Player Position Puzzle Blackjack

One of these days I am going to add Blackjack to my casino visits, in the meantime trying to learn as much as I can, hopefully minimizing embarrassing myself at a real table.

This entry puzzles me at wikipedia's BJ article:

"Double down. ... Non-controlling players may double their wager or decline to do so, but they are bound by the controlling player's decision to take only one card."

What is meant by other players being bound by the decision? This means everybody only gets one card? This doesnt seem right.

I believe it's talking about "Betting behind".

I.E. Many casinos allow an additional person to place bets on a hand. The seated person controls the hit/stand/split/double decision. The person behind may make suggestions, but that's it.

What that rule says is that if the seated person decides to double-down, the person behind is not required to double, however, will still only receive one card.

Bottom line: This is no different than doubling for less. I.E. When you double-down, you can do it for any amount up to the original bet. In this scenario, it's just a minor detail that there are two bets.



On a side note, I wonder... If in this scenario, when either person doesn't want to double for full value, can the other person increase his portion to make up the difference? Hmmm...

Quote: DJTeddyBear

I believe it's talking about "Betting behind".

I.E. Many casinos allow an additional person to place bets on a hand. The seated person controls the hit/stand/split/double decision. The person behind may make suggestions, but that's it.

What that rule says is that if the seated person decides to double-down, the person behind is not required to double, however, will still only receive one card.

Bottom line: This is no different than doubling for less. I.E. When you double-down, you can do it for any amount up to the original bet. In this scenario, it's just a minor detail that there are two bets.



On a side note, I wonder... If in this scenario, when either person doesn't want to double for full value, can the other person increase his portion to make up the difference? Hmmm...

Correct.

As to your other point, I believe that would be between the two players. Maybe an agreement could be reached to purchase the double. From a procedural point of view I would imagine this has to be done before the chips are out.

This is getting action on another person's hand? wow, if so, glad we are talking about that, that's the sort of thing that would confuse the heck out of me coming out of nowhere

Taking this back betting a little further, then there are ways to help reduce your ev if you are playing behind a fellow team player.

For example, the person in front bets $5 and you bet $200 behind. You are dealt 7,7 verses a dealer 9. Your 'friend' could split and as you don't have to follow the split then you can play your stake behind one of the 7's instead. The reasoning is that 7 is better to draw to than 14, 6 is better than 12, 8 is better than 16 etc etc.

I remember a player in the UK who hated doubling even against 2-6 upcards. As he decided that he would not draw another card anyway (on his 10 & 11) he was an ideal player to sit next to because quite often he would let you double on his behalf.

Quote: odiousgambit

This is getting action on another person's hand? wow, if so, glad we are talking about that, that's the sort of thing that would confuse the heck out of me coming out of nowhere

Don't fret about it.

You rarely see it, and when you do, the two people usually know each other.

Back-betting is pretty much unheard of (and I believe usually not allowed) in the US, so don't worry too much about it. If you are gambling in Macau, though, there's tons of it, as well as in other places with a heavy influence from that part of the world (Australian casinos, for example, also see lots of back-betting).

Quote: bgriffin

Back-betting is pretty much unheard of (and I believe usually not allowed) in the US, so don't worry too much about it.

I've never seen it not allowed in the U.S.. Once in a while I see it in pai gow tiles.

Quote: bgriffin

Back-betting is pretty much unheard of (and I believe usually not allowed) in the US, so don't worry too much about it. If you are gambling in Macau, though, there's tons of it, as well as in other places with a heavy influence from that part of the world (Australian casinos, for example, also see lots of back-betting).

Foxwoods had it from 1992 until July 12,2010. They called it back line betting or backlining. It was interesting and exploitable which is one theory on why it was removed. The casino's explanation was too many fights among the players. I guess they're a little slow if it took them that long to notice.

Quote: benbakdoff

Foxwoods had it from 1992 until July 12,2010. They called it back line betting or backlining. It was interesting and exploitable which is one theory on why it was removed. The casino's explanation was too many fights among the players. I guess they're a little slow if it took them that long to notice.

seemed to me, trying to understand this, that you could pick favorable situations and stay away from unfavorable, generating player advantage... would it be that easy?

Quote: odiousgambit

seemed to me, trying to understand this, that you could pick favorable situations and stay away from unfavorable, generating player advantage... would it be that easy?

If by "picking" situations you mean choosing to bet, I would think a back bettor would have to bet when everyone else does; i.e. before the cards are dealt. I mean, if not, being able to choose whether to play or not after the cards have been dealt would give a sizable player advantage. Only bet on blackjacks, or something ;-)

Quote: odiousgambit

seemed to me, trying to understand this, that you could pick favorable situations and stay away from unfavorable, generating player advantage... would it be that easy?

It was easy. Up to two players could backline for a total of three hands on any one spot. The player sitting down controlled the hand. Players wanting to backline had to ask permission from the person controlling the hand. Refusals were not uncommon and no offense was usually taken. The total of all bets could not exceed table max.

Problems arose from arguments on how to play the hand to too many hands picking up chips. Probably once a week, I would hear the story of the $5 bettor in front trying to extort money from the $900 bettor in the back by threatening to hit a hard 20 unless paid a "commission." I've never personally seen it nor do I know anyone who has but the stories persist.

Teams would play these tables with usually one small bet and one large. If the front split, doubled or surrendered, the back didn't have to. Insurance decisions were separate as well. The backliner could Wong in and out with impunity.

Dealers, what do you think of these tables that Foxwoods had in it's early days? Seven spots, $2 blackjack, three spots deep for a total of 21 bets along with the over and under 13 side bet. Red, pink and white chips everywhere!

These tables would open at noon and people would arrive two to three hours early and put their coats on the chairs to save themselves a spot.

Quote: benbakdoff

It was easy. Up to two players could backline for a total of three hands on any one spot.

That would be three BETS on any one HAND.

Quote: benbakdoff

Probably once a week, I would hear the story of the $5 bettor in front trying to extort money from the $900 bettor in the back by threatening to hit a hard 20 unless paid a "commission."

There was a story like that in the Gambling Jokes thread. Be sure to read my funny follow-up on the next page.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

That would be three BETS on any one HAND.


There was a story like that in the Gambling Jokes thread. Be sure to read my funny follow-up on the next page.

Yes, three bets on any one hand. Thanks for catching that, DJ.

Quote: Wizard

I've never seen it not allowed in the U.S.. Once in a while I see it in pai gow tiles.

I once saw it at a Senneca Indian Casino in Niagara Falls. Guy bet $100 behind my buddy's $15 or so. Both lost.