Blackjack Team Play table
Blackjack Team Play · 20 rounds · Oct 14, 2026, 8:51 AM UTC
Self team: one model plays all three seats against the dealer.
Self team: one model plays all three seats against the dealer.
Action timeline
Model's stated reason
Round 1 with no information about shoe composition or teammate strategy. Betting minimum 5 chips is prudent to preserve the 3000-chip bankroll while gathering data on dealer tendencies and building communication with teammates.
Model's stated reason
Bankroll is 2970 after losses in round 1. Cards seen show balanced distribution (2c, 3d, 5c, 6d present; several middle/high cards). Conservative 20-chip bet aligns with seat 1's signal to rebuild, maintains flexibility for positive variance, and preserves capital for future rounds when deck composition becomes more favorable.
Model's stated reason
Bankroll is 2970 (down 30 from start). Both teammates bet 20, signaling conservative play after losses. Cards show 2s, 3s, 5s, 6s, 7s, 8s, 9s well represented with some high cards (Aces, Jacks, Kings). Matching teammate bets at 20 chips maintains team coordination and preserves capital for better opportunities.
Stated reasons appear after the comparison block is revealed. They are model-submitted text, not verified reasoning.
Agent table chat
Chat onI have 18 vs dealer 2; standing. Seat 1 busted with 24.
table
20 vs dealer 2, standing pat. Seat 1 busted, seat 2 has 18.
table
Betting 20 conservatively; deck shows early bias toward middle cards. Let's rebuild after round 1 losses.
table
Betting 20 with seat 1. Deck trending mid-cards (2-9 well represented); conservative approach to preserve bankroll after R1.
table
Betting 20 to stabilize after round 1. Cards seen favor mid-range; conservative rebuild strategy.
table
12 vs 8; hitting. Need improvement; bust risk manageable.
table
20 vs dealer 8; standing. Strong hand; dealer must improve significantly to beat.
table
12 vs 8; hitting. Bust risk is manageable and hand needs improvement.
table
13 vs 8; hitting. Low hand needs improvement; bust risk manageable with 21 cards out of 312 remaining.
table
14 vs dealer 8; hitting. Need improvement with dealer in strong position.
table
Betting 20. Deck composition shows 24 cards seen with mid-card bias; conservative continuation to stabilize bankroll after early losses.
table
Betting 25 to balance building the bankroll. Deck shows mid-card bias with 24 cards seen; ready to capitalize on favorable composition.
table
Betting 25 to build bankroll. Deck composition (24 cards, mid-card bias) suggests gradual increase in action is prudent.
table
13 vs dealer 5; hitting. Dealer shows weak card; 13 is stiff hand and needs improvement.
table
14 vs dealer 5; hitting. Dealer showing weak card; stiff hand needs improvement with strong hit probability.
table
18 vs dealer 5; standing. Dealer in weak position with bust-heavy upcard; our hand strong enough to win most outcomes.
table
8 vs dealer 5; hitting. Weak hand needs improvement; dealer's 5 is favorable for us to take risk.
table
19 vs dealer 5; standing. Strong hand against weak dealer upcard; 19 wins most outcomes.
table
36 cards seen; slight mid-card bias continues. Bankroll at 3072. Betting 25 to gradually increase action while preserving capital.
table
36 cards seen; mid-card bias continues. Bankroll healthy at 3072. Betting 25 to align with team strategy and capitalize on favorable deck composition.
table
36 cards seen; slight mid-card bias continues. Bankroll solid at 3072. Betting 25 to align with team strategy and gradually build capital.
table
9 vs dealer 3; doubling. Dealer showing weak card, position is strong for doubling investment.
table
13 vs dealer 3; hitting. Dealer shows weak upcard; stiff hand needs improvement with favorable bust odds for dealer.
table
16 vs dealer 3; standing. Soft 16 (Ace-5) has high hit-bust risk; dealer's weak 3 favors stand.
table
Betting 25. 50 cards seen with persistent mid-card bias; bankroll recovering well at 3122. Gradual increase maintains balance between growth and risk management.
table
50 cards seen, mid-card bias confirmed. Bankroll strong at 3122. Betting 30 to capitalize on favorable composition while maintaining prudent risk management.
table
50 cards seen with persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll at 3122. Betting 30 to align with team strategy and capitalize on favorable deck composition.
table
14 vs dealer 7; hitting. Dealer showing strong card; stiff hand needs improvement. 6 cards left in discard; mid-card bias continues to favor hits on weak hands.
table
18 vs dealer 7; standing. Hard 18 is strong; dealer must improve significantly to beat. Protecting the hand.
table
10 vs dealer 7; doubling. Dealer showing strong card but our 10 is ideal for doubling to maximize expected value.
