New poster. On the final hand, if you are chip leader, on which part of this question do you primarily focus? When you compare your chip stack with the likely final stacks of the other players, do you act based on the possibility of losing, winning or pushing your own hand? For example, if you will beat BR2 with W/W or You Push/He Wins, but lose to him should he win (which is guaranteed due to a natural) and you lose (unlikely due to a strong hand), it seems best to focus on win/win. Stand on your pat hand and hope the dealer doesn't beat you. However, if you lose, he'll advance over you. While your existing hand is a likely winner and will likely advance you, a double down win gives you a lock. Do you just play out your hand or do you try to make something extra (and less likely) out of it for the lock? I believe the origin of my question is due to the philosophy of being BR1 on the final hand or tapping out trying. The broader question is should this aggresive all or nothing philosophy be tempered when playing the final hand? If so, can a player typically focus on just one or two likely scenarios while ignoring the more unlikely outcomes, even though those are the ones that will eliminate him? Thanks.
It is tough to answer generalized questions without specific examples, because the question can often be interpreted in many ways. Nonetheless, I'll try to get us started in the discussion. I assume you mean a situation where you have the win/win covered, but your opponent can still double behind you to take back the high. Your question is whether or not to make a preemptive double. There is no way to apply a general rule in this situation. Every situation is different, based on your cards, his cards, and the dealer upcard. The only universal truths here would seem to be: The stronger his double down hand, the more likely you'll need to double. The weaker the dealer upcard, the more likely you'll need to double. If more players are involved, it gets more complicated, particularly if your double down causes you to drop below other possible players on the low side. You can never cover everything. As the leader, try to guard against the most common outcomes. That leaves your opponents to pick up whatever is leftover with the less common outcomes. The more players that have a shot on the last hand, the more aggressively you'll need to defend your lead with doubling or splitting. If your single bet is big enough to cover the high regardless, you then just need to maximize the probability of winning that hand generally. This sometimes means subtle changes from basic strategy are appropriate, such as standing with hard 16 vs dealer ten. I suspect that my response is not very satisfying. I recommend posting a specific scenario for additional discussion. It doesn't have to be a real situation; feel free to make one up. Seeing exact bankrolls, bets, and cards will let us make exact decisions.
Ternamint Just two considerations are: Your betting position and evaluation of players in contention. Position, more than anything else maintains a greater influence on your decisions.
Re-reading your post after my reply I still can't quite understand what you mean. The main situation you describe seems to involve an opponent natural blackjack (which I overlooked in my previous reply), but it sounds like a single-bet win will still prevail for you even with the opponent blackjack. In that case, there would be no reason to double. Play the hand to win it.
Natural. Yes. After writing this out, I realize I'm looking for the absolutes, if any exist, as well as a thought process (decision tree). I realize every scenario is different. Are there any "no brainer" situations that I can commit to memory? How do I determine what they are? More on my original scenario: I got bogged down worrying about "what happens if I lose" and zoned out on the reality of the situation. BR2 had a natural to my 2-card 20. I think I had him beat if I stand and win, but if I lose (unlikely) he wins. Also, there was a third player - he won his split (dd?) and advanced. I believe I needed to ask myself - what does win/win/win look like? The natural won and couldn't be doubled, so no matter what my position, I knew his ending BR. Because I had a strong hand, I should have ignored the guy with the natural if I had him beat (assuming win/win). I should have spent more time on the third person and figured out his BR, should he dd (likely) and win. I should have assumed win/win/win and acted accordingly. I acted under the possibility of lose(me and unlikely)/win/win. I decided to play my hand as though I might lose. This caused me to make an aggressive play to lock out the other players. I lost ground and BR3 took it. I am a systematic player and inexperienced at tournaments. I played well to get one hand from the final table and then had no idea what to do. Sucked, but it's possible I did the "right" thing. BR3 won his dd, which may have been enough to overtake me. I really don't know as I put my coat over my head, sobbed like a child and snuck out. I am looking for a systematic way to do 45 second analysis of such situations. Is this right: if BR1 on the final hand, and after the initial bets are placed and first two cards dealt, I need to think in this order...(1) What is the likely outcome of my own hand and what will that make my BR. (2) Look at BR2+ and estimate their final BR based on their likely outcomes (including possible dd and splits). (3) If it looks like you will win your hand (19, 20, 21 -v- stiff for example), don't worry about what might happen if you lose - play it as though you will likely win, ie, the most likely outcome. Worst case Question: Another player can overtake you on the final hand if he wins a dd. He has hard 15 and has to double down to catch you. You are last to play. He catches an Ace for hard 16. Dealer has a 6 up. On what hands would you dd, split, stand, hit? Would you hit until you had a hard 12 or higher and let the hand play out to what should be a win for you? Slight variation: You're certain BR2 will double his hard 15 but you act first. Does that change your answer?
