"The worst bet in the history of blackjack tournaments"

...said Max Rubin of Ken Smiths bet on the penultimate hand of his match-up with Hollywood Dave at the UBT. OK, what he actually said is that it would have been one of the worst if it had been made in the open! It was clearly a fantastic move which paid dividends but I have a few questions. Firstly to remind everybody what the situation was, Ken and Dave were heads-up, Ken to act and it's hand 29.

Ken - BR2 - $167K
Dave - BR1 - $192K

Ken - Bet - Secret - $24K
Dave - Bet - Open - $61K

My first question is why did Ken bet only $24K and not $26K which would have beaten a HD push? I'm guessing the rationale was to get Dave to think he was betting really big, say 2, 3 or 4 times his deficit, so that Dave, reluctant to give up the high, would bet large also. If that's the case it clearly worked.

2nd question: What would you have done if the secret bet wasn't available?
3rd question: What would you have bet if you were HD?
4th question: Is Max Rubin a good tournament blackjack player?

Cheers

Reachy

 

Smart Bet

Trust me Ken's bet had a lot of meaning to it

As I have stated here before on this board, Ken and I have also spoken about it in our many skull session about this format. Making the "Right" bet when you are in a secret bet mode is usually not the best bet that could be made under these conditions

When you are up against a "Skilled" Pro as Dave is,you just can not make a bet that Dave will be able to put you on. He will be all over your bet like "white on rice"

So lets take a closer look at this situation

Chip Totals

Ken 167 K
Dave 192 K Dave leads by 25K

Ken's bet of 24 K makes a lot of sense even though when its first looked at, it looks like a less than optimum bet,here is why

Ken can not afford to lose more than 25K since he is already behind by 25K because if he does Dave will have more than a 1/2 of a Max Bet lead which will make Dave's job on hand 30 a lot easier.

When Ken is in the Secret Booth, Dave is thinking what will Ken bet and Ken is thinking OK what will Dave think I bet.

Here is what Dave is most likely thinking

Ken will either bet 83K which is a split of his bankroll
Ken might also just bet 100 K
Ken would not bet less than what he is behind, or would he ?

Any other bet that Dave would come up with would just be a random guess. Thats what you want your opponent to have to do just guess on your bet

Here is most likely what Ken is thinking

No matter what "right" bet I make here, Dave is going to cover me somehow and I maybe in secret bet mode, by my first 2 cards are out in the open and Dave can get a good read on what the likely outcome will be based upon my 2 cards and the dealers up card. So with a swing needed and that only happens 12 % of the time, this bet now makes a lot of sense.

Dave did just that,his bet of 61 K covered Ken split bet and he could DD to pass a 100K bet

So Ken needs to swing Dave with just about any bet he would make and with a 24 K bet he will still jump ahead of Dave and risk the least amount of chips.If Ken losses the bet he stays within a 1/2 of a Max bet lead, as long as Dave either loses or pushes his hand which will happen more than Dave winning the hand a real slick quick heads up thinking by Ken

Now Dave is really playing in the dark and trying to figure out Ken's bet .Dave's bets represent that he figured Ken for the first bet of the two choices, that would not totally cripple him if he has to surrender it and thats a 83K.The 100k bet has just to much risk attached to it for Ken. Lose that bet and its all but over


Dave bets enough to cover that split bankroll bet as with his 61K bet and his lead of 25K that would clear Kens split bet of 83K by 3 K.

Dave in the heat of the moment just to play it safe may have added the extra 1 or 2 chips just to make sure he clears Ken's bet.You see in the heat of battle under a ever clicking clock and the lights and cameras, they do add another element of pressure its alway a good move to add the extra chips when it doesn't hurt .We all have done it when we are not 100% sure of our opponent chips counts.

Both players played great and did exactly what should be done when in a heads up situation .Do yourself a favor and watch their heads up match over and over again its filled with a ton of great play by both of them and a good learning tool.

For those who play on line take the time to practice chip counting at home before you venture into a live UBT tournament or for that matter any tournament. At least with UBT they require you to keep your chips in a set number of chips per stack.

After not having played for a while except for on line. When I went to Aruba it took me two or three satellites to get my chip counting eyes back in focus. Man Oh Man did playing on line spoil me.

Max Rubin doesn't play a lot of tournaments but he did win one or two 1 table tournaments in Aruba and St Kitts he is no pushover.But then again there were no pushovers anywhere on the first two UBT tour stops.Small fields but a great training ground.

Adrianna Jade has called Aruba and St Kitts a UBT Blackjack "Boot Camp". We are all learning how to play this format.

In this months Blackjack Insider I wrote a column on my "Rear View Mirror" style of play that I believe is the way to more Final Tables in the UBT format


Joep

 

Joep & Ken

thanks for the analysis and comments on the betting - very educational - this analysis of how/why your bet will help everyone in making this type of decision

 

Question

Ditto--enjoyed this thread--good stuff and thanks.

Question: In live UBT tourneys, do they provide all-player BR counts at any point, and if so on what hand(s)?

Am spoiled online for sure and trying to get prepared, so also, what are the chip stack requirements you mention?

Thanks for any info...

