When To Play Someone Else's BJ Hand

As a dealer, I see this daily. Someone is either too scared, or doesn't have the money to split or double down. I assume that all of the doubles would be worth taking (playing basic strategy), but I don't think it's always advantageous to take someone's split. Ex. 88 vs dealer A. Has any math been done on this subject? Couldn't find anything using google or on this site here. Thanks.

Quote: hollywoodtoledo

As a dealer, I see this daily. Someone is either too scared, or doesn't have the money to split or double down. I assume that all of the doubles would be worth taking (playing basic strategy), but I don't think it's always advantageous to take someone's split. Ex. 88 vs dealer A. Has any math been done on this subject? Couldn't find anything using google or on this site here. Thanks.

Splitting 88 VS A definitely is NOT +EV you just lose less on the hand in the long run. Surrender the hand if allowed.

Splitting VS hitting isn't a big difference (depending on what your definition of big is). If you can't surrender and you really dislike variance forgoing splitting eighths isn't the biggest mistake in the world.

I'm not sure the information on just splitting is available, but head to the Wizard of Odds site, he has various BJ calculators. You can make your own list with that information. You'll probably remember it better if you do it that way.

Quote: AxelWolf

...I'm not sure the information on just splitting is available, but head to the Wizard of Odds site, he has various BJ calculators. You can make your own list with that information. You'll probably remember it better if you do it that way.

Here is the Wizard's info on the value of each blackjack hand. You would take all splits that have a positive number in the "SPLIT" column.

You can cut and paste the table into Excel and sort them by value. I did that for 8 deck, Dealer Hits Soft 17, and DAS and found that 48 hands have positive value, but 11 of those would violate basic splitting strategy.

Quote: hollywoodtoledo

As a dealer, I see this daily. Someone is either too scared, or doesn't have the money to split or double down. I assume that all of the doubles would be worth taking (playing basic strategy), but I don't think it's always advantageous to take someone's split. Ex. 88 vs dealer A. Has any math been done on this subject? Couldn't find anything using google or on this site here. Thanks.

I've said this before and it bears repeating.

If you're going to do scavenger play there are some things to keep in mind, one of which is heat. If it's going to attract unwanted attention from the pit you may not want to do it. Another is who you do it with. I would make darn sure I know the person or at least have a good read on them. I can't tell you how many rip offs and ensuing arguments I have seen. Nothing brings unwanted attention like two people yelling at each other.

I love doing this and it is lucrative. I even ask to insure other players' hands when the time is right. Some think I'm nuts and thats fine with me.

Not sure if it's popular or even exists in US casinos, but a couple of British casinos I've been in allowed other players to place side bets for other players' hands, or even bet in addition to their bet.
I just found the whole ordeal to be annoying. Let me play for myself.

I generally don't care for scavenger plays.

Like, 1BB stated, they draw attention, from both pit and surveillance. When a player is placing money on another players spot or two players are handling money back and forth, believe me, that is the type of thing that gets watched.

There is also the huge potential for a misunderstanding, which in turn draws mega attention. I can't tell you how many times, I have seen player A complete player B's double, thinking he has purchased that double along with any win, only to have player B return ONLY the original bet amount after the win as if it was a loan and keep the profits. Why anyone would only loan the money or the other party would think it is a 'loan' is beyond me (no benefit to the loaning party), but I see this so called mix up a lot.

Three, I don't like taking advantage of other players and some scavenger plays and some scavenger players do this. Some times they talk the other party into a partnership that is unfavorable to the original party. I don't care for doing that. It's just not me. Sometimes scavenger plays, you don't mean to take advantage, but it does.

Example, you offer to double someone's 9 vs dealer 5 that he wasn't going to double. The scavenger-ing player often will say that it doesn't cost the original player anything, but what if the double card is a 2. The original player has lost the ability to hit that hand again, that he would have had. Same thing with doubling 10 or 11 vs hands like 7, 8, 9. The original player loses the ability to hit again after drawing a small card, so there is nothing to gain by him allowing the double partnership, but there is something to lose...the ability to re-hit and improve one's hand.

So I limit my scavenger plays like someone not wanting to double there 11 vs dealer 6, where they were only going to take a single card under any circumstances. If I jump on a double 10 or 11 vs a dealer 7, I will take the time to explain that he is losing the ability to hit again, if he draws a small card. I just don't want any surprises or arguments. But even in these situations, I only participate if the monetary amount is a few hundred dollars or more, that way the EV is worth the extra attention. I am not interested in that extra attention for the EV of a $10 double.

Quote: noy2222

Not sure if it's popular or even exists in US casinos, but a couple of British casinos I've been in allowed other players to place side bets for other players' hands, or even bet in addition to their bet.
I just found the whole ordeal to be annoying. Let me play for myself.