Much of this thinking should be done while you are deciding how much to bet. If you can, make a bet where you advance with win/win and lose/lose. When you can't do that (usually), you'll have to pick. Most of the time, making a large enough bet to win the table if you win the hand is the best move. (Taking the high.) If you were lucky enough to be able to retain both the high and the low (w/w, l/l), if your opponent's double is not a threat, then the play of your hand should be to just prevent the swing (l/w). That means making plays like standing with any stiff against a dealer ten if your opponent is pat with 17 or 18. If the dealer busts, you advance. If the dealer makes 19,20, or 21, you advance. When your opponent's possible double or split is a threat, things are more complicated. Now you have to assess his likelihood of winning a double and weigh that against your likelihood of winning a double. The problem in many cases is that if you double, he now has the low. If you draw a bad card on your double, he won't double behind you. The situation you describe is fairly straightforward. Since he is stiff, you should double any non-busting hand. Split any pair and stand on any resulting stiff. You're a lock in those cases. If you have a bustable hand, you are not a lock, but you should still double any hand, including hard 20. (Splitting the tens would obviously be better, as long as you have enough chips!) Be careful here. You say that you are certain he will double. However, if you double, then he should not. You just gave him the low. He should just hit out to a better hand than yours. If the dealer beats you, he advances regardless of his outcome. If the dealer pushes you, he might be able to pass you with a single bet win. (He has a "free hit" here.) Back to the question the way you asked it: If you assume he will double regardless, you would again want to double any non-busting hand. You should double 12 to 15 as well. I'm not sure about 16 and above though I suspect doubling 16 and 17 would be correct.
A General Rule You are BR1 and act after BR2 and BR2 has doubled. When it is BR1's turn to act then "IF BR1 and/or BR2 HAS a STIFF then BR1 SHOULD DOUBLE. No computer or math computations to demonstrate this rule. The situation could be as follows as follows: BR2.........1000.......500+500........18 BR1.........1100.......500...............14 BR2 initially bets 500 and doubles for 500 and makes say 18 BR1 correlates with a 500 bet and starts with a STIFF. Therefore according to the rule he should also double. See the outcome table below. When BR1 wins the round his new bankroll total is bracketed []. Dealer Outcome --------->........Bust.....17......18.......19........20......21 BR2....1000....1000....18...........2000...2000...1000........0.........0........0 BR1a..1100......500...Stiff..........1600....600.....600...[600]...[600]...[600] BR1b..1100....1000...Bust............100....100.....100...[100]...[100]...[100] BR1c..1100....1000...Stiff..........[2100]...100....100...[100]...[100]...[100] Note that if BR1(b) doubles and busts he is no worse off than if he stood with the stiff. If BR1 only gets a low card and still ends up with a stiff he is better off; he now also wins the round when the dealer busts. If BR1 gets a total of 18 or more he wins the round reguardless what the dealer ends up with. A table where BR2 doubles to a stiff and BR1 has a starting total of hard 19 will show that doubling the hard 19 is better than standing. The key is that either BR2(after doubling) and/or BR1 must have a stiff when BR1 has to act. ............................BlueLight
More General Rule Lets say: BR2 doubles and nends up with 21 (not a stiff). BR1 has a starting total of 19 (also not a stiff). The rule here is: IF BR2 DOUBLES TO A "HIGHER" TOTAL THAN BR1 THEN BR1 SHOULD ALSO DOUBLE. Once again no math computations are needed Dealer Outcome --------->...Bust......17.......18.......19.......20.......21 BR2.....1000....1000...20......2000....2000....2000....2000....2000...1000 BR1a...1100.....500....19......1600....1600....1600....1100......600....600 BR1b...1100...1000...Bust......100......100......100.....100......100....100 BR1c...1100...1000.....20....[2100]..[2100]..[2100]..[2100]..1100....100 Note that doubling the hard 19 and busting loses nothing against all the possible dealer outcomes. If doubling 19 and making a total still less than BR2 improves BR1's chances considerably. Note that doubling by BR1 in this type of situation gains very little since most of the time doubling hard 19 will bust. If BR2 had doubled to only 18 then BR1 should stand on his 19 in case of BR2 pushing when the dealer also ends up with 18. But this situation to stand will need computations to verify. ........................BlueLight
