BR3 of 3, Last To Act, 2 Advance

I'd bet 300. Primarily because it takes the low against BR1, but also because it offers the possibility of doubling to overtake BR2 (even if BR2 doubles).

Both seem to have made errors -

I think BR2 should have responded to BR1's max bet by betting 420-480. That would give BR2 the middle - the low against BR1, and the high against you. Plus if BR2 were to double or get a BJ, that would cover a double/BJ by you.

BR2's bet of 200 does mean you have the option of taking the high, but the low (against BR1) is preferable.


BR1 ought not to have bet 500 in the first place, though. 180 seems like BR1's best bet.

 

Anyone else want to take a whack at this one? I won't because I was BR3 and Monkey was behind me, watching.

I'll post what I did after a few more folks have had a chance to respond.

 

I saw it

I witnessed this too, and BR2 couldn't have made a WORSE bet choice than he did ($200) no matter how hard he tried!
Nice enough fellow that wasn't an experienced tourney player. Can't get away with that when Lefty's around!

Billy C

 

i like london's bet ($300) for same reason, i know you want to get in the middle both ways here but don't see how to get high without giving up low.

 

$200.00 Gets low, and allows for double to get high if necessary.

Analysis time, 30 seconds.

 

But it takes no analysis at all to leave one chip more than BR1, and thus maximise any benefit that doubling might bring.

I'd be using the 30 seconds to look for reasons to bet something other than 300.

 

agree with your anaysis, maybe with more time, better bet, I'm with you, in a pinch,
almost automatic.

 

Almost automatic, indeed. I'll post what I did tomorrow (Sunday) night, but I will say that no one has guessed my bet.

Remember these facts - First, I have last action on this hand. Second, this was a 42-hand game and both of my opponents had already proven that they were not BJT-savvy players.

 

BR1 Aggression

I suppose if you are very confident that BR1 is going to double almost any hand, then a bet of 400 might be worth considering, giving you the middle if all goes to plan. (And you even have the luxury of being able to split a pair and still retain the low against BR1, having then bet a total of 800 to BR1's 1,000.)

It would be similar to leading off with a max bet as BR1, when you have just one opponent, who you anticipate is going to bet the max whatever you do. It's lucrative if they behave as predicted, and if they don't you still have a reasonable chance.

 

Whoops - forgot to write this up last night as promised!

While I was sitting there with the clock ticking, the $300 was my first inclination. However, taking into account the inexperience of my opponents and the fact that I am acting last, I decided to bet London Colin's second guess of $400. And here's why:

1. Gives me the high over BR2's mistake of $200 without needing a DD/split.
2. If the Dealer shows an Ace and BR1 has a weak hand, I can surrender and force BR1 to win or push (300 would do this as well).
3. My BJ takes BR2 right out of the game with no hope of recovery.
4. BR2 may realize his situation and think he's forced into a bad DD, which is how it played out.

If I was against strong opponents, 300 would have been it.

 

very creative

I like bet of 300 very much. The other good bet is 200.
Those are the first and almost immediate choices.
First condition for comparing these bets is BR1 not losing his 500 bet, because if he does then he is eliminated if we manage to lose no more than 310.
The only difference between 200 and 300 bets is as follows:
Bet of 200 advances us when we lose one full bet less than BR2, and bet of 300 would not do it;
Bet of 300 advances us when we win double against BR1’s push and/or against BR2’s double win, and it wouldn't work with 200 bet.
BR2 may doubles more than usual seeing that we can take it away from him by doubling our bet of 200. It's pointless to do it when our bet is 300. That may add up somewhere around 4% to our chances of advancing.
If we bet only 200 BR2 may double for less, and only splitting adds to our chances, so additional value of 200 bet should be less than 1%.

If I really had to come up with yet another bet than it would be 100 or 110. When dealer shows an Ace BR1 may realize how bad was his bet and surrender, so can do BR2, even with okay hands like 19. With bets bigger than 110 we would have to win if we survive dealer’s no bj.
Bet of 100 for the dealer showing Ace adds a little more than 3% for situation that we would lose with any other bet, but gives up a lot (more than 20%) for all other possibilities.

So what’s happened?

S. Yama

PS
I wrote that b4 I read the answer.
Leftnut, lots of points for creativeness. Good out of the box thinking.
With your 400 bet you need to gain to one of your opponents.
You looking for: you win and BR1 pushes or loses, or you and BR2 win same number of bets, or you double and one of them wins only single, or you push and one of them lose, and if you surrender to dealers Ace, when he gets bj and BR1 doesn’t surr. and then loses.
Having poor players on the table improves those chances but unless they are so drunk that casino manager makes bets for them it won’t be the best play.

 

I don't remember all that well, to tell the truth - very unusual as I'm generally good at that. Perhaps one of the guys who were spectating can help?

What I do remember is that BR1 won her hand so she was golden. BR2 did just as I'd hoped, realized that he screwed up and reacted by trying a bad DD (hard 19) and busted. I won the hand and advanced.

 

300 vs. 400

"With a bet of 390 or more, Lefty was a virtual coin flip against BR2. If BR2 had bet only 170 Lefty couldn't be any better than 44% to beat BR2 no matter what he bet. So by betting 400 Lefty was a favorite to advance, because his odds of getting a push-lose swing against BR1 are added to his coin flip odds against BR2."
Monkeysystem, as usual, clear and well phrased, except that BR2 could easily double his bet, taking away from that 44% win number.
It is almost a “free double” for BR2, giving up only some hands that need more than one hit, and they are hands that lose to BR3 push or win or push against BR3 win. Even with some of the hands retaken back by BR3 winning double, altogether, total chances for bet of 400 are much smaller than 50%.

"So, the difference in the benefits between these two bets of 300 and 400 amounts to the difference between the probabilities of three players finishing lose-lose-win and three players all winning."
I don’t follow this. By saying lose-lose-win, who do you mean to lose? One or both, or all three, in what order?

S. Yama

 

Numbers

If we ignore for the moment the possibilties for drunken double downs from either opponent, then isn't this what we have? -


If you bet 400, then you absolutely must either push or win your hand to have any chance of advancing. That means that your chances of success are somewhere below 52%.


If you bet 300, then you have a peculiar, even stronger variation of the Strong Form of Curt's Revenge, featuring two opponents rather than just the one.

The strategy for this would be -

• If both opponents look like winning their hands then you double for the high against BR2. (This will be true even if BR2 has doubled)
• Otherwise take free hits until you have passed one of their totals.

The normal Strong Form of Curt's Revenge gives a 55% chance, and the above must be even better than that.