bj bankroll question
ricodot
Senior Member
my buddy and I are taking a daily trip to a local casino. we agreed to pool our resources into a $600 bankroll and a 50/50 split. since I have more of a net worth than he does, I said that if we deplete the $600 initial bankroll and I fund a new bankroll of $1000 he's not entitled to any of the winnings. he says he's entitled to 300/1600 or 19% of the winnings. any opinions
Comments
What? I don't follow this.
Btw, who does the playing. Is the shortstop a counter/better player than you?
Would have been better worded if I said he lacks incentive with zero "take" instead of saying zero "stake". I'm just saying that if the guy gets none of the winnings on the 1k, why the heck would he keep spending his time playing?
Wouldn't their only impact be the length of time it takes to get a count? (Though also means in a good spot, you'd play into it longer since others aren't taking cards)
I'm also not taking into consideration the help that more people might give in helping you stay under the radar
You might be right, that is what I was hoping to find out..I do know seeing a guy hit a 14 vs a 4 and stay on 16 vs 10 (unless he knew more than I give him credit for) just makes me want to keep on walking..
My card counting days are long behind me so this is ignoring any deeper implications like a player hitting when they shouldn't removing more cards from the deck/shoe in a positive count... but in general, as annoying as it may seem, I'm pretty sure a player making a "wrong move" is just as likely to help you as hurt you. So if you can take the psychology of "that idiot's play cost me a win" out of it, mathematically, it really shouldn't bother you. But if it does, by all means, move along.
I played small stakes BJ on cruise ships this summer for a couple hours for the hell of it when my wife was taking an afternoon nap and ran into one of those people who mostly knew proper BS but still didn't like hitting 16 v 10 or similar situations. He asked me what to do once or twice and given my above statement I told him "I don't like telling people what to do, so I'll tell you the proper move is to hit but it's your money so do whatever you prefer."
I stick to Pai Gow most days was just mainly curious.
his incentive is playing blackjack on his day off as opposed to sitting at home doing nothing. he has no downside if I lose another $1000 but I can't believe, as he does, he should get a % of the future winnings. originally, with him and I've done this with others is to sit and play with me and have NO risk and give them 10% of my winnings. for reasons I don't want to go into I would rather have another person play as opposed to playing 2 spots my self. I originally asked him how much he wanted to contribute and he said $300. I said i'll match that so he has a 50% stake. know thinking about it I should have said i'll contribute $1700, play out of a $2000 br and he would be get 15% of the winnings for sitting there and listening to me on what to do. as a friend said to me, "why not $50 into the br and take a % of the winnings later".
I know I didn't respond to your original question but this is what I was thinking when I read your first post.