Is Covering an OP's DD with my own DD @ final hand a loser's bet ?

Discussion in 'Blackjack Tournament Strategy' started by KungFox, Sep 16, 2019.

  1. KungFox

    KungFox Member

    Hello all,
    I hope you had a nice summer, as tourneys-filled as mine !

    One 'quandary' I often come across at the final hand of a table, be it final or elimination, is to bet (or not to bet) so as to cover an opponent's double down with my own double down .

    My feeling is that preparing to cover a DD with my own DD only applies against aggressive, not-so-savvy players, as an expert would rather play optimal most of the time. Or am I being delusional ?

    How often, or in which kinds of situations, do you cover OP's DD with your own DD ?

    I guess this discussion must already have taken place here in the past, but I couldn't find a relevant topic title during my searches...

    Thank you in advance for your lights !

    Greetings from Belgium,
     
  2. gronbog

    gronbog Top Member

    It sounds like you are asking about sizing your bet so as to be able to cover an opponent's possible double/split with a double/split of your own. If so, I would recommend always doing so as long as betting the extra amount does not cost you something more valuable.

    For example, you will lose about 48% to 49% of your hands. An opponent who intends to double/split anything will succeed about 32% of the time. So if betting the amount needed to possibly cover the double/split means you must bet more than your lead plus a chip, and you think that if you make that bet then your opponent will bet small enough to beat you if you lose (this is called taking the low), then you have covered an outcome which occurs 32% of the time at the cost of exposing yourself to an event which occurs 48% of the time. This is a bad trade off.

    I use this method of trading off possible outcomes to size all of my critical bets.
     
  3. KungFox

    KungFox Member

    Exactly. Sorry if I don't fully master the TBJ player's jargon yet.


    So, if I understood you right, covering a double/split is "a priori" not a bad move, especially if I am quite sure about the profile of my opponent(s) ? Do the "doubling anything" odds add, when against two opponents ? If so, covering their DD would be more "productive" (64 % vs. 48-49 %), or wouldn't it ?

    OK. But doesn't this then open the door for a possible, so-called "surrender trap" I would then have sprung "by the way", making this "coverbet" not so bad after all ?

    Thank you for your time !
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2019

Share This Page