Tiebreaker Betting Question

Coin toss

Joep likes the $250 bet, keeping the split alive and S. Yama likes the $350 bet were a BJ will put him over the top.

I respect these players and they are both excellent tournament players, so going either way is not bad.

This is where you have to make the call. Which option do you choose?

#1) Do you bet $250 for low and keep the split and DD alive?

or

#2) Do you bet $350 for low and keep the DD alive, but win with a BJ?

Possibilties,

A) A loss for both players with either option #1 or #2 will make you a winner.

B) A winning hand for the other player still allows you to DD for a possible tie.

C) A BJ by the other player and it is all over with either option.

D) A BJ by you with option #1 and you may still have to DD to tie.

E) A BJ by you using option #2 and you win.

I could make a longer post with all different situations to make both bets look good, but it comes down to which one you deside to play and if you get lucky.

Personally I like the $350 bet because I can win with a BJ (even though it is a long shot) and still DD if needed. Even if I bet the $250 and I get a split I have to win both of them just to tie (based on the other player winning their hand). Also what does the dealer have up? Do I really want to split low cards vs. dealers face card or ace?

Bottom line is it's your money so play it the way you want, you are the one that has to live with the out come "Win or Lose"!

My favorite line is "I would rather Win Wrong than Lose Right"!
 
Last edited:
Tiebreaker

Good point TX. But I fear catching 66, 77, 88, AA, and not being able to split vs dealer 7, 8, 9, T, or A. Also, I would not be thrilled with 22, or 33, either. I guess your more optimistic about catching the BJ than I am.

tgun
 
Dream Big

If your going to dream of winning, why not dream big...LOL

No really I am just not big on splits when you "HAVE TO" win both hands. First you have to catch a split hand, then win them both. That is what I am not a big fan of.

With my luck I would catch the split and make a 21 and 19 and the dealer would draw to a 20...LOL
 
I have a headache

The one thing everone agrees on is to take the low.

The bone of contention is:

1. Either, size the bet to take advantage of winning a single bet via a "Natural" (e.g. $350) with the possibilty of doubling if necessary.
The incidence of an uncontested Blackjack is 4.65%
(Thanks, S.Yama).

2.Or, divide the bankroll in half to cover the possibility of splitting a pair. I think that I read that the incidence of being dealt a pair is 3% (please correct me if I'm mistaken). So, in this example bet $250 for the split and double if necessary.
(Thanks,Joep).

A computer simulation would probably (I'm not ready for that advanced stage yet) show that both solutions are extremely close. I have vacillated between these two alternative for the past couple of days. I still don't know what I'd do in this situation.

In both cases, the player would probably end up doubling down rather than getting the bj or pair. From a frequency of occurance point of view , S. Yama's suggestion seems to be the superior alternative. However, I'm not sure that giving up that edge, in anticipation of Joep's split, isn't worth the price. I'd sure hate to double any pair other than 6,6; 5,5 or 4,4. However, I know I'd have to win both splits which means the dealer probably needs to bust. That belies the dealers probabilty of making a hand 52% of the time. As I said before, I've got a headache.
 
Tie breaker

Everyone agrees to take the low...250 or 350...close call...
the tough question will be after the cards are dealt....
do you think the dealer will beat the other player???
or do you push the rest of your chips out ?????
 
You pays your money and you takes your chances

swog said:
the tough question will be after the cards are dealt...
Click to expand...
I'll second that in spades! Looking at the DD Outcome Charts, it seems a good rule of thumb would be to double down whenever it comports with basic strategy. With the exception of two hands (A5 and A4 vs 4) every basic strategy DD play gives better than 55% chance of a win or push.
TXtourplayer said:
This is a prefect example of the dreaded: Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda. How did you play turn out at Turning Stone, did you advance or not?
Click to expand...
I shoulda took the low with the initial bet (opponent’s bet /1.5 plus one chip), then I coulda followed Joep’s advice about taking back the high, and as the hand played out, I woulda doubled down to give me the same outcome; which was I caught a 4, the dealer made 17 and the other guy advanced. :sad:

--jr
 
Trademarking catchphrases

Well we already established on Stanford's site that i am the one who originated the term "Flex Bet" to describe the age-old double play of making a final bet that enables you to both double for the high as well as surrender for the low -- now it looks like this phrase of mine 'Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda' to describe the curse of overthinking a decision long after its been played out is catching on as well (thanks for keepin' it rolling' along, Rick!)

