Here's a new one.

[SecurityRisk]

So I'm playing at a table with a couple of other people. The count is high. The dealer has an ace showing. The count justifies taking insurance, so I do. I'm the only one that takes insurance. Dealer has blackjack. Pays my insurance and takes everyone else's money. Next hand, wouldn't you know it? the dealer has an ace showing again. Count still justifies taking insurance, so I do. Guy next to me sees me taking insurance again, so he takes insurance. Dealer does NOT have a blackjack this time. The other player is mad at me for making him lose money buy taking insurance.

Huh?

 

[21forme]

People are funny, aren't they?

When I take insurance, often someone lectures me on what a bad bet it is. This usually happens on the hand after I stood on a 16 v 10.

 

[ScottH]

People try to tell me not to take insurance, but when I do it twice in a row they are like, "No! Man, don't do it again!" And it's usually been that I win the first one and lose the second, which makes the ploppy think they were right to tell you not to take it.

 

[ihate17]

Recent experience

Count does not justify insurance, I have 20 and dealer shows an ace. I do not take insurance and dealer does not have a natural.

Few hands later, count is +4, I have 13, dealer shows an ace, I take insurance. Dealer does not have a natural.

New shoe, first hand and perhaps three minutes later. I have 19, dealer shows an ace, count does not warrant insurance so I do not take it. This time dealer has it and a lecture for me.

How can you insure a 13 but not insure 19 or 20, it makes no sense to me?

My answer, "I am a idiot I guess"
Really there are few other explainations unless you want to get into the math and the count and the fact that your hand and insurance are two different bets. All that would be telling the casino that I might be using my brain here, so better to just say you are dumb.

ihate17

 

[shadroch]

If the count didn't justify insurance,then I assume you had a fairly small bet out.Wouldn't it be better to simply take your chances than to call attention to yourself?
This isn't a criticism of your play,but an attempt to follow your thinking.

 

[blackchipjim]

camo or idiot?

I would agree with your plays that you stated. I have caught alot of garbage from the other people sitting at the table because of it. I try not to sit at third for this reason. I just point to the open seat and tell them the kitchens' is open. I find knowing what the proper play at the time is far outwieghs the comments. ( see ploppy threads ). blackchipjim

 

[ihate17]

who are you talking too?

If the count didn't justify insurance,then I assume you had a fairly small bet out.Wouldn't it be better to simply take your chances than to call attention to yourself?
This isn't a criticism of your play,but an attempt to follow your thinking.

Everyone in this thread took insurance at the proper count.

 

[EasyRhino]

When I insure a stiff, I can sometimes pull out the line "it's the only way I figured I'd win anything this hand". Or, if I have an unusually large bet out, I say "I got scared!"

I did, however, get peer-pressured into taking even money last weekend. Count was postive (but not super high), I went kamikaze with my remaining chips, and scored a natural with a dealer ace showing. When the dealer offered even money, pretty much every one started urging me to take it.

I figured it was better to not make waves than to obey the 2 points in running count that I was off.

 

[Automatic Monkey]

When I insure a stiff, I can sometimes pull out the line "it's the only way I figured I'd win anything this hand". Or, if I have an unusually large bet out, I say "I got scared!"

I did, however, get peer-pressured into taking even money last weekend. Count was postive (but not super high), I went kamikaze with my remaining chips, and scored a natural with a dealer ace showing. When the dealer offered even money, pretty much every one started urging me to take it.

I figured it was better to not make waves than to obey the 2 points in running count that I was off.

Actually, when you take into account the value of the decreased variance, the proper point to take even money on a BJ is slightly lower than for insurance on a stiff hand. There is sometimes some mathematical truth to ploppy logic. Snyder's "Bird In The Hand" essay explains this in more detail.

 

[Renzey]

Insurance Cover

I think it's good to spread around several Insurance bets for way less in unwarranted situations -- some with good hands and some with stiffs. It tends to obliterate any logic in your Insurance play.

Five bad Insurance bets for one tenth of the bet each costs less than standing with 12 vs. 2 once -- about $1 for a $25 base bettor.

 

[rogue1]

In debt to Fred

I will always be in debt to Fred Renzey for making it absolutely clear in Blackjack Bluebook II that the insurance bet and the hand you are holding have absolutely nothing to do with one another.

 

[ChefJJ]

I didn't read it there, but when I did read it, it was like an epiphany!