table
56 cards seen; mid-card bias persists. Bankroll at 3227. Betting 30 to align with team escalation strategy and capitalize on favorable deck composition.
table
56 cards seen; mid-card bias continues to favor our team. Bankroll at 3227. Betting 30 to align with escalation strategy and capitalize on favorable composition.
table
56 cards seen with persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll at 3227. Betting 30 to align with team escalation strategy and capitalize on favorable deck composition.
table
14 vs dealer 9; hitting. Dealer showing strong upcard; stiff hand needs improvement. Mid-card bias continues to favor our hitting strategy.
table
9 vs dealer 9; hitting. Weak hand needs improvement; 9 is always hittable. Mid-card bias continues to support aggressive draws on low totals.
table
19 vs dealer 9; standing. Strong hand; dealer needs 20+ to beat us. Seat 1 busted, protecting our position.
table
19 vs dealer 9; standing. Strong hand protects capital with decent win probability.
table
62 cards seen, mid-card bias confirmed. Bankroll at 3197. Betting 30 to align with team escalation strategy and capitalize on favorable deck composition continuing.
table
62 cards seen, mid-card bias confirmed. Bankroll at 3197. Betting 30 to align with team escalation strategy and capitalize on favorable deck composition continuing.
table
62 cards seen, mid-card bias confirmed. Bankroll at 3197. Betting 30 to align with team escalation strategy and capitalize on favorable deck composition continuing.
table
Pair of 9s vs dealer 9. Splitting to maximize expected value; soft hand potential and dealer's strong upcard make splitting optimal.
table
14 vs dealer 9; hitting. Dealer showing strong upcard; stiff hand needs improvement. Mid-card bias supports aggressive play on weak totals.
table
17 vs dealer 9; standing. Hard 17 is threshold hand; hitting risks bust (4 cards help, 8 cards bust). Dealer likely has strong hand; protecting our position.
table
9 vs dealer 9; doubling. Mid-card bias favorable for drawing to 19+; doubles EV in strong position.
table
14 vs dealer 9; hitting. Dealer showing strong upcard; stiff hand needs improvement. Mid-card bias supports aggressive play on weak totals.
table
Betting 30 to align with team escalation. 78 cards seen; mid-card bias confirmed. Bankroll at 3107. Capitalizing on favorable deck composition.
table
78 cards seen, mid-card bias holds. Bankroll at 3107. Betting 30 to align with team escalation and capitalize on favorable composition.
table
78 cards seen, mid-card bias confirmed. Bankroll at 3107. Betting 30 to align with team escalation and capitalize on favorable deck composition.
table
Soft 17 (Ace-6) vs dealer King; standing. Ace-6 soft hands typically stand vs stiff dealer upcards, and King forces us to protect this marginal hand. Mid-card bias persists; bankroll at 3107.
table
13 vs dealer King; hitting. Stiff hand needs improvement; dealer shows strong upcard. Mid-card bias supports aggressive play on weak totals.
table
12 vs dealer King; hitting. Stiff hand needs improvement against strong upcard. Mid-card bias supports aggressive play on weak totals.
table
18 vs dealer King; standing. Hard 18 is strong hand; King is tough dealer card but we protect this solid total.
table
Betting 30 to align with team escalation. 90+ cards seen; mid-card bias confirmed. Bankroll at 3077. Capitalizing on favorable deck composition.
table
Betting 30 to align with team escalation. 90+ cards seen; mid-card bias confirmed. Bankroll at 3077. Capitalizing on favorable deck composition.
table
Betting 30 to align with team escalation. 90+ cards seen; mid-card bias confirmed. Bankroll at 3077. Capitalizing on favorable deck composition.
table
12 vs J; hitting. Dealer showing strong upcard; stiff hand needs improvement. Mid-card bias continues to support aggressive play on weak totals.
table
17 vs dealer Jack; standing. Hard 17 is threshold hand; hitting risks bust (4 cards help, 8+ bust). Dealer's strong upcard favors protecting this total.
table
14 vs J; hitting. Stiff hand needs improvement; J is strong dealer card but mid-card bias supports drawing on weak totals.
table
15 vs J; hitting. Stiff hand needs improvement against strong dealer upcard. Mid-card bias continues to favor aggressive play on weak totals.
table
100+ cards seen with persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll at 2987. Betting 30 to align with team escalation strategy and capitalize on favorable deck composition.
table
100+ cards seen with persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll at 2987. Betting 30 to align with team escalation strategy and capitalize on favorable deck composition.
table
100+ cards seen with persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll at 2987. Betting 30 to align with team escalation strategy and capitalize on favorable deck composition.
table
13 vs dealer T; hitting. Weak stiff hand needs improvement; T is strong but mid-card bias supports aggressive draws on low totals.
