Posted by Dr Fro 9:04 PM

Game Theory

Jane's company had a blackjack tournament for their Xmas party. I won a lot of money at it last year, and I fancied my chances again this year. The competition is not so good every year.

The format is simple: The top winner from each of 4 tables goes to the final table. The winner of that gets a bunch of money.

Going into the last hand in the first round, I had the lead with about $4,000, and second place had about $3,000. Nobody else was close. I used the jeopardy strategy of figuring out what I needed to win in the event that second place doubled up. Since second place would get $6,000 for doubling up, I bet just over $2,000. That way if we both win or both lose, I should win. I could only lose if she won and I lost.

Well, there is no 1.5x for blackjack on Jeopardy. Guess what? She got blackjack and ended up with $7,500 in chips. Now, even if I won, I would not have enough chips to beat her. Fortunately, I was at third base, so I had to double down.

"Double Down"

"But sir, you have an eighteen."

"Yes, and I want to double down" (I also like to live dangerously!)

"OK. King. You bust."

Then, for the next 5 minutes I get made fun of by everybody at the party for "being so stupid to double down with an 18."

I explained myself exactly once, but it fell on deaf ears. I overheard one guy say to another, "Jane is always talking about what a gambler he is, but decisions like that will make them go broke. I hope he plays better in Vegas."

Is there any better illustration by analogy that what is right for cash games is not necessarily what is right for poker tournaments?

1 Comment(s):

Posted by  Johnnymac, at 8:04 AM, December 17, 2007  

I am embarrassed for the lovely Jane to have to work with those people if they didn't understand it. Wow.

I admire your forebearance, overhearing comments like that would drive me crazy in that situation.

__________________________________________________

Post a Comment