Buying "surrender hands" from other players

[bjarg]

Math Demon was saying if the AP has the 16vT hand in a -TC, he should surrender the hand to another player, to eat up cards.

Well, thats even more ridiculous. A counter on the selling side? How many times at a table where you offered by someone to buy your surrender hand? Not even the most stupid of ploppies would buy a hand a counter is surrendering, since they will always be crappy hands versus a high dealers upcard.
So thats great advice... Maybe you should also tell us what to do in the event of running into a dragon in the subway.

Ontopic: Without having read the entire thread, I must agree with most people here. If I were to sell my hand to another player the hand would most definetely be his and I would never claim any part of the winnings if he actually won it.

However, I think I understand 21gunsalute's perspective on the matter and i really dont see why everyones coming down on him so hard. I dont see why anything he said should result in questioning his honesty or anything like that.

[RS]

Well, thats even more ridiculous. A counter on the selling side? How many times at a table where you offered by someone to buy your surrender hand? Not even the most stupid of ploppies would buy a hand a counter is surrendering, since they will always be crappy hands versus a high dealers upcard.

Oftentimes (well, not OFTEN, but often enough), ploppies don't like it when you "mess up the flow" by surrendering 16vT / 17vA, or by hitting your 12v4, etc. Some would, indeed, rather buy the player's hand to "play it out properly".

I've asked to surrender my 88vT, ploppy told me not to, I said "My money, I play how I want", so he offered to buy my hand (in full), and play it out by splitting the 8's. Although one hand lost and the other hand won, he was happy as a clam by "playing it out properly", and I was equally happy by taking 2x what I would have gotten from the surrender play.


I've seen stranger plays, although I was only observing two other players doing the negotiating. Regardless, as said earlier, these aren't plays that happen all the time, but when they do come up, we can gain EV by playing them out properly. Plus, it's always good to have some team comradery with the other players. [Later one, when you hit that 13v2 and dealer makes a hand that would have busted, they aren't going to bust your balls (as much).]


Lastly, do not take the subway.

[Math Demon]

Lastly, do not take the subway.

Thanks for the tip, RollingStoned! I'll avoid the subway. I did see a Balrog there last Friday. Nasty creatures.

[Jabberwocky]

"If it was so, it might be. If it were so, it would be. But since it isn't, it ain't. That's logic." - Tweedldee

[Tbonz]

Scavenger plays: Mathematically, yes of course +EV, some big +EV! But there is a downside, and this thread demonstrated some of that. There are disputes that occur. And disputes cause attention. Even if your scavenger plays don't lead to disputes, they draw attention that you may not realize. Anything out of the ordinary draw attention. Players exchanging chips at the table. Players playing other players spots. These are things the EITS is supposed to notice.

Now sure, an occasional red chip transaction of buying someone split, double down or insurance probably won't definitively label you an AP. But you have provided another peice of info to look at and there can be an accumulative effect, especially if playing your regular rotation of stores. And if you are playing green, black and beyond, you just multiply the whole issue several times. It is just counterproductive to my longterm goals and not worth the little bit of extra EV, except very extreme circumstances. (risk vs reward)

If anyone reading this thread should take anything away from this thread, it should be what KJ has posted here. It is far more +EV playing positively under the radar than it is to memorize impractical scavenger plays that will bolster more suspicion than monetary gain. Now of course I would not say never look or grab an opportunity for a high EV scavenger type play, I never completely shut the door on anything. However, I read the agonizing that many post here about how obvious even just taking insurance sometimes is, how could theses same people be willing to buy surrender hands? Set aside the fact that some of course are +EV moves, well so is splitting tens at the proper count, is that something all of you are comfortable doing on a regular basis. There are times for it, but there are many more times where it should not even cross your mind. I am no expert on scavenger plays, its not a real part of my game and it never will be, its not really beneficial in my style of play. But what I have been damn good at is lasting a long time at a high level at this game. These discussions aren't bad as it helps people understand the game a little more, but they are best left for the message boards and not the tables. It really doesn't pay to announce yourself as either a knowledgeable player, or a perceived hustler at the table. Either one will either immediately, or eventually bring unwanted attention. And being shut down due to impractical play is a real -EV move all day long.

[Three]

I am with Tbonz and KJ to a degree on this. Active seeking scavenger plays can raise suspicions. I prefer to wait for them to be offerd unless someone is short and can't split aces or something equally atrocious. I take them when offered if they make sense. The surrender sale is rarely offered. I have seen it happen a few times but rarely. Most don't realize they are screwing up but some do it to control variance and know it is a bad play. The probably wouldn't use those terms but that is the just of their thought process. There are usually a ploppy or two waiting to do a sales pitch for what they believe is a +EV scavenger play. They aren't always right about the positive EV part. I could probably get away with more aggression but between using extra info and cheap cover plays I rarely see any heat. My annual win at some stores this year have peaked some interest but again what I do has them dismissing counting as the reason. I suppose at some point they won't care why and pull back the red carpet.

