Example in CTS

BughouseMaster

BughouseMaster

Banned User
I was looking at some of the tournament examples, and stumbled across this one:

The betting limits are: 5-500 and here's the situation:

We bet last and are BR2. BR1 has 600 and bets 1st with a bet of 5. BR3 has 280 and bets next.

The solution says if we bet 115-215 we are high if all hands win & 2nd if all hands lose (86% advance probability), but I'm inclined to bet 65 here. My thinking is BR3 can end up with max of 560 (excluding the < 5% chance he gets BJ), so wouldn't 65 be a very good bet too, since we'd be 2nd high if all win & still 2nd if all hands lose?
 
I’m still busy in Guatemala and won’t have time to look for a few days yet, but I think you left out BR2’s bankroll.
 
I can't find the example that you are mentioning in his book. The closes one is example 31 on page 98. The same money amounts except BR2 bets 2nd and BR3 is last. He says bet slightly more than 110 with an 86% chance of advancing. However, I would bet 145-215. I would bet at least 145 on the low probability chance that BR3 gets a BJ (betting 280) and BR1 gets a hand that can be split. BR1 could get a maximum of 40 bet with 3 splits and 4 DDs and end up with 640. The 145 would cover that. 215 gives you one chip more than BR3 if he pushes and you lose. If I were actually sitting at this table I wouldn't give the hand a lot of thought, I would bet 215 to keep one chip more than BR3. Probably why I don't win, I don't give the hand a lot of thought :(.
 
Ah, yes, you are right, Larry!

We indeed bet 2nd, not last. For some weird reason I had thought that the button moves COUNTER-clockwise which would us bet last but that's obviously wrong, lol

145 seems like a good bet too, and does have the extra benefit of covering a BR3 bj while my 65 wager wouldn't... i'm still curious to know what % chance we have in winning by betting 65.
 
By the way, the more I think about it, I think I might be very slightly better off by just betting 115. Since BR1 has to play 1st I will know whether he has enough splits to bother me and if BR3 has a BJ. I can always double for some amount to keep me ahead of BR1 if I have to. If BR3 has a BJ then it can come down to some complicated playing decisions.
 
Example 7 in his book is similar to the situation you are putting yourself in if you do not bet enough money to go ahead of BR1 if you win. He says it is 81%. You want to bet enough money so you do not have to double to beat BR1 if BR3 gets a BJ.
 
Actually, Example 7 is completely different since we are BR1 in that example & act 1st. In that situation, I would bet 295 in a heartbeat to take both the high and the low! This type of example I'm very familiar with. Let alone it's also a 2-player example as opposed to ex. 31 which is a 3-player situation.
 
Ok, since I no longer have a copy of Wong’s book, I need to recap the corrected question first.

Example 31:
In betting order, bet limits $5-$300, 2 advance:
BR2 (You): $500
BR1: $600
BR3: $280

Correct?
 
KenSmith said:
Ok, since I no longer have a copy of Wong’s book, I need to recap the corrected question first.

Example 31:
In betting order, bet limits $5-$300, 2 advance:
BR2 (You): $500
BR1: $600
BR3: $280

Correct?
Click to expand...

No. In betting order, BR1 is on the BUTTON, then us. Betting limits 5-500!
 
Example 31 (corrected):
In betting order, bet limits $5-$500, 2 advance:
BR1: $600, bet $5
BR2 (You): $500, bet ?
BR3: $280
————-
This one is a simple scenario.

BughouseMaster, your original question was “wouldn't 65 be a very good bet too?”

Sure, it’s an ok bet. Much better than an ill-advised $5 to $60 for example.

In previous conversations I likely told you to consider the possibility of your opponent’s blackjack only after all other things are covered. Here it is so easy to cover the all-in win by BR3 (bet $65 or more) that now you SHOULD consider BR3 blackjack, because it doesn’t cost anything more to do so.

Losing $145 is in no way worse than losing $65 for you. They are equivalent on the downside.

By now it should be clear that betting $145 is better than betting $65.

Make sense?
 
Note to hopinglarry: Yes, $130 is better than $145 I believe.

Ignore this message for now please BughouseMaster! One step at a time please!
 
KenSmith said:
First, assure me that you understand why $145 is better than $65

PS I’m going to sleep. 6am bus in the morning to more parts unknown.
Click to expand...

Of course, bec of the simple fact that $145 covers a BR3 bj and $65 doesn't... c'mon Ken! I did just win 1st place, right? That didn't happen by fluke
1f602.png
 
Last edited:
BughouseMaster said:
Of course, bec of the simple fact that $145 covers a BR3 bj and $65 doesn't.
Click to expand...
But your reason leaves out the important part “at no cost “.
To illustrate. let’s add 3 more players, all tied for last with $170 each.

Now:
BR1: $600, bet $5
BR2 (You): $500, bet ?
BR3: $280
BR4a: $170
BR4b: $170
BR4c: $170

Now what should you bet?
 
Either 65 or 70.

The 3 with 170 can end up with 425 max if any of them hits a BJ so wouldn't want to bet more then 70 because of that. Of course BR3 could also end up with BJ but I've now protected against 3 out of the 4 players & still have a great shot to end up top 2 and advance. It wouldn't be smart to protect against only BR3's BJ bec it would then expose me to the other 3 if I bet were to bet 205 to beat BR3's BJ by 5.
 
Correct. Now back to the 3-player scenario.
Betting $145 is nearly the best bet, and any improvement now is really academic instead of practical. But you asked!

BR3 should just go all-in, It’s simple and easy. if he gets a blackjack, he advances. If no blackjack, he can still advance if he swings you (br2).
In that case, br2 bet of $145 can’t be improved to my knowledge.

But if BR3 happens to bet less, there is a tiny consideration. Consider this:

BR1: $600, bet $5, stands with 20.
BR2 (You): $500, bet $145, stand with hard 16.
BR3: $280, bet $90, dealt a pair of 8s.

Let’s say the dealer has a 6 up.
BR3 splits and makes 21 on the first hand.
When he is dealt another 8 on the second hand, he can split again.
With 3 hands working, he can afford to lose one if he wins the other 2 against a made dealer hand.

If we as BR2 had bet $125 instead of $145, BR3 would have needed to bet more to swing us ($100) and now can’t make 3 hands.

So, with my current understanding, and a $5 correction from my earlier messages, I don’t think you can improve on a $125 bet as BR2.

But maybe there is some other obscure consideration to be found.
 
arlalik said:
Is losing $205 any worse than losing $145 ?
Click to expand...
To a practical degree, there is no additional problem with betting $205 instead of $145 or $125.
It’s no problem, but it is unnecessary to cover BR3’s blackjack since you already have the high over BR1 (even if he wins 8 bets). Remember, two players advance.

The same nitpicking disadvantage applies as I mentioned above, where you allow BR3 to make a bet as small as $20 following your $205 bet. (Again, that’s a poor play for BR3, so this scenario is quite unlikely.)
But if it happened, now BR3 would be free to split and double as many times as he wants to increase his chance of making a net one-bet win while you lose the hand.

So, technically, yes $205 is worse than $145 or $125. But the difference is so tiny it’s ok to completely ignore it.
————
Now, if you were on the button, and didn’t know what BR1 was going to bet, I absolutely like your bet of $205. Now guarding BR3’s blackjack IS important. Bet $205 and if you win your hand, you advance. If you push or lose, you still can advance depending on your opponent’s outcomes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top