first, it's every man for himself.

in lotsa years i don't ever recall changing playing strategy because of someother punters wager. in the shadow of a larger player, i might embellish the act with vocalizing/rationalizing some correct but apparently "bad" play. insuring a small hand, or ducking a hit on a stiff against a ten with a big count, lacking the ability to surrender, come to mind. large action, even that $5k buy-in at caesar's requires dedicated surveillance by both the eye and the pitstiff. if only for rating that "big" player, the game comes under more stringent "protection".

how did you conclude that the fellow on 3rd base was a "chumpy" ?

how many tens were left in the deck ? that's "many" counts less outstanding aces. the ace in this case somewhat helps the dealer while the ten hurts him.

how many "bad" plays can you deduce that are appropriate at certain times ?

if you are flat betting at a quarter table just to kill time, i'd question if that's the best place for your gaming dollar at caesar's. i believe that they do have some respectable video poker payouts. and those slots likely would earn a freebie meal somewhere while i doubt that flat quarter 21 play would get much.

if the 3rd base player was skilled, he should have vocally applauded his own play, leastwise so that the 'stiff could notice.

if the "chumpy" walked "up" and the marker player walked home on empty, who's the "chump" ?