Buying "surrender hands" from other players

[WRX]

This has turned into probably the most ridiculous thread in the history of this site. There's a severe epidemic of ploppy virus spreading. I think that my response of a few words on page one was ample to address the issue. I stopped reading further responses in detail a LONG time ago.

[moses]

I will give credit when its due. Your ability to even think at such a deep level of depth is quite amazing...especially to a novice like me. Seriously, I mean that as a compliment. Shoot I don't like to even play with another player let alone buy their bad hands. I wish I had you standing over my shoulder offering to give me money every time I decided to stand on 16. O no. Didn't mean to open that can of worms again. Anytime you can make money - more power to you.

[21gunsalute]

I believe you have reading comprehension trouble. You are offered to have someone buy your surrender. If you agrre they own the hand. If you tell them what you want there is no deal to any sane person. So what are you talking about? A deal tha t nobody would make with you? If they make a deal with you they aren't making the deal you offer. So in a thread about buying surrender hands you want to talk about making them partners? That is not what we are discussing and nobody would do it with you so there is no point to your posts. People have tried over and over to explain what we are talking about here is buying surrenders as a scavenger play and you keep insisting you can get people to go partnes with you. Nobody would do that and that is not what we are discussing.

Now do you have anything constructive to add to the thread? We know you wouldn't make the deal that most players would. All your talk is about something that will never happen unless a player stiffs another on the deal. Given that nobody would make your deal deceit is implied and everyone has assumed that is what you mean. Now whether you would allow your hand to be scavenged by another is not the point of the thread. Most players would allow it but not all. Nobody offering to buy a surrender is going togo partners on the hand.


Now that you understand nobody in this thread is talking about going halves with you maybe you can contribute something to the thread. You have said I don't see why anyone would do it, yet most are open to it. You are at a disconnect with what people would do. Now get in your mind that other people will do this and contribute to the thread.

How many times do I have to say this to get it through your thick skull? You can't "buy" a surrender! You can only convince (coerce) the other player into playing out the hand for which you're investing an amount equal to his own investment. He's still required to play out the hand. There is no surrender-the surrender is rescinded. You're now invested 50/50 with the other player in a bad hand for which you want 100% of the proceeds if the hand is won. You're either attempting to steal money from the other player if you didn't properly explain it in proper detail or coercing the other player into a bad deal. He's still required to play out the hand, he still has as much invested in the hand as you do, and you're stealing 100% of the profit off from the hand. And what is the casino going to think about such a play? They were going to get money off the hand and now they have to pay out instead of taking in, and the chips are going to fall into the hands of someone who wasn't originally involved in the hand but coerced another player into rescinding a surrender and played out the hand. The casino is going think that you took advantage of another player and took advantage of the casino (which you did). I'm not going to let you talk me into this bad deal. If you don't want me to surrender the hand and offer me 50% of my original bet, fine, but we're going to divy up the win 50/50. I'm not going to allow you to take advantage of me and coerce me into a bad deal (and yes, playing out the hand and then giving you all the proceeds if I win is a bad deal IMO). If I'm playing out the hand and the hand is won and we're in on it 50/50 then we're both getting 50% of the proceeds.

Hey, if you can get away with this, more power to you, but I think the casino would take a dim view of this and keep you under close scrutiny after the first such attempt. At any rate, you are attempting to take advantage of another player and that's something that I would never do. It's like stealing money from your kids piggy bank. If you're okay with that, fine, but I hope I never see you at any of the casinos I frequent. I don't want to see a decent game lose the surrender option because some jerk caused the casino to re-evaluate it's rules.

[21gunsalute]

Slow down, killer. You have a $100 hand, I "50/50" invest with you for $50. The hand wins. You give me 50% of the wins (ie: $50)?

Right. That's what would be fair. We're invested 50/50 and I still have to play out the hand. Why would I agree to anything less?

[RS]

Have you ever watched [and laughed at] a dog that's chasing his tail?


I feel that's what this thread has become.

[21gunsalute]

The smart play is not to respond to this - though I suspect you will.

Sincerely
Freightman

So, according to you, the "smart" play is whatever you say it is. Sorry, but this whole thread is about a really dumb play that will definitely bring heat and possible much more.

[RS]

Right. That's what would be fair. We're invested 50/50 and I still have to play out the hand. Why would I agree to anything less?

Let me get this straight.