See, i HAVE contributed something of note to the blackjack world besides my loud mouth! ;)

-holly d.
 
Who Is We

When you said we established on Wong's site.Who is WE ?.Dont forget about the" LOW" I did hear you talking about that backstage before we went on.
 
Sorry, the "Low" is already in use. Check Wong's book for many instances of that one. You'll hafta get a new catchphrase all of your own that hasn't been documented yet..... hmmm... how about a term for getting shafted with the first bet on the last round of a tourney? No catchphrase there, but you (unfortuneately) had to experience that one. I'm sure you have a few choice phrases to describe it... "Getting fucked over by the button" doesn't quite have the right ring to it...

-hd.
 
Last edited:
It Wasn't The Button It was Your " NON-FLEXABILITY"

I did what I needed to do and that was make my hand mean something.Now when you used "your" notice I said "your" "Flex Bet".You forgot one thing you didn't FLEX.That bet calls for and I Quote you "you have the flexability to double to get the high or surrender to get back the low.You just forgot to FLEX .Because if you surrender I would have won.And if you doubled you would have finished 2nd so next time "FLEX".I hope you get paid everytime the word FLEX is used im trying for you,I know how tough it is being an Actor /Tourn.Pro .Always looking out for your best interest I want you around in May so you can carry my bag of money to my car.Can you carry a Million ?If the bag is to heavy you could do it in 2 trips to the car.

P.S. The beers are always on me,
Love ya dave
 
Late to the party

I'm just now getting around to reading this thread. At first, I thought this was a pretty straightforward question and Wong's data on Curt's Revenge would apply. However, that's not true, because you're not doubling for the win, you're doubling for a tie on the high (and low for that matter). A swing wins for you anyway, so the double only affects your chances of extending the match for one more hand.

On the terminology front, I'll have to take another look at Wong's book, but I don't recall the "high" and "low" terminology being used there. I seem to remember him talking about "keep the most unbet chips" where we would now say "take the low". Or, "keep the second most unbet chips", where we now say "take 2nd low".

My book is at home, and I'm at the office. I'll check later.
 
good point

KenSmith said:
I'm just now getting around to reading this thread. At first, I thought this was a pretty straightforward question and Wong's data on Curt's Revenge would apply. However, that's not true, because you're not doubling for the win, you're doubling for a tie on the high (and low for that matter). A swing wins for you anyway, so the double only affects your chances of extending the match for one more hand.

Good point Ken,
And extending the match means player "B" will have to bet first on that next hand!
tgun
Click to expand...
 
Value of another hand

tgun's point about B having the button on the next hand is an important point for analysis. We need a good value to use for B's chances on the next hand.

Among reasonable bet scenarios with good players:

B bets $25, A bets $225 to $250. B has a roughly 51% chance of advancing here. (A wins with any win, and also with a push/loss.) There's also a small chance of both players pushing. My 51% number is off the top of my head, and might need tweaking.

B bets $25, A bets $25. This should be a better play for A, but I've never seen an optimal strategy discussed or published, and it's somewhat self-referential because again you need the value of the next hand to make the decision. That's true for the first scenario as well, but in the second scenario it's extremely important.

I'd like to solve this puzzle definitively. It's a basic question, and one that deserves a very thorough and final answer. Ideas are welcome, and meanwhile I'll put this on my list of projects.

In brief, I want a straight ratio for the next unseen hand... With B on the button, B wins x% of the time, A wins y% of the time, and x+y=100%. Thus any ties that lead to yet another hand, or two hands, or three hands etc, is rolled into the answer.
 
