The Silver Sevens 3-1 BJ coupon

It seems to me that the language on the coupon says that you get paid 3-1 on your first blackjack whether or not you win the hand--as in, even if the dealer has a blackjack as well!

Has this ever been tried/contested? The more precise language should be "first WINNING blackjack." but it doesn't.

And if you don't get paid on a push, then is the coupon over? Any subsequent blackjack won't be your first blackjack, so according to the language, you wouldn't get the extra payout!!

I would expect them to say that a pushed BJ wouldn't get paid at all and you could keep the coupon, but I can see somebody making a big stink about this, as is so often the case when imprecise language is used in a contract (which the LVA coupon definitely is).

If I were to speculate the intent of the coupon was probably "first winning natural 21". 

The way I read it though is that you would get paid on a push. 

If you don't get paid on a push then you would retain the coupon. My reading is you show them the coupon in the book before you start playing but you don't tear the coupon out of the book until you win. 

However since any subsequent 21s won't be your first you should end that session. Color up your chips and walk away from the table for a moment then return. Now it's a new session. 

Since leaving and coming back seems a little ridiculous I would probably ask the pit boss if it were necessary or not. My guess is that they would likely honor the coupon on your first winning natural 21 after the push. 

Oh come on.

When a blackjack player and their dealer both have blackjack, it's a push. Coupon or no.

Be gracious in all of life's affairs, including as casino guests.

Maybe that's how you intuit it, but I'm referring to the precise language of the coupon. Your first natural 21. It does NOT say you have to win the hand.

You're getting kerfuffled because you have the opinion that claiming a payout due under the circumstances I described woukd be an "un-gracious" thing to do. Maybe so. But that wasn't my point. I was noting that imprecise language in a contract can potentially lead to disputes, and the LVA coupons have contracts on the back.

Believe me, there have been titanic legal battles over smaller discrepancies than this!

No, there have not.

There has never been a "titanic legal battle" over an issue smaller than the one that could potentially erupt over the imperfect language employed in drafting this Huntington Press coupon that's been circulated to a few thousand people, very few of which will even CONSIDER tromping to Silver Sevens in actual and sincere contractual expectation of winning an extra $30 in the 4% chance their first blackjack occurred on a hand where the dealer also got a blackjack.

There has never been a "titanic legal battle" over a matter smaller than this one could ever become.

Absurd.

But Sweet JESUS do I hope you have the opportunity and bullheadedness to prove me wrong.

What is the difference in the EV of the couopon between being paid on a push and not? 

Relatively little. 1 out of 21 player blackjacks will be pushes. That will happen once every (21x21), or 441 hands. A loss of three bets (from getting a push instead of getting paid) would amount to a drop in EV of -0.7%.

The coupon is worth + 3 bets every 21 hands, so that would be + 14% if you were paid on a push. +13%, then, roughly, if you're not.

Thanks Kevin. 

So with a $15 max bet we're looking at a difference in ev of about $0.15? 

Am I thinking of that correctly. 

Not exactly. The average number of bets/hands to get a blackjack would be 21. $15 x 21 = $315 that you have to put into action, though it could obviously be far less or far more.

Given that (using rounded figures) you have a +14% advantage if pushes are paid and a 13% advantage if they're not (and in the latter case, we assume that you'll retain the coupon and can continue to use it until you get an un-pushed blackjack),  the drop in EV is $3.15. Once again, because you should expect to have to play twenty-one hands to hit the bonus.

However, there's another consideration. The games at Silver Sevens are all, I believe, 6:5 shitjack. Assuming standard rules, you're fighting about a 2% edge. So on that $315 average action, you can expect a loss of $6.30.

So one way to calculate the EV of the coupon, assuming that you're not paid on a push, is that in order to hit the $45 bonus, you have to play hands that will inflict a $6 loss, making your net win $39.

I'm curious as to what the LVA value estimation is. Be right back.

OK, so the estimated value on the coupon list is $0.00! That can't be right.

I'd like someone else who is better than I at this sort of calculation to check my figures and see if I'm at least close in my estimation.