I had one trip I was really kicking arse at a store that has been a great contributor to my BR this year. I had an audience of two suits and decided to keep my max bet up through the shuffle and leave it up until I lost. Well when the shuffle hit they left well before the shoe was cut. I went down to a smaller advantage bet but not my usual off the top wager. Wouldn't you know it I won every hand for the first 3 decks into the shoe at a table with one other spot being played I would have won about $7K or so but only won about $1K. Why did the two suits have to leave? Oh well it was a huge winning session anyway.

[Math Demon]

.
.

Scavenger plays: Mathematically, yes of course +EV, some big +EV! But there is a downside, and this thread demonstrated some of that. There are disputes that occur. And disputes cause attention. Even if your scavenger plays don't lead to disputes, they draw attention that you may not realize. Anything out of the ordinary draw attention. Players exchanging chips at the table. Players playing other players spots. These are things the EITS is supposed to notice.

Now sure, an occasional red chip transaction of buying someone split, double down or insurance probably won't definitively label you an AP. But you have provided another peice of info to look at and there can be an accumulative effect, especially if playing your regular rotation of stores. And if you are playing green, black and beyond, you just multiply the whole issue several times. It is just counterproductive to my longterm goals and not worth the little bit of extra EV, except very extreme circumstances. (risk vs reward)

If anyone reading this thread should take anything away from this thread, it should be what KJ has posted here. It is far more +EV playing positively under the radar than it is to memorize impractical scavenger plays that will bolster more suspicion than monetary gain. Now of course I would not say never look or grab an opportunity for a high EV scavenger type play, I never completely shut the door on anything. However, I read the agonizing that many post here about how obvious even just taking insurance sometimes is, how could theses same people be willing to buy surrender hands? Set aside the fact that some of course are +EV moves, well so is splitting tens at the proper count, is that something all of you are comfortable doing on a regular basis. There are times for it, but there are many more times where it should not even cross your mind. I am no expert on scavenger plays, its not a real part of my game and it never will be, its not really beneficial in my style of play. But what I have been damn good at is lasting a long time at a high level at this game. These discussions aren't bad as it helps people understand the game a little more, but they are best left for the message boards and not the tables. It really doesn't pay to announce yourself as either a knowledgeable player, or a perceived hustler at the table. Either one will either immediately, or eventually bring unwanted attention. And being shut down due to impractical play is a real -EV move all day long.

I am with Tbonz and KJ to a degree on this. Active seeking scavenger plays can raise suspicions. I prefer to wait for them to be offerd unless someone is short and can't split aces or something equally atrocious. I take them when offered if they make sense. The surrender sale is rarely offered. I have seen it happen a few times but rarely. Most don't realize they are screwing up but some do it to control variance and know it is a bad play. The probably wouldn't use those terms but that is the just of their thought process. There are usually a ploppy or two waiting to do a sales pitch for what they believe is a +EV scavenger play. They aren't always right about the positive EV part. I could probably get away with more aggression but between using extra info and cheap cover plays I rarely see any heat. My annual win at some stores this year have peaked some interest but again what I do has them dismissing counting as the reason. I suppose at some point they won't care why and pull back the red carpet.

I had one trip I was really kicking arse at a store that has been a great contributor to my BR this year. I had an audience of two suits and decided to keep my max bet up through the shuffle and leave it up until I lost. Well when the shuffle hit they left well before the shoe was cut. I went down to a smaller advantage bet but not my usual off the top wager. Wouldn't you know it I won every hand for the first 3 decks into the shoe at a table with one other spot being played I would have won about $7K or so but only won about $1K. Why did the two suits have to leave? Oh well it was a huge winning session anyway.

All good points. Always consider longevity vs. short-term gains.

Thanks guys.

[bjarg]

It's hard to disagree with KJ, tbonz and Tthree here since the point they are making is very good. Unless you are looking for a short playing career or are at a place that you know you'll never be back, I agree that longevity should always be a priority. However, scavenging can be an incredibly powerful tool. Maybe not for a red chipper who will most of the time be surrounded by players playing 10 dollars, but it is for people playing at medium or high stakes tables. At a store I play at theres a guy who flat bets the equivalent of 1000 dollars on every hand. He NEVER doubles down and NEVER takes insurance... I usually look for heads up games, but I love playing with that guy! Scavenging opportunities are everywhere and quite easy to find when you keep your eyes open.

Like every technique, scavenging is also an art. A good scavenger will always try to do it without drawing to much attention to himself. For instance, in the example with the guy above: when I play at that casino I will ALWAYS insure my hands against a dealer's ace no matter the count and bable about how great the insurance bet is. Since I always insure, the insurance bet I place for him from time to time doesnt look weird at all. Of course the tricky part is NOT insuring the other players hand when the count is low... Im not good with numbers but Im sure the gain Im getting from getting away with insuring this guys hands is WAY bigger than what Im losing on my insurances below +3 (hilo) spreading 1-60. Also, I will only double obvious bs hands, never high index soft doubles for example.

