See the top rated post in this thread. Click here

Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 27 to 39 of 231

Thread: Buying "surrender hands" from other players

  1. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Thirdbaseman View Post
    Tthree,
    I do not agree with this.
    If you win 1 bet, you get back your bet, plus win 3.
    So you need to win 1 out of every 4 bets (25%) to break even.
    You are stepping into the ploppies shoes, so you need to win same % as ploppy to break even (25%).
    Yep, another early morning screw up. Maybe that's why I tend to lose the first hour in the morning and win it back later. LOL

  2. #28


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    To clarify.... You would only buy surrenders that are not correct BS (or index), right? If its correctly played by the player, don't buy it? And the "buying every friend's surrender" should be ignored yeah?
    "Everyone wants to be rich, but nobody wants to work for it." -Ryan Howard [The Office]

  3. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by RollingStoned View Post
    To clarify.... You would only buy surrenders that are not correct BS (or index), right? If its correctly played by the player, don't buy it? And the "buying every friend's surrender" should be ignored yeah?
    As a counter you know sometimes correct BS surrenders aren't surrender plays due to the count. The low hanging fruit is the real chicken surrender moves. You will see them often enough if the plops ever use surrender.

  4. #30


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    There are profitable situation but the casino would have the laser beam on you. I was rarely able to do it, the dealer just say it's not allow! Once in a while i do though. If we can do it all the time sure ,why bother counting cards or even HC ,well not hc.

  5. #31
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Pacific coast
    Posts
    12


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    By the way, this casino offers "Late Surrender". With that being said, would I gain an edge from buying other peoples surrender hands?

    For example, after dealer peeks, I then proceed to buy hard 13 v 10 from player.

    Because although I'm buying a losing hand of 13, dont I have the luxury of not losing my bet right off the bat, which would be the case with the player who initially owned that hard 13 hand for the opening seconds of the round. Meaning once the dealer has peeked under her 10, the player would then sell his hand to me. I'm guranteed to be in the ballgame per say. Unlike the player who is at the mercy of the casino, in the event having the dealer opens up a BJ for herself. Player doesnt have the luxury to early surrender, like he would like too, and therefore he hopes and prays, that when she peeks, she doesnt have BJ, and then after those intense brief moments, he sells his hand to me.
    I wont have that problem, I will be guranteed to have a baseball bat in my hand, then given an opportunity to stand and swing in the batters box. He may get sent back to the dugout, while in the "on-deck circle" while never given an opportunity to step to the plate. I'm always going to the plate, regardless of the situation.

    So would this increase my value even more, or has this been already factored into the equation?

  6. #32


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    If I understand what you're saying....Yes, already been factored.

    Bottom line is -- if someone wants to surrender but it is not the correct play (based on Basic Strategy / Index), then buying their hand for 50%, you're at an advantage, because that hand (say 13vT) wins more than 25% of the time. Since you're essentially getting a 3:1 payout on the hand, you're golden.

    If the hand (13vT) were to win EXACTLY 25% of the time (talking theoretically, here), and say the hand was $10. You buy it 4 times. Three times you lose, one time you win. You lose $15 (since 3 losses, $5 each), but you'll end up winning $15 as well ($10 hand, $10 win, totals $20, and you paid $5 to the player, for a net win of $15). That would make it an "even proposition" bet, meaning in the long run, you will be neither up nor down any money on that hand, because for every 3 losses of $5 each there will be 1 win of $15.

    However, 13vT has a win rate higher than 25% (which is why it's not a proper surrender move), and thus, buying the hand for 50% is +EV.
    "Everyone wants to be rich, but nobody wants to work for it." -Ryan Howard [The Office]

  7. #33


    0 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Freightman View Post
    Your logic is flawed. Rethink the scenario.
    No, my logic is not flawed. If you're not splitting the proceeds with the other player you are stealing from him. I'm sure the pit and surveillance would view it that way. Furthermore, it's still his hand to play. If he gets paid it's up to him what he does with the proceeds. You're equally invested in the hand, it's still technically his hand to play, and he's entitled to half the proceeds. What you're doing is bullying and stealing from others at the table. This is morally unacceptable, and I'm sure the casino(s) would toss you out when they figure out what's going on, whether or not they suspect you're counting or not.

  8. #34


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful. Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by 21gunsalute View Post
    No, my logic is not flawed. If you're not splitting the proceeds with the other player you are stealing from him. I'm sure the pit and surveillance would view it that way. Furthermore, it's still his hand to play. If he gets paid it's up to him what he does with the proceeds. You're equally invested in the hand, it's still technically his hand to play, and he's entitled to half the proceeds. What you're doing is bullying and stealing from others at the table. This is morally unacceptable, and I'm sure the casino(s) would toss you out when they figure out what's going on, whether or not they suspect you're counting or not.
    SERIOUSLY flawed logic
    Once you have paid the surrender price, you own the hand. Everyone else seems to get it.

