Etiquette question

A really cool dude invited me to play at a private $100 table with him, because for some reason he was playing better with me around than not. He is certainly not a counter, playing a pattern of 1-3-2-6 units, with units being either $100, $200, or $500, depending on "what he feels like." He plays perfect BS, including hitting soft 18 vs 9 and vs 10, surrendering 15 and 16, etc, and actually does quite well for himself. The weird things he does -- and he knows it's weird, is double 11 vs A, double 10 vs 10 (always!), double hard 12 vs 2 and 3. The doubling 12 he definitely knows is wrong, but he gets a kick out of it and it's fun to watch.

Anyway. I'm there playing my game, spreading conservatively with never more than $500 in the box, whereas his bets reached 3k sometimes.

For some reason, he has this thing going where he stays on 16 v 7, and I explain to him that's crap ("there are 5 cards that help you!"). A couple of shoes later, after it had been going bad, he starts getting a little hot-headed when I hit my 16 vs 7, or hit my 10v10 instead of doubling. And of course the inevitable happened: he had two hands at 2k each, my bet was a single $200 bet, I had 16 and dealer has 7. He says "stay! why don't you stay?!" and I kind of play him aside and say it's not my game, I know the stats, can show him the table etc. I hit, the cards come out such that he loses both 2k bets but the dealer would have busted if I had stayed as he told me to.

So here is the thing (the guy and I had a lengthy talk just after that shoe): if you are invited to a private table, and the guy seems like he likes you, things are going in general pretty well, but then there's this moment of huge betting disparity, do you follow BS or suck up the -EV and respect the table leader?

I feel like it was a mistake to "ignore" his advice so rashly, and apologized to him afterwards saying that even though hitting 16v7 is the right play, I should have respected his high bet and the fact that he had invited me, etc.

Thoughts?

Unless you're playing with his money, nobody has any right to tell you how how to play, no matter how much they're betting or how little you're playing.

You should play your game the way you want to.

However, since it was a private table, you might want to let him buy the hand if he wants to. Personally, I'd be inclined to surrender the 16 v 7. Let him buy it for full price is a lot better than a surrender!

If you're playing off his bank, do whatever he says. Although, I feel like that wasn't the situation. You can offer to sell the hand to him. But I would not do the -EV play...unless it was very close (16vT, 12v4, A8v6, etc.). I don't know what the EV difference is in hit vs stay 16v7 but I imagine it's quite a bit.

deleted

I wouldn't play at a table where I had to be invited. Unless of course the invitation is from some hot girl.

The invitation was to his table, not his bankroll.
The guest was still playing his own money and it was under his control.
If rich nutcase wants an entourage, he will have to PAY them to be "yes, men", otherwise, its their money and their call.

Quote: rainman

I wouldn't play at a table where I had to be invited. Unless of course the invitation is from some hot girl.

Is this my buddy? lol
I might pay someone to leave my table. But invite them to play? Not! And then bitch? Unbelievable.

I have to agree with the majority of answers, that it's your money and you should play as you would. That's implicit, I think, in being at any table where you're using your own money.

I very much like the thought that, perhaps before playing again, you make an agreement that he can buy you out of any hand where the strategy differs, if he feels that strongly about it and the evening will go better for you. On that hand (16v7) in particular, it's -ev either way, so it's certainly the best result for you if he consistently buys you out, and so you both get something from it (he gets his way, you don't pay for it).

Was this guy the President or something? If some guy asked me to play at his private table, I would be puzzled, then I would assume he was hitting on me. I would respectfully decline the offer. This sounds strange to me. The reason you want to play at his table? Cover?

C'mon, that's not perfect basic strategy.

Quote: arcticfun

A really cool dude invited me to play at a private $100 table with him, because for some reason he was playing better with me around than not. He is certainly not a counter, playing a pattern of 1-3-2-6 units, with units being either $100, $200, or $500, depending on "what he feels like." He plays perfect BS, including hitting soft 18 vs 9 and vs 10, surrendering 15 and 16, etc, and actually does quite well for himself. The weird things he does -- and he knows it's weird, is double 11 vs A, double 10 vs 10 (always!), double hard 12 vs 2 and 3. The doubling 12 he definitely knows is wrong, but he gets a kick out of it and it's fun to watch.

Anyway. I'm there playing my game, spreading conservatively with never more than $500 in the box, whereas his bets reached 3k sometimes.

For some reason, he has this thing going where he stays on 16 v 7, and I explain to him that's crap ("there are 5 cards that help you!"). A couple of shoes later, after it had been going bad, he starts getting a little hot-headed when I hit my 16 vs 7, or hit my 10v10 instead of doubling. And of course the inevitable happened: he had two hands at 2k each, my bet was a single $200 bet, I had 16 and dealer has 7. He says "stay! why don't you stay?!" and I kind of play him aside and say it's not my game, I know the stats, can show him the table etc. I hit, the cards come out such that he loses both 2k bets but the dealer would have busted if I had stayed as he told me to.