But I definetely agree one should draw the line at the point where using the technique brings unwanted attention or becomes a risk for longevity. After all, the best +EV move for any blackjack player is longevity itself.

[21gunsalute]

This is one of the reasons I rarely post here anymore. Far too many frauds who attack anyone who disagrees with them.

I don't know if I'd classify them as frauds, but there have certainly been more than a few individuals in this thread who are intolerant of any other point of view and then resort to might is right tactics instead of arguing their point rationally and logically. Despicable!

[21gunsalute]

I have watched this thread for over a week. I had initially wanted to respond to 21gun, but I held back.

21gun, a lot of these bright people are trying their very best to explain the mathematics.
__

Let me just try and see if I can provide a different perspective.


First off, mathematically, 21gun is patently wrong! If he was going to surrender, he is basically selling the hand back to the house for half his bet. There should NOT be any monetary difference to selling it to another player.

He *DOES* have a point, though. If he had surrendered, he is done with the hand, and can go back to ogling the cocktail waitress, or whatever he does to occupy his mind. So he is performing actions on behalf of the hand's new owner, of which we cannot really place a monetary value. Generally, however, human beings do favors for other human beings just out of common decency. And ultimately, you always revert back to who you are inside, and how you were brought up. Do you typically crash someone's car just because it isn't yours (then hit that hand until it busts)? Or do you protect it as if it were your own?

It should NEVER be a 50-50 split, else the buyer should NOT buy the awful "surrender" hand. The buyer should just place that bet on the next random hand.


Here is an astute counter's perspective:

You want to conserve cards in positive true counts. If HL TC > 0, do *NOT* buy or sell surrenders.

If the reverse is true (HL TC < 1), you want to use up the small cards. Go pawn off all your proper surrenders [16v 9-A, 88vT, 15vT, 15vA (h17)], and buy all improper surrenders (of course, at half-price).


Hopefully, everybody ends up happy.




Good Luck, 21gunsalute! Keep an open mind. There's a lot of things to learn around here.

Matt, I totally understand the math and I'm not disputing that factor. Other posters here should also keep an open mind, but it's a lost cause in some of these cases I'm afraid.

[Ouchez]

This is very interesting thread having just read all of it today. I did not read it when it first appeared because it sounded impractical at best, and probably in reality a very stupid move to attempt, just as TBONZ and KJ have said.

The great concern I have is the way 21Gun was attacked and abused for his views on the Surrender Scavenge, it was wholly uncalled for and bordered on brutal, almost a gang mentality was displayed by many of you. If you really need a fight, man-up and keep it one on one.

I can assure all that 21 is no troll, is a very serious player and puts in copious time at the tables, far more than most here. 21 is also correct, where he plays this Scavenger play would NEVER fly, not by the casino and for sure not by the other players, the attention would be horrendous, and ruinious.

I understand the math behind this move, but way off the chart in practicality, at least here in the Midwest, and I believe mostly everywhere else. If you need to resort to this kind of Scavenge to make money at BJ, time to find something else to do. IMHO

Ouchez

[Kat]

Well said, Ouch. Now time to move on. Move along. Nothing to see here.

frog3.jpg

[Freightman]

This is very interesting thread having just read all of it today. I did not read it when it first appeared because it sounded impractical at best, and probably in reality a very stupid move to attempt, just as TBONZ and KJ have said.

The great concern I have is the way 21Gun was attacked and abused for his views on the Surrender Scavenge, it was wholly uncalled for and bordered on brutal, almost a gang mentality was displayed by many of you. If you really need a fight, man-up and keep it one on one.

I can assure all that 21 is no troll, is a very serious player and puts in copious time at the tables, far more than most here. 21 is also correct, where he plays this Scavenger play would NEVER fly, not by the casino and for sure not by the other players, the attention would be horrendous, and ruinious.

I understand the math behind this move, but way off the chart in practicality, at least here in the Midwest, and I believe mostly everywhere else. If you need to resort to this kind of Scavenge to make money at BJ, time to find something else to do. IMHO

Ouchez

I disagree with you on several points.

The discussion was a theoretical one regarding the profitability of the play. Granted, I've only recently been active, or semi active in this board, however, my main intro was on an interesting hand that created a lot of negative discussion. In that discussion, a certain comment was made that.... I don't mean to be insulting, but......- well of course the comment was meant to be insulting. Carrying on, a newbie, forget the handle, prefaced his comments specifically by saying that he was a newbie, and that in his limited experience, that he would ......... In that discussion, a certain comment was made that.......I don't mean to be condescending, but.........well of course the comment was meant to be condescending.

Fast forward to the discussion in question, our hero maintained his attitude as mentioned above, and defended his comedic stance to the nth degree, despite all logic to the contrary. Frankly, I found it amusing watching how far he could shove his foot down his throat, wondering if he could manage to get out through his backside. The simple point us that, in his view, his position is the right one and everyone else is wrong. He may be a nice guy, may spend a lot of time at the tables, but frankly, he set himself up for this.

Last but not least, all that needed to happen to stop the thread was a cessation of his ludicrous logic, ad nauseum post after post.