You have $100 bet. I give you $50 so we're "equally invested" or whatever you're trying to say). If the hand wins, you give me $50? So basically if the hand wins, I break even. If the hand loses, I lose $50.

First of all, someone would have to be an absolute fool to think that's how an "equal investment" happens, as you are CLEARLY cheating the player. Secondly, that's not what this thread is even about. It's about BUYING a SURRENDER, not "equally investing" a sh*tty hand with a thief. Lastly, if this did happen and you did (or tried to) cheat a player like this, the casino would view YOU as the cheater -- yes the original bettor.

If you are confused about how this works, I urge you -- take 3 stacks of chips, one for the casino, one for the original bettor, and one for the "scavenger" -- you don't even need cards (although it might help you...). Play out the roll each of the possible 4 ways, and realize, that by "investing equally" is actually cheating the player and by the player buying the surrender from the original bettor, the outcome is the SAME for the original bettor as if he had surrendered. Grab some chips, try it. It's kinda funny how it works out.

[Freightman]

The humor value mounts

[Three]

Give it up guys. He is trolling. Only someone with brain damage wouldn't see the point that virtually everyone else is making. I suspect 21gun is not brain damaged but if he is serious I could be wrong.

[moo321]

21gun, you can buy a surrender.

1. If someone is going to surrender anyways, you aren't causing them any harm by buying the surrender from them, so there should not be an ethics objection.
2. Some places may require the original player to play out the hand. Fine, you tell the guy, I'll pay you half your bet, and you hit the hand, and I get any winnings from the hand
3. It is profitable as long as it is not a BS surrender. Sometimes it may be very profitable (I've seen 12 v. 7, even 12 v. 2).

[21gunsalute]

Let me get this straight.

You have $100 bet. I give you $50 so we're "equally invested" or whatever you're trying to say). If the hand wins, you give me $50? So basically if the hand wins, I break even. If the hand loses, I lose $50.

First of all, someone would have to be an absolute fool to think that's how an "equal investment" happens, as you are CLEARLY cheating the player. Secondly, that's not what this thread is even about. It's about BUYING a SURRENDER, not "equally investing" a sh*tty hand with a thief. Lastly, if this did happen and you did (or tried to) cheat a player like this, the casino would view YOU as the cheater -- yes the original bettor.

If you are confused about how this works, I urge you -- take 3 stacks of chips, one for the casino, one for the original bettor, and one for the "scavenger" -- you don't even need cards (although it might help you...). Play out the roll each of the possible 4 ways, and realize, that by "investing equally" is actually cheating the player and by the player buying the surrender from the original bettor, the outcome is the SAME for the original bettor as if he had surrendered. Grab some chips, try it. It's kinda funny how it works out.

Will you please read all the comments before commenting and quit trying to twist everything around? Since the other player is half invested in the hand, he get's his 50% bet back + 50% of the profits. Perhaps you still think it's a bad deal, and it is, because you aren't going to win 50% of the hands, but those are my terms and that is the fair way to do it. I'm not going to let someone else profit off from my hand when I would then be required to play out the hand and still be guaranteed to lose money. That's a bad deal for me. If everyone is buying everyone else's surrenders, how long is going to take casino personnel to figure out what's going on?

[21gunsalute]

Give it up guys. He is trolling. Only someone with brain damage wouldn't see the point that virtually everyone else is making. I suspect 21gun is not brain damaged but if he is serious I could be wrong.

No Tthree, I'm making valid points and you've stooped to slandering me and twisting my words (along with RollingStoned) and have yet to apologize for it. Once again, if you don't agree with me fine, but quit twisting my words, making up things I clearly did not say and stop slandering me and apologize. Stick to the facts presented and stop the character assassination!

[Three]

Hmm. is that the wind blowing? The horse still looks deadto me. All the beating it is taking is going to make it easier for the scavengers to get their meal. What was the meal to be scavenged? Oh yeah, it was someone selling their surrendered hand to you for the same price the casino would pay them. I am not sure what all this other stuff has to do with it. Nobody that wants to buy a surrendered hand will invest half in it so the only reason to discuss such a transaction is how to deal with that 1 in a thousand Ah*le that is going to screw you on the deal. The buy half of the hand will never happen without deceit by the seller. Is that what we are talking about here. It is a valid concern for any scavenger play. As we see here there are some that would do it. Do you need to consider that 1 in a 1,000 guy that will cheat you into the value of a scavenger play. I don't ever remember seeing any issue with scavenger plays.