Understanding the different rules of blackjack at the various casino's, the min/max bet sizes and the comps/loyalty points earned by risking your money is a requirement to play well and be compensated accordingly.

The same holds true for poker.

Can anyone provide an example of risk equivalence between a blackjack game and a poker game?

For example, in blackjack, the number of decks, betting range and other factors such as using a point count system, knowing the particular rules of that casino such as the cut depth....etc... can be used to obtain a single number that will give the probability of success of the two cards you have vs the dealer.

What would be an equivalent NLH poker game in terms of stakes, betting rules, number of players, and speed (turbo, regular...) in terms of the probability of success of the two cards you have vs the number of players in the pot?

For example, AK in blackjack is an immediate win except when the dealer shows the same....AK in poker gives a specific probability of success depending upon the cards showing on the board.

I used to play blackjack regularly at the casino.I am not sure it can equate to poker. I would average $14 per hour at blackjack, but somedays I had a negative paycheck.

Look into it. Maybe you'll find when you play poker a set way at a certain stake you tend to make the same. Let me know what you learn.

Originally Posted by Polytarp

Understanding the different rules of blackjack at the various casino's, the min/max bet sizes and the comps/loyalty points earned by risking your money is a requirement to play well and be compensated accordingly.

The same holds true for poker.

Can anyone provide an example of risk equivalence between a blackjack game and a poker game?

For example, in blackjack, the number of decks, betting range and other factors such as using a point count system, knowing the particular rules of that casino such as the cut depth....etc... can be used to obtain a single number that will give the probability of success of the two cards you have vs the dealer.

What would be an equivalent NLH poker game in terms of stakes, betting rules, number of players, and speed (turbo, regular...) in terms of the probability of success of the two cards you have vs the number of players in the pot?

For example, AK in blackjack is an immediate win except when the dealer shows the same....AK in poker gives a specific probability of success depending upon the cards showing on the board.

There really isn't an equivalent, since in BlackJack it is you against the house.
The dealer has no say in how the house's hand will be played. The game is setup with the odds in favor of the house. Since the cards are not shuffled between hands, what cards have been played have a bearing on the odds of making a particular move or not on the next hand - if numerous high cards have already been played, splitting tens will more likely cost you money, since you are less likely to get a ten or an ace for each. Using this to your advantage, you can lessen the houses odds or even slightly swing them into your favor.

Poker, on the other hand, the house just takes a rake. So it becomes a game between you and the others at the table. The goal here being to win more from the other guy than you give up in rake over the long haul. As far as the house is concerned, they really don't care which player wins or loses, since they always win the rake regardless.

Thanks for the response.
My intent was to determine a simple mathematical model for both then assess what scenarios would be quantitatively equivalent. For example, there are professional blackjack and poker players but not professional roulette players (though I may be wrong here since I learned of an instance in a documentary where some human computer types cleaned up at roulette in a UK casino). A case scenario would be where a blackjack player and a poker player grind out the same amount of money over an equivalent amount of time. I'm certain that models exist for both players and I was wondering if there was someone within CardsChat who could give a quick synopsis.

There are commercial blackjack simulation software systems that can be put on auto-pilot and run through millions of hands using various rules and point count systems.
Is there commercial poker simulation software that can do the same? That is, run millions of hands relative to a specific set of input parameters in a game like Omaha, Hold-em ...etc.

You can't run simple hand simulations in poker. It just doesn't work like blackjack.

Run a million hands of any strategy in blackjack, and you'll be losing money *guaranteed*. It doesn't matter what your strategy is, the house an edge, and that means you cannot win in the long run. Just like roulette, the house has an edge no matter what number/combo you bet on. Do it a million times, and you lose.

The house doesn't have an edge in poker, 'cause you aren't playing against the house. You're playing other players, so they take a rake. The best players at poker will win regularly against the worst players, and come out ahead if they are beating the rake.

With blackjack, you'll lose in the long run. That's how the game is designed, just like roulette, slots, etc.
In poker you can influence the skill level:
- play with/against more skilled people and you will lose in the long run
- play with/against less skilled people and you will win in the long run
It's not about the cards, it's about your poker skills.
A common approach/assumption is that the skill level increases with stakes.

The long run is a very, very long time.

Negreanu played poker and blackjack locally a few times a while back. Poker is his game.
Years ago, Uston did well with teams. Teams still exist for a reason.
You can have a positive expectation in craps with certain bets.
There is no 'system' for baccarat.

There is a huge difference between playing to win (to survive) and for entertainment. I'm in the latter category but if I have to prove a point (to win a bet or get rid of an asshole at the table...etc..) I'll do whatever it takes to win and at this point the concept of 'comfort level' no longer exists. This mode of play is the exact opposite of tilt.

I may have mentioned the Kelly criterion in an earlier post but his result is derived from Shannon's paper.