Normal tournament strategy is bet the minimum for some number of hands, evaluate the situation, and at some point put the money up to get in the advancing bankroll position for the last hand (assuming you are not already there). At least in your typical 3-2 BJ, negative game. However, it is not uncommon (at least down my way), that BJs pay 2-1 in tournaments with no insurance and you can only split Aces once. The 2-1 BJs makes this a positive long run game. Is the best long run strategy still to play the minimum or perhaps bet more than the minimum? I don't know what is best. Larry
I think that the limiting factor here is that one only gets a blackjack once in every 21 hands or so. So, while the EV of the game overall is positive, it is only so because of the occasional spike provided by the 2/1 payout. A second consideration is the reason why one bets minimum during a tournament session. For me, it is not because the EV of the game is negative. For me it's because I'm trying to "stay put" until I see the outcome of one or more hands. By betting minimum (which is usually small enough to be a non-bet) I know that my own bankroll will not have changed significantly after that hand. I even avoid doubling while betting minimum for the same reason. Before this week, I would also have avoided splitting, but having now learned the power of the push via splitting, I may reconsider that! For these reasons, I don't make any special adjustments in my level of aggressiveness when blackjack pays 2/1. I actually see it as a simplification. I can just lump the possibility of a blackjack in with the consideration of doubling down, or being doubled against.
