it doesnt matter if he goes all in because even if he goes up to $1250 (all in with the $500 and getting a blackjack he still will need $3750 more to win, I cant see a situation when going all in would be advantagous unless you are down to a few bets and he has a lot of bets left. also i think position may switch throughout the challenge because i doubt it can be all played out in a day
Better BJ player
- Thread starter Bondy3
- Start date
Wrong. Let us say he has 2500 and bets 1250 to win on a win double or split. You have 3500. Don't you think it is a huge advantage to play and bet second? If you did you might bet 1500 to cover this possibility with a win. If he busts you might opt to surrender a weak hand that the index doesn't call for. If you acted first you would not know any useful information to play or bet with. I could rattle off examples forever. While the end is not defined in rounds it can be seen when it is likely to occur on the next hand. Let us say you both have 2500. He bets it all so do you. If he acts first and busts you surrender anything. If he stands you know the likelihood of him winning and what you have to do to have the best chance at winning the bet.
Last edited:
yeah I get the idea, and no LS (I wish there was, would make this more interesting)
but keep in mine we are only starting with $500, and we would need to increase our bankroll to TEN times that to win, so unless he pulls ahead of me, I am going to start off betting table min and hope he busts out first. in a random walk if every hand was 50-50 and we started with 500 and would go to either 5k or 0, there would be a 11% chance of hitting 5k and a 89% chance of hitting 0.
but keep in mine we are only starting with $500, and we would need to increase our bankroll to TEN times that to win, so unless he pulls ahead of me, I am going to start off betting table min and hope he busts out first. in a random walk if every hand was 50-50 and we started with 500 and would go to either 5k or 0, there would be a 11% chance of hitting 5k and a 89% chance of hitting 0.
Semantics
I used a poor choice of words in my original post, I should have stated "SELECTING table seating position based on this challenge is important only the first hand played when you should bet second (last)". I don't disagree with your example but that could occur hand 5, 29 or 103 at which point you have no choice of betting position.
To answer your question "Don't you think it is a huge advantage to play and bet second?' Yes, but you can only bet second every other hand and we have no way to predict prior to the match at which hand your example may occur. Betting last the first hand allows you the possibility to bet last one time more than your opponent, a privilege he cannot achieve.
I used a poor choice of words in my original post, I should have stated "SELECTING table seating position based on this challenge is important only the first hand played when you should bet second (last)". I don't disagree with your example but that could occur hand 5, 29 or 103 at which point you have no choice of betting position.
To answer your question "Don't you think it is a huge advantage to play and bet second?' Yes, but you can only bet second every other hand and we have no way to predict prior to the match at which hand your example may occur. Betting last the first hand allows you the possibility to bet last one time more than your opponent, a privilege he cannot achieve.
Are you thinking that you act second every alternate hand?
This is not poker, where you have a rotating button. In blackjack, third base is ALWAYS in position.
Betting minimum to start with is a good strategy.
Once your boss gets to 3750, you must start playing aggressively.
Remember, if he gets to 2500 and bets it all, you're a 57-43 favorite!
If he bets all in with 2500, and you have 2500, clear best play with no surrender would be to bet 1250. If boss wins, you have a chance of winning with a double.
Actually, does someone have the answer to whether it's optimal in this scenario [each has 2500, boss bets all in first to act] to bet 1670 [winning on a blackjack] or betting 1250, to open up the possibility of splitting?
This is not poker, where you have a rotating button. In blackjack, third base is ALWAYS in position.
Betting minimum to start with is a good strategy.
Once your boss gets to 3750, you must start playing aggressively.
Remember, if he gets to 2500 and bets it all, you're a 57-43 favorite!
If he bets all in with 2500, and you have 2500, clear best play with no surrender would be to bet 1250. If boss wins, you have a chance of winning with a double.
Actually, does someone have the answer to whether it's optimal in this scenario [each has 2500, boss bets all in first to act] to bet 1670 [winning on a blackjack] or betting 1250, to open up the possibility of splitting?
Yes, I made the assumption this challenge could only be a fair match to both with no other players at the table either in a casino or at a kitchen table and would be played similar to a BJ tournament with a rotating button. I also assumed both players were intelligent and neither would agree to acting first each and every hand.
This is a player vs. player not player vs. dealer contest, if not played tournament style and/or with other players at the table how do you even determine who bets first? This could be a stand off with the first hand never dealt to either opponant.
This is a player vs. player not player vs. dealer contest, if not played tournament style and/or with other players at the table how do you even determine who bets first? This could be a stand off with the first hand never dealt to either opponant.
OP says that opponent is not a tourny player. OP should always sit at 3rd base. I'm assuming this challenge will take place in live casino play and since only starting with $500 buy-in I can't imagine they will have their own table. If needed to negotiate this then OP should insist on making his seat selection first bc he is the "underdog" in this challenge. He may not be but his boss thinks to be the expert player. Why you not chose to always go 2nd if the opponent allows it?
We made differing assumtions prior to posting and each is correct under those circumstances. To answer your last question; I personally wouldn't knowingly take advantage of a friend, co worker or boss, the later which could conceivably cost much more than $5,000. The OP in my opinion should decline the challenge, he has more at risk than his boss, which is - EV.
You said he's a millionaire. Is he self-made or did he inherit it?
If he's self-made then I think it's best to stay away from the bet. He surely had to have run over a few people to make his millions. Why wouldn't he run over you if you accidentally won?
Another option for you is to go play with him once "just for kicks". Let him win and be sure to praise him big-time, really butter him up. Then when you get back maybe he gives you a raise.
If he's self-made then I think it's best to stay away from the bet. He surely had to have run over a few people to make his millions. Why wouldn't he run over you if you accidentally won?
Another option for you is to go play with him once "just for kicks". Let him win and be sure to praise him big-time, really butter him up. Then when you get back maybe he gives you a raise.
