take insurance are shifting their attention towards an additional side bet. This can potentially distract them from using optimal blackjack strategy and may ultimately lead to greater losses.

In summary, while insurance may seem like a tempting option to protect against a dealer's blackjack, it is generally not seen as a wise move in blackjack. The odds are not in the player's favor, and it can disrupt their overall strategy. It's usually best to focus on using sound blackjack strategy and making informed decisions rather than relying on insurance.

 

[James108]

In blackjack, the "insurance" bet is a side bet that can be placed when the dealer's upcard is an ace. It's a good strategy if well used. The insurance bet pays out 2:1 if the dealer has blackjack, but loses if the dealer doesn't have blackjack.