Knowing The Other Player Style

I know that im in a different time zone than most,but what am I missing here.The question was Player A bet 500 Player B bet 250.Player A waves off on a stiff,and Player B is not suppose to double his non breaking hand because the best it does is give him a tie for the high and a tie for the low.And now Player B has to bet first on the next hand.First off Player B can win on that hand if he makes a hand and the dealer makes a hand but not as good as Player B hand.Remember Player stood on a stiff.Now the knowing the player comes in to play if they gave you the low on the first tie breaker hand what would make you think you would not get it again.If Player B bets the min. betting first on hand 2 he still at worst case has a tie for the low again.Throw the book out,knowing the other player is way more important then what the book says.
 
Fascinating Discussion

The actual scenario was that :
A bet first in the amount of $500.
B then bet $475 leaving $25 in unbet chips.
As S.Yama deduced, the betting increment was in $25 chips.

I'd prefer either S.Yama's or Joep's bet for "B" over the
bet "B" actually made. I'm still not sure that "A" on the button
made the right bet.

The outcome was that the dealer beat both players.
"B" won the match with the $25 unbet chip. I do not
recall what either player was dealt. I do recall that
neither player took a hit. I was mesmerized by the
bets. I posed the question because I didn't know if
either or both players made the best decision. I'm still not sure.

In Stanford Wong's book P48, he talks about the Two-Player Exception
which says that if you are BR1 on the final hand and bet first you should
"bet small" which could be translated into "take the low". This "exception" presumes that BR1 by definition has a lead to bet. This was not the case in point. This was a sudden death tiebreaker (no lead amount). I'm not sure if Wong's "exception" would be applicable to this situation.

Thanks for all your valuable comments-past,present,and future.

Rich Garcia
 
Joep said:
Player A waves off on a stiff,and Player B is not suppose to double his non breaking hand because the best it does is give him a tie for the high and a tie for the low.
Click to expand...
Joep, the original problem just presented the bets for A and B. The ensuing discussion centered on whether to size the bet to cover a split or give up the split and bet enough more to take the high in the event of a BJ win by B. That example was somewhat restricted because the BR equaled the max bet and A went all in with it. This made covering a split and winning with a DD mutually exclusive, because the most B could do in either scenario was a full double/split or double for less to equal A’s bet.

The part about A waving off a stiff came in my post about the actual hand I played the day before where (I now know) I made the wrong bet by matching A. There our BR was more than 2 max bets so B (me) could bet enough to take the high and advance in both cases. Your post in response pointed out that I could not lose but I could win or tie again by hitting instead of doubling.

After that exchange I went off line and got out the Dealer Outcome Charts and calculated the percentage for a win by hitting in my actual case of 9 vs dealer 5. I took a simplified approach using 13 in the denominator for card probabilities without taking account of the exposed cards and a no-bust hit strategy. Thus the only time I take more than one card is if the first one is a deuce. I came up with a value of 19.7% to win the tie by making a hand to push or beat the dealers 17 thru 21, and extend the tie the rest of the time.

Alternatively, with a double down I would push/beat the dealer 17.6% of the time and with more money out than A, I would also win the 41.8% of the time when the dealer busts with the 5. This adds up to a total 59.4% chance to advance with the double down.

Of course at the table I don’t know any of these numbers. I just know 5 and 6 are the dealer’s highest bust hands and in live play I would double down a 9 vs 5 in a New York Minute ;) if not sooner. So I went for the whole enchilada and put out another $10 for one card.

Thanks to the discussion here, next time I will be able to make a more informed decision.

--jr
 
To whom it may concern:(your all wrong on the tie play)

Although this thread is history if anyone wants to know the correct strategy on this Tie situation let me know. By the way I am the one who is responsible for the propagation of the terms " High" "Low" I now use diff. terms for them in my upcoming book.
THANK YOU
THE GHOST
 
All Wrong

Ghost,

The more you post the more I think you are my X wife, she is not a "Ghost" although she damn near was. Why do you beg members in this community to request your analysis instead of just offering it without referring to your book in every post? This is a member friendly site to inform and educate each other without degrading comments (as you do) to their current knowledge of tournament blackjack. You could summarize all your posts with one simple statement " if you want the real answers buy my book".

Although I have enough books in my BJ library, please inform me when your's is published, I am out of kindling to start a fire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top