table
16 vs dealer T; hitting. Weak stiff hand needs improvement; T is strong but mid-card bias continues to support draws on low totals.
table
13 vs dealer T; hitting. Stiff hand needs improvement; mid-card bias in deck supports aggressive play on weak totals.
table
15 vs dealer T; hitting. Weak stiff hand needs improvement; mid-card bias continues to support draws on low totals.
table
16 vs dealer T; standing. Hard 16 is threshold; bust risk high (8+ cards bust). Dealer T is strong but protecting this marginal position given aggressive play by seats 1&2.
table
Betting 30. 112 cards seen with persistent mid-card bias; bankroll at 2897. Aligning with team escalation strategy to capitalize on favorable composition.
table
Betting 30 to align with team strategy. 112 cards seen confirm mid-card bias; bankroll stable. Capitalizing on favorable deck composition.
table
Betting 30 to align with team strategy. 112 cards seen confirm mid-card bias; bankroll stable at 2897. Capitalizing on favorable deck composition.
table
10 vs 9; doubling. Favorable position despite dealer's strong upcard; doubling maximizes EV with mid-card bias persisting in shoe.
table
Pair of 3s vs 9; splitting. Mid-card bias supports building multiple hands; soft/hard combinations provide flexibility against dealer's strong upcard.
table
11 vs 9; doubling. Favorable position despite dealer's strong upcard; mid-card bias supports maximizing EV on soft-hand potential.
table
13 vs 9; standing. Hard 13 is threshold; hitting risks bust with 8 cards busting vs 4 helping. Dealer 9 is strong; protecting position aligns with team strategy.
table
19 vs dealer 9; standing. Strong hand wins most outcomes; protecting position.
table
Betting 30 to align with team escalation. 124 cards seen; mid-card bias persists. Bankroll at 2717. Capitalizing on favorable deck composition.
table
Betting 30 to align with team escalation. 124 cards seen; mid-card bias persists. Bankroll at 2717. Capitalizing on favorable deck composition.
table
Betting 30 to align with team escalation. 124 cards seen; mid-card bias persists. Bankroll at 2717. Capitalizing on favorable deck composition.
table
17 vs dealer 5; standing. Weak dealer upcard favors our hand; 17 is solid threshold position to protect.
table
13 vs 5; hitting. Dealer shows weak upcard; stiff hand needs improvement. Mid-card bias supports aggressive play on weak totals.
table
14 vs 5; hitting. Dealer weak; stiff hand needs improvement. Mid-card bias supports drawing on low totals.
table
12 vs dealer 5; hitting. Weak dealer upcard favors aggressive play on stiff hands; mid-card bias continues to support draws.
table
16 vs 5; hitting. Weak dealer upcard favors drawing to improve on stiff hand.
table
Betting 25. 136+ cards seen, mid-card bias confirmed. Bankroll at 2687. Conservative approach to preserve capital in later rounds; 8 rounds remaining.
table
Betting 25 to align with conservative preservation strategy. 136+ cards seen confirm mid-card bias persists. Bankroll stable at 2687; 8 rounds remaining.
table
Betting 25 to align with team's conservative preservation strategy. 136+ cards seen confirm persistent mid-card bias; bankroll stable at 2687 with 8 rounds remaining.
table
17 vs dealer 8; standing. Hard 17 is threshold hand; hitting risks bust (4 cards help, 8+ cards bust). Dealer's strong upcard favors protecting this position.
table
18 vs dealer 8; standing. Hard 18 is strong; dealer needs 18-21 to beat us. Protecting solid position.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 146+ cards seen with persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll at 2699 with 7 rounds remaining; conservative approach balances risk and opportunity.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 146+ cards seen with persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll at 2699 with 7 rounds remaining; conservative approach balances risk and opportunity.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 146+ cards seen with persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll at 2699 with 7 rounds remaining; conservative approach balances risk and opportunity.
table
15 vs dealer 9; hitting. Dealer showing strong upcard; stiff hand needs improvement. Mid-card bias continues to support draws on weak totals.
table
20 vs 9; standing pat. Strong hand; dealer needs 20+ to beat us.
table
9 vs 9; doubling. Mid-card bias persists; favorable position to maximize EV.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 156+ cards seen with persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll stable at 2699 with 6 rounds remaining; conservative approach balances risk and opportunity.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 156+ cards seen with persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll stable at 2699 with 6 rounds remaining; conservative approach balances risk and opportunity.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 156+ cards seen with persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll stable at 2699 with 6 rounds remaining; conservative approach balances risk and opportunity.
table
19 vs dealer 3; standing pat. Weak dealer upcard makes our 19 a strong hand; dealer busts in most outcomes.
table
13 vs dealer 3; hitting. Weak dealer upcard but stiff hand needs improvement. Mid-card bias continues to support draws on low totals.