So here is the thing (the guy and I had a lengthy talk just after that shoe): if you are invited to a private table, and the guy seems like he likes you, things are going in general pretty well, but then there's this moment of huge betting disparity, do you follow BS or suck up the -EV and respect the table leader?

I feel like it was a mistake to "ignore" his advice so rashly, and apologized to him afterwards saying that even though hitting 16v7 is the right play, I should have respected his high bet and the fact that he had invited me, etc.

Thoughts?

The guy is not even close to perfect basic strategy. Assuming a S17 shoe game, you've listed five plays that go against it. I suspect that these aren't the only departures that he makes. He may have done quite well when you played with him but he is most certainly not an overall winner.

I was joined by a lady who asked me if I played "right". I said yes and she said good because she just left a table where someone surrendered. The point is, I can often evaluate a player before they play their first hand.

Although not his intent, this guy was very selfish expecting you to vary your play while he goes his merry way doubling hard 12s. You owed him nothing. I suppose you could have offered to leave the table but I have a feeling he would have asked you to stay. These hotdogs need an audience.

Quote: arcticfun

...And of course the inevitable happened: he had two hands at 2k each, my bet was a single $200 bet, I had 16 and dealer has 7. He says "stay! why don't you stay?!" and I kind of play him aside and say it's not my game, I know the stats, can show him the table etc. I hit, the cards come out such that he loses both 2k bets but the dealer would have busted if I had stayed as he told me to.

Thoughts?

As it was inevitable and knowing that, the best thing to do would be before accepting his invitation ask him that you'd be happy to accept his invitation, as long as he was comfortable with you playing basic strategy, which differs from his "strategy"...

...after the fact, though, as it's my money, I'd say play as you would feel, although for the first time the "controversy" arose, offer to sell the hand to him or go partners: just the first time though and then establish rules going forward for the rest of the play.

Arctic fun could have said that he adheres strictly to basic strategy but what happens the first time an index play pops up?

Quote: arcticfun

So here is the thing (the guy and I had a lengthy talk just after that shoe): if you are invited to a private table, and the guy seems like he likes you, things are going in general pretty well, but then there's this moment of huge betting disparity, do you follow BS or suck up the -EV and respect the table leader?

I feel like it was a mistake to "ignore" his advice so rashly, and apologized to him afterwards saying that even though hitting 16v7 is the right play, I should have respected his high bet and the fact that he had invited me, etc.

Thoughts?

It's your money, not his! Play the way you want. I've been at tons of "non-private" tables where I've been told I was "playing wrong" because I sat out hands, didn't play with the team, didn't play conservatively because I was 3rd base, played S21 BS (eg hit h17 vs A, hit 68 vs 6, etc.) and more bunk.Unfortunately, these days know-it-all players who are loud seem to be listed to by novice players who play Basic Strategy. The novice players start to believe this junk and the myths are passed on to new players.

This is a thought provoker. We all know it is 'your' money, so you should play it as you see fit. But given the social circumstances, and the disparity in the betting levels, there is some consideration that you could give to your friend.

I would tell him that BS tells me to hit, but you don't want me to, and since you have high bets at risk, I will offer you a chance to control my hand.

First offer would be to take the hand to play as he likes, for the $200 I have bet.

If he declines, then I would make the following offer.
I will stand as you wish. If I win the hand, I will give you 1/2 ($100).
If I lose, but would have won by taking the next card, then you owe me $200.
If I would have busted by taking the hit, then you owe me nothing.

If he doesn't agree with this, then I would just say I need to play BS then, and take the hit. Sorry

OK it sounds like what makes most sense is to acknowledge the social situation, and simply come to an agreement on the calls we butt heads with rather than ignoring "advice" straight out.

BTW, I realize he wasn't playing perfect BS. What I meant was that he was following BS on calls that people typically screw up on (hit soft 18, surrender 16v9, etc). He fully acknowledged that doubling 12v2 was net worse, but his reasoning is that he will only take one card no matter what, and he is comfortable doubling on that win or loss. Lol - I suppose it's one bet that can't mess up the order of the cards, huh?

Quote: arcticfun

...He fully acknowledged that doubling 12v2 was net worse, but his reasoning is that he will only take one card no matter what, and he is comfortable doubling on that win or loss. Lol - I suppose it's one bet that can't mess up the order of the cards, huh?

That leads to an interesting question, and maybe I should crack open the Braun book to see if he addresses it. What is the downside to doubling that 12 vs dealer 2 in terms of -EV?

deleted

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

Twice the expected loss.

Yes, I figured that, but I wanted to know a value.

Found what I wanted. Good ol' Wiz: https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/9/6dh17r4/

Quote: bushman

Yes, I figured that, but I wanted to know a value.

Found what I wanted. Good ol' Wiz: https://wizardofodds.com/games/blackjack/appendix/9/6dh17r4/

Good link there. I see I have been mistakenly believing that 13v2 is close to a coin flip between hitting and staying.