We are Player A, on the Last Hand and first to act: (minimum bet 100, maximum bet 1000) PLAYER A 2401 chips, PLAYER B 2000 chips. (* SURRENDER AVAILABLE) QUESTION 1: Which is the perfect bet for PLAYER A ? (400, 600, or 800 - I would bet 600 here) QUESTION 2: If PLAYER A bets 600 what shall bet PLAYER B ? - (But if PLAYER A bet 800 ?)
A fellow blackjack21.com player! I think we've chatted once or twice at the tables. Nice to see you here. I prefer 800, as it means you can cover a max bet double by your opponent (if you double). That's to say: player A can win 1600 while player B wins 2000. I started answering this part and got myself totally confused. So for the time being I'll wait and see what others say. It's worth mentioning that there is an additional rule at blackjack21 which might have an impact: no doubling for less.
Yes, I remember too, thank you ! Yes you are right, and to better detail this rule would be like this: - players are not allowed to double for less except the situations when their remaining bankroll is lower than their placed bet (for example if a player have 1900 bankroll and he bets 1000 from it, then he will be allowed to double for the remaining 900)
Yes, 800 bet would be the best for PLAYER A. But if I play with newcomers (or weaker players) if preffer 600 because I have observed that many times they tend to merely push the minimum bet as they think they are taking the low. And so, after being able to see all dealt cards I will decide if to surrender and to force my opponent to win his hand with doubling down, or to simply stand. Though I am not sure if this idea (strategy) is the best, and instead I should simply stick by the %s ? As for my other question, what PLAYER B should bet, I would say at least 802 as long as PLAYER A dont bet more than 800. But in the case that PLAYER A would bet 901, then PLAYER B should bet at least 841. And in case that PLAYER A do a big mistake and bet at least 902 or more, then PLAYER B should take the minimum by betting 100 and surrendering in anything he will get except BJ where he will have to either stand or surrender.
That's known as the 'surrender trap'. If you search for that phrase you'll find a few old threads discussing it. I've never really made it part of my game; my feeling has been that not enough people (even newcomers) fall for it. But I could well be missing out. And here is a link to a detailed (very, very detailed) study of all the intricacies of the surrender trap - http://www.beyondcounting.com/pdfs/surr_trap.pdf
Thank you for the article, interesting thoughts and also has few really good advices. But it mostly reffers to Elimination Blackjack Tournaments where the chips stack is big and where the max bet allowed is also large and hardly something can fit properly for what Blackjack21 currently offer. For example at ``Selling the Trap`` part there is an advice that says: ``if you bet only slightly more than your lead and protect against his 2-bet win, you will survive around 95% of the time, far greater than the 56% chance acorded by the straight low`` Also, in the article there is another advice at the end of page eight: ``The situation changes when our lead exceeds a third of the maximum bet allowed. At this point, that third candidate bet becomes very attractive. The bet which gives us the surrender low and the high. The surrender low actually gives us a choice, after seeing our cards, of surrendering to take the low, or playing out the hand to go for the high. The problem is that our lead is not large enough to allow us to cover both. The moment we surrender, we are locked into the low, and forgo the upside coverage that we had. With our trapping bet at small leads, we had no upside coverage anyway, and we didn’t need any if BR2 fell for the trap. With a lead exceeding 1/3 max bet, brute force outperforms deception, and we are probably better off betting the 2/3 max bet.`` I would say that this last advice from the article can apply properly for what Blackjack21 offer when BR1 has a lead between 334 and 359 and then he shall bet between 667 and 717, anyway in both cases a doubling down will not be enough to cover oponent max bet doubling down (unless he is shorter than 2000 chips) But if BR1 would have a lead of 361, then he shall bet 820. This means that BR1 800 bet for the first scenario I have exposed is the perfect bet, as you stated. As an aside note, you say that not enough players fall for the trap.. - Do you think that the stake level may have an important impact over this aspect ? (I have found many players merely pushing the min bet and falling for the trap at 10$ stake levels and below)
Now, with all of this info, I would have another two similar scenarios which I will show here in this post. But firstly I would have one big question: - I need to know what is the percentage to win a hand with doubling down before any cards are dealt ? OK, and now the scenarios: SCENARIO (v1A): (min/max bet 100/1000) PLAYER A 2701 chips, PLAYER B 2250 chips. (* SURRENDER AVAILABLE) Which is the perfect bet for PLAYER A ? Shall be 550 or 775 ? SCENARIO (v1B): (min/max bet 100/1000) PLAYER A 2701 chips, PLAYER B 2200 chips. (* SURRENDER AVAILABLE) Which is the perfect bet for PLAYER A ? Shall be 500 or 750 ?
Monkey's Revenge For question 2 if I were player B I’d bet 797 if player A led off with 800. This bet gives player B the option to double to cover the high or surrender to cover the low. But better than that, it might take player A by surprise because it looks like a correlation bet. It gives player A a lot to think about with the clock ticking. The formula for arriving at your bet is to subtract a calculated amount from player A’s bet. The calculated amount is to figure player A’s lead if he surrenders and you push. Double that, then add a chip. Note that this method loses power if player A’s lead is too big. In this example if player A bets 600 player B must bet at least 501 to cover player A with a double down. And then he can’t surrender to cover the low. However, a bet of 600 fails to cover the max bet double down. A good rule of thumb for player A in this deal is to cover the max bet double down by 1 chip. For player B, covering the double down is better if player A gives you that option by betting too low. Player A should bet 800. Then player B should reply with 797. If player A leads off with 600, player B should bet 1000.
- Thank You very much, this is a really great tip for me ! - Many, Many Thanks once again, another great tip ! But still, something is unclear for me.. what shall bet PLAYER A in the following two (similar) scenarios ? SCENARIO (v1A): (min/max bet 100/1000) PLAYER A 2701 chips, PLAYER B 2250 chips. (* SURRENDER AVAILABLE) Which is the perfect bet for PLAYER A ? Shall be 550 or 775 ? SCENARIO (v1B): (min/max bet 100/1000) PLAYER A 2701 chips, PLAYER B 2200 chips. (* SURRENDER AVAILABLE) Which is the perfect bet for PLAYER A ? Shall be 500 or 750 ?
Cover The Double Down It's almost always better to cover the double down if you have to choose between that and some kind of surrender back bet. Bet 775 or more in scenarion v1a and 750 or more in scenario v1b. Just be ready for the bet by player B that's slightly less.
I thought about the same, but I have asked once again, because in this article ( provided to me just earlier in this thread by London Colin ) http://www.beyondcounting.com/pdfs/surr_trap.pdf , James Grosjean and Previn Mankodi (on page 9) argue this aspect: ``For leads exceeding 25000, a half of the maximum bet, the straight low becomes attractive, because a bet of 25000 gives BR1 the high and the low simultaneously. At this point, the lead is large enough that we do not need to overbet the lead in order to get good upside coverage`` So.. as a conclusion, I am still a bit concerned about SCENARIO v1B .. - PLAYER A should bet 500 or 750 ?