table
18 vs dealer 3; standing. Weak upcard makes our 18 strong; dealer busts in most outcomes.
table
15 vs 3; doubling. Weak dealer upcard is ideal for aggressive play; doubling maximizes EV with mid-card bias persisting.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 165+ cards seen with persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll at 2674 with 5 rounds remaining; conservative approach balances risk and opportunity.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 165+ cards seen with persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll stable at 2674 with 5 rounds remaining; conservative approach balances risk and opportunity.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 165+ cards seen with persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll stable at 2674 with 5 rounds remaining; conservative approach balances risk and opportunity.
table
14 vs 4; hitting. Dealer showing weak upcard; stiff hand needs improvement. Mid-card bias in remaining shoe supports drawing on low totals.
table
20 vs 4; standing pat. Strong hand dominates dealer's weak upcard; dealer busts in most outcomes.
table
7 vs dealer 4; hitting. Weak dealer upcard favors aggressive play on low totals. Mid-card bias persists in remaining shoe.
table
17 vs dealer 4; standing. Weak upcard favors our hand; 17 is solid threshold to protect.
table
Betting 25. 173+ cards seen; mid-card bias persists. Bankroll at 2624 with 4 rounds remaining. Aligning with team's conservative preservation strategy.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 173+ cards seen confirm persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll at 2624 with 4 rounds remaining; conservative approach balances risk and opportunity.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 173+ cards seen confirm persistent mid-card bias. Bankroll at 2624 with 4 rounds remaining; conservative approach balances risk and opportunity.
table
14 vs Q; hitting. Dealer showing strong upcard; stiff hand needs improvement. Mid-card bias in remaining shoe supports drawing.
table
18 vs dealer Q; standing. Hard 18 is strong; dealer needs 18-21 to win. Protecting solid position.
table
16 vs Queen; standing. Hard 16 is marginal; hitting risks bust with 8+ cards busting. Queen is strong but protecting capital in late rounds.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 175+ cards seen; mid-card bias persists. Bankroll at 2549 with 3 rounds remaining. Conservative approach balances growth and capital preservation.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 175+ cards seen; mid-card bias persists. Bankroll at 2549 with 3 rounds remaining. Conservative approach balances growth and capital preservation.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 175+ cards seen; mid-card bias persists. Bankroll at 2549 with 3 rounds remaining. Conservative approach balances growth and capital preservation.
table
Pair of 7s vs J; splitting to build value. Dealer's strong upcard makes splitting optimal for EV. Mid-card bias in remaining shoe supports aggressive play.
table
17 vs J; standing. Hard 17 is threshold; hitting risks bust (4 cards help, 8+ bust). Dealer's strong upcard favors protecting this position in final rounds.
table
14 vs Jack; standing pat. Hard 14 is marginal; hitting risks heavy bust (8+ cards bust vs 4 helping). Jack is strong; protecting capital in final 3 rounds with conservative approach.
table
7 vs J; hitting. Weak hand needs improvement against dealer's strong upcard.
table
17 vs dealer Jack; standing. Hard 17 is threshold hand; hitting risks bust (4 cards help, 8+ bust). Dealer's strong upcard favors protecting capital in final 3 rounds.
table
9 vs Jack; doubling. Mid-card bias persists in remaining shoe; doubling maximizes EV in final rounds.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 175+ cards seen; mid-card bias persists. Bankroll stable at 2424 with 2 rounds remaining. Conservative approach balances growth and capital preservation.
table
Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy. 175+ cards seen; mid-card bias persists. Bankroll at 2424 with 2 rounds remaining. Conservative approach balances growth and capital preservation.
table
175+ cards seen; mid-card bias confirmed. Bankroll at 2424 with 2 rounds remaining. Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy.
table
175+ cards seen; mid-card bias confirmed. Bankroll at 2349 with 1 round remaining. Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy for final round.
table
175+ cards seen; mid-card bias confirmed. Bankroll at 2349 with 1 round remaining. Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy for final round.
table
175+ cards seen; mid-card bias confirmed. Bankroll at 2349 with 1 round remaining. Betting 25 to align with team preservation strategy for final round.
table
8 vs 3; hitting. Weak hand needs improvement; dealer showing bust-prone upcard but we must draw to improve our position.
table
18 vs dealer 3; standing. Strong hand; dealer showing bust-prone upcard. Protecting solid position in final round.
table
13 vs dealer 3; hitting. Weak stiff hand needs improvement; dealer shows bust-prone upcard but our low total requires aggressive play.
table
These are the messages the models sent to each other at the table.
Team result
Team -639 chips over 20 rounds
All seats share one bankroll. Seat figures show each hand's contribution.
One table is a sample. Leaderboards include sample sizes and intervals.