  9. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Most of the time buying a hand usually half the split will have the casino need the signal from the original owner etc etc but when I have seen people buy a hand being surrendered they more times than not ask the buyer to play the hand. I think they probably should ask the original owner but for some reason most of the time they see the hand as forfeit to the buyer. Aholes would would dispute or reneg are why casino's often don't allow any scavenger plays or bets on other peoples side bet.


    @! gun's logic is like the guy who buys a painting and then sells it for half price later and wants half the profits when the artist dies and the painting is sold at 100 times the purchase price. Or the lottery pool person who decides not to take the chance this week and doesn't kick into the pool so they can pay some bill or go out drinking wanting a full share in the pool when one of the tickets win big.

    It is like the player surrendering the hand and then the dealer busts so he wants to get paid anyway. What is the difference between the house and the player getting the hand? The house pays half your bet and keeps the win and the bet just like the purchasing player would. Do you think the original hand holder would get paid for half the bet by another player if half the win went to him. Of course not. Everyone knows that is not what is going on. Someone like 21 who would change the deal after the fact to line his pockets ... well we all have pejoratives for people like that. That is a risk you take and these greedy b*stards have killed scavenger plays in many casinos. Probably less than one in a hundred in the casino are that kind of person.

  10. #36


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Tthree View Post
    Most of the time buying a hand usually half the split will have the casino need the signal from the original owner etc etc but when I have seen people buy a hand being surrendered they more times than not ask the buyer to play the hand. I think they probably should ask the original owner but for some reason most of the time they see the hand as forfeit to the buyer. Aholes would would dispute or reneg are why casino's often don't allow any scavenger plays or bets on other peoples side bet.


    @! gun's logic is like the guy who buys a painting and then sells it for half price later and wants half the profits when the artist dies and the painting is sold at 100 times the purchase price. Or the lottery pool person who decides not to take the chance this week and doesn't kick into the pool so they can pay some bill or go out drinking wanting a full share in the pool when one of the tickets win big.

    It is like the player surrendering the hand and then the dealer busts so he wants to get paid anyway. What is the difference between the house and the player getting the hand? The house pays half your bet and keeps the win and the bet just like the purchasing player would. Do you think the original hand holder would get paid for half the bet by another player if half the win went to him. Of course not. Everyone knows that is not what is going on. Someone like 21 who would change the deal after the fact to line his pockets ... well we all have pejoratives for people like that. That is a risk you take and these greedy b*stards have killed scavenger plays in many casinos. Probably less than one in a hundred in the casino are that kind of person.
    Tthree, get off your high horse! Maybe things are different in your neck of the woods, but none of the casinos I play in would allow anyone but the original bettor to play out the hand, and the OB is the one who will be getting paid. Your analogy is pathetic. Every casino in this area would escort you off the premises if you attempted to play out another person's hand, and the same goes for trying to coerce the other player into going 50/50 on his hand when he won't be privy to any of the profit. This may even be considered a criminal act, especially on an Indian Reservation where the laws are generally not understood and may even be made up on the fly.

  11. #37


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by Freightman View Post
    SERIOUSLY flawed logic
    Once you have paid the surrender price, you own the hand. Everyone else seems to get it.
    I don't know of any casino that would let you play out another person's hand. The original bettor owns the hand.

  12. #38


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by 21gunsalute View Post
    I don't know of any casino that would let you play out another person's hand. The original bettor owns the hand.
    Hopeless

  13. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    3rd rock from Sol, Milky Way Galaxy
    Posts
    14,158


    Did you find this post helpful? Yes | No
    Quote Originally Posted by 21gunsalute View Post
    and the same goes for trying to coerce the other player into going 50/50 on his hand when he won't be privy to any of the profit
    This is the point you don't seem to get that has everyone else pulling their hair out. Nobody coerced anyone. He has already decided to sell his hand for half price. That is what surrender is in case you haven't realized that. You just become the buyer instead of the casino. That is the deal made and understood clearly by all parties involved. If he doesn't want to do it he sells it to the casino for the same price. That is what surrender is. You coerce him into nothing. You simply ask him if he doesn't mind if you buy it for the already agreed up price instead of the casino. Only the most unreasonable person or someone concerned about heat generation wouldn't do it. Only a supreme lowlife would change the deal after the hand wins. HE WOULD THEN BE THE ON NOT COERCING BUT FORCING A CHANGE IN THE ONLY DEAL HE WANTED A PART OF FROM THE TIME THE HAND IS DEALT. I am not sure if you are TROLLING or just can't grasp the concept that he simply willingly sold his hand for the price he wanted to a different party. If you ever see someone reneg on a deal with another player at the table everyone that witnesses it sees it as the biggest lowlife move out there and people will mention what you did to others every time you play at the same table for months and months. People will view you with the worst form of contempt. This is why some casinos won't allow scavenger plays.

Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

About Blackjack: The Forum

BJTF is an advantage player site based on the principles of comity. That is, civil and considerate behavior for the mutual benefit of all involved. The goal of advantage play is the legal extraction of funds from gaming establishments by gaining a mathematic advantage and developing the skills required to use that advantage. To maximize our success, it is important to understand that we are all on the same side. Personal conflicts simply get in the way of our goals.