Thank you for any advice. I am BR1 and the betting is 5-100. Final hand with one advance, late surrender, double anything, dealer stands on 17, 6 deck. BR2 - 250, bets 100 BR3 - 120, bets 100 BR1 - 365 What should I bet here? Regards Dogen
Bet the minimum First thing I would think about as BR1 is locking out BR3. The best BR3 can do is get a BJ which would leave him with $270. So the most BR1 would want to bet is $90. But BR1 would not bet the $90 because just betting $5 (or $10) gives BR1 the high and low over BR2 and BR2 winning a single bet gives BR1 the victory. BR2 would have to DD and win, Split and win both hands, or get a BJ in order to beat BR1. Therefore, as BR1, I would bet $5.
beware of "Kurts" revenge I would like to cover all bj's and dd's. Therefore; I would bet 100. Br 2 bets 100, leaves 150 on the table, win = 350, bj = 400, dd = 450 Br 3 bets 100, leaves 20 on the table, win = 220, bj = 270, dd = 240 Br 1 bets 100, leaves 265 on the table, win = 465 Betting 100 allows Br1 to have the hi, lo, and cover all plays while only needing to win a single bet. Can also surrender and still have the lo. tgun
Still go with $5 BR1 has over a max bet lead but with a $100 bet he leaves the door open to BR2. A swing by BR2 will win it for him. Also if BR2 pulls a reasonably strong first 2 cards (19 or 20) and BR1 gets something smaller, BR1 is in trouble and surrendering at that point is of no value. So why not force BR2 into a KURT"S REVENGE situation since this a desperation move with a low probability of winning? Just seams to me, in this case, that limiting your chances of losing is better than making a large bet. First of all, BR1 would not have worry about winning at all, it's all in BR1's hands. As I said before, with a $5 bet BR3 is locked out and the only way for BR2 to win is by KURT'S REVENGE - specifically: 1) winning a DD (really tough if BR2 gets 17, 18, 19, or 20) 2) winning both sides of a split (has a low probability of even getting 2 cards to split) 3) getting a BJ (1 in 21 probability) These 3 are all low probabilities. I would guess BR1's chance of winning would be over 80%. I don't think you can get that probability by betting $100.
I don't remember the numbers but thought that using a strong variation of Kurts revenge dropped the % from 80 to around 66. My answer was just to get others to join the discussion. tgun
I'm here! My understanding is that a forced DD has a 31% chance of being successful. With that in mind BR1s success rate with a $5 bet would be 69%. I'd just like to add something else to the mix; BR2 could with a split and double to get his whole 250 in if he wanted. Anybody know the odds of a forced split double being successful? Would you want to cover that or would you be happy to double to retake the high if need be? Let's examine the $90 bet. It's the high-low, covers a BR2 BJ and double but is vulnerable to a swing. The only way for BR2 to take the high is by getting all his money in which I estimate to be less than 10% successful. If you add in the fact that BR1 can cover that with a double of his own the chances of success are even lower. Therefore if BR2 opts for taking the high (if possible) then BR1s chances of advancing are 90%+. At the other end the chances of a swing are 12% which puts BR1s chances of advancing at 88%. In summary I would suggest that the $90 bet is superior and that you are about 27% more likely to advance going down that route. What do you think? Am I confusing my elbow with my gluteus maximus again? Cheers Reachy
What 'da??? OK, now I'm confused. The points tgun and Reachy raised are good ones. I think we need one of the math geniuses on this site to step in with the right answer. Any takers?