I think that's available in most/all UK casinos and many EU ones.

In the UK you can nearly always play behind someone else. Most casinos I've played at will insist you have a BJ bet if you want to play the sidebets. Some places have multiple bet parts for each player and their sidebets.

The advantage playing behind is you do not have to split, so in theory you are marginally better off playing behind a very good player than your own box - in fact if you both bet behind each other there's an opportunity to split things like 7s vs 9.

I played in one casino that allowed 2 back bettors. Whoever had the largest bet controlled the hand.

Quote: Hunterhill

I played in one casino that allowed 2 back bettors. Whoever had the largest bet controlled the hand.

so can you hijack the hand from red chippers and hit 12v2 whenever you'd like? I'm sure that would create a lot of ill will from the guy with the $5 bet who has his own 'special' way of playing

Quote: Avincow

so can you hijack the hand from red chippers and hit 12v2 whenever you'd like? I'm sure that would create a lot of ill will from the guy with the $5 bet who has his own 'special' way of playing

Yes it didn't matter who was the seated player or who had been there the longest. Whoever had the largest bet. There were not as many arguments as you would think. Players just tended to defer to the big bettor.

Scavenger is a good addition to the various AP techniques but obviously you cannot overdo it and cannot really push it.
You use it when the opportunity arises.
The opporunities I have used it are:
When people run out of money for a Double.
Regulars in the casino that I know and they know me. Seeing them being hesitant for a Double (especially when on occasion they decided to put a bet much higher than their usual bet range on a hunch)
People backbetting on me (very common where I play outside the US) and they are reluctant to follow on a Double, especially tricky doubles like S18.

Quote: AceTwo

People backbetting on me (very common where I play outside the US) and they are reluctant to follow on a Double, especially tricky doubles like S18.

Interesting,
So you are saying that if someone is betting behind you and is reluctant to double, then you can do the double for them??? That could be a pretty big opportunity, and a big opportunity to argue.

Quote: OnceDear

Interesting,
So you are saying that if someone is betting behind you and is reluctant to double, then you can do the double for them??? That could be a pretty big opportunity, and a big opportunity to argue.

Yes.
But of course civilians will not hesitate to follow on Doubling 11 v 6.
They will hesitate doubling S18 v 6 (as they never do it when playing alone) and other similar 'difficult' doubles.
So the opportunity arise but not that often.

Quote: Hunterhill

Yes it didn't matter who was the seated player or who had been there the longest. Whoever had the largest bet. There were not as many arguments as you would think. Players just tended to defer to the big bettor.

So one player has a $55 bet and another has a $50 bet, then what happens when dealt a pair of eights in a -EV situation? The duo can effectively split a $105 hand for only $55

Quote: Hunterhill

I played in one casino that allowed 2 back bettors. Whoever had the largest bet controlled the hand.

In all of the places that I have played that allows back betting the front bettor controls the bet.
It does not matter who has the bigger bet.

It is usual courtesy by Civilian Front Bettors, when the back bettor plays a much higher bet than them to allow him to make the call.
Also often front bettors will discuss what to do with the back bettor which is part of the 'socialising part' of punters liking this practise.

This social courtecy 'allows' a counter to back bet on a civilian (say when he plays on a full table and cannot spead to 2 hands in a good count), hoping that because of his higher bet the civilian will follow his advise.

Doubling
Most casinos, if the back bettor does not want to follow will allow it.
Few insist that the back bettor follows with the Double.

Spliting
This is more 50:50 approach between casinos.
Some will insist that the back bettor follows.
Some will allow that the back bettor's bet goes only to one of the hands and this hand is specified (ie the back bet goes behind the specific hand).
BUT, if this is done often and the casino figures out that you are abusing this, they will stop allowing it.

Note that if two players acting together, Front bettor betting low and Back bettor betting High, allowing this practise of the back bet going into only one hand is a very good strategy with certain hands (ie 8,8 v 10) and reduces the HE considerably when the ratio of front bet to back bet is high.
I do not reccomend though to do this as the casino will figure it out quickly.

And one more rule that usually applies to Back betting is that Table Maximum applies to all the bets on that hand.

If the top bet of a counter is the table maximum, then it creates a problem for allowing a back bettor.
The front bettor can put the table maximum and in such case there cannot be a back bet.
But it creates bad feelings if someone is back betting on you for some time and then you decide to put a max bet out and he cannot bet.

So for a counter who wants to max out, unless the backbettor is betting table min (and the counter is ok with going upto just below table max), it is better to discourage someone from back betting on you from the beginning.