 

In Aruba & St Kitts there was a scheduled countdown right before an elimination hand.In Aruba there was also a count down after the elimination hands.In St Kitts we had a meeting with Russ and staff and suggested to make the tournament's run faster that a chip counts after the elimination hands could be skipped unless it was close as to who the low bankroll was.

In the one table satellites chip stack are required to be no higher than 10 chips per stack.On the Final tables the chip stacks are restricted to 20 per stack.

The main reason the chips were moved down to 10 per stack was to prevent players from asking another player" isn't your stack over 20". Which then stopped the game while the player check their stack and the player than was able to get an accurate count without having to count the stack. It was becoming a "MOVE" and that was quickly squashed by the UBT Tournament staff.

 

Blown away!

Just when I think I'm getting to a certain level of understanding in this game you guys show me another one! Genius!

Cheers

Reachy

 

I fairly confused ...but thats not all that tough or unusual....

Its the final round right? Bets from 1 to 100 thousand right?

So down by 25 thousand...is it better to give away the push in the hope of tricking away the low?

I understand that this worked this time....but wasnt just as much luck involved if he would have coveered the push? If he had bet more the result would have been the same ..NO?

I guess Im wondering what the percentages were that made this a clear choise? And why would going even lower to the 23,000 that you later fretted over be any better?

You decided your one best odds chance was low....wouldnt a bet of 1 dollar more than needed to cover a push be a play that kept low too?

Im not putting on my egg head here ...just shooting from the hip as the method I usually use during during the high stress , clock ticking away thought process that occurs during my game...

Im thinking there is a better bet than this and that Ken got lucky....He Ken Smithed it...

I understand that he won .....I understand the logic to retain < 1/2 max bet...but was this the best odds play????

Im not all that smart....so keep the egg head talk to a minimum with me...Im still seeing this as not that great a bet.... rather a lucky bet ... After all wouldnt a 26,000 bet yielded the same result?

 

Rando

The 26k bet if lost by Kenny puts him behind by 51K which becomes the magic number of 1K more than a 1/2 of Max bet lead .Thats why the 24 k is much better .



Joep

 

My head is an egg!

I've just been looking at various scenarios using table 4 from Wong's CTS. Ken's bet of 24K is definitely better than a bet of 26K.

Here's a chart:

Code:

                   Bet     24K     26K
Prob>1/2Max Bet Behind     44%    49%
Prob>Max Bet Behind        12%    12%  
Prob<1/2Max Bet Behind     8%     1%
Prob have the Lead         48%    50% 

If the best outcome is to go for the lead and failing that be less than 1/2 max bet behind, 24K gives you a 56% chance of success. A bet of 26K whilst maximising you chances of taking the lead also maximise your chances of having a greater than 1/2 max bet deficit. The overall chance of achieving the original goals are 51%, 5% less than 24K which is accounted for by the Dave Push:Ken Loss scenario now resulting in a greater than 1/2 max deficit.

There is a good chance that I might have bet $1K in Ken's situation. Here is an analysis of that:

Code:

                   Bet     24K     26K     1K
Prob>1/2Max Bet Behind     44%    49%      44%
Prob>Max Bet Behind        12%    12%      0%  
Prob<1/2Max Bet Behind     8%     1%       8%
Prob have the Lead         48%    50%      48% 

I'm not sure what to make of this. The binary outcomes suggest that 1K is better than 24K on the basis that there is no chance of being over a max bet behind. (The figures for being a max bet behind are also included in the figures for being greater than a 1/2 max bet behind if anybody wondered why it didn't all add up to 100%). Looking more deeply into the outcomes, with the 24K bet is possible to have a >1/2max lead (12% chance) whereas it isn't with a 1K bet. With a 1K bet any lead will be greater than 1/3 max bet which gives you the opportunity on the final hand to bet twice your lead to cover a max bet and surrender back to the low. Hmmm....

Cheers

Reachy

 

Thanks everyone.....Im begining to understand....but I know theres no way in heaven and hell that I would ever come to these conclusions in the < 30 seconds clock ticking lights flashing blah blah....or is that what one uses the secret bet for????? Gaining thinking time???

In live play is there a time limit for the secret booth? Or can you stay in there and review stratagy and have a sandwich or something?

 

Thanks

...Joep (and Ken and all on this informative thread) for the info--very helpful.

 

1/2 max bet question

This may sound a little basic to some but I need an answer. The subject of "1/2 max bet ahead" came up on this thread so here goes.

I know that having over a 1/2 max bet lead on the last hand has 3 advantages:
1) Gives some protection if your opponent gets a BJ (assuming 3:2 payout).
2) Provides a cushion if a surrender situation arises.
3) Allows you to take the high and low by betting exactly 1/2 max bet.

My question is this: Are there other advantages for having a lead greater than 1/2 max bet but less than a max bet?

 

Thanks Ken. I needed the reassurance that I had the "1/2 max bet" straight in my mind.

 

Newbie here....

Just found this forum and been doing alot of reading.

Monkeysystem,

I found this thread interesting and was wondering if you could breakdown your most recent post here so I get a better understanding of when to bet 1/2 Max Bet as opposed to Max Bet.

I think I may just need to know the value of a Blue chip.

Thanks