Category: Advanced Strategy

Posted on by — 9 Comments

You’re Upsetting Our Players

In 1999, I started communicating with “Richard,” the marketing director of the Laughlin Flamingo hotel. (Today the same property is called the Aquarius, and it may change names again because the parent company is in the process of changing owners.) Richard knew my name because I wrote columns for Strictly Slots and Casino Player, both of which were distributed for free in that casino.

He wanted to use my “fame,” such as it was, to draw in customers, but he didn’t really want me to teach his players how to beat him. Was there any middle ground?

I suggested he hold a video poker tournament, giving away whatever amount he wanted, and I could teach a class on “How to Succeed in a Video Poker Tournament.” His players would get real value because tournament play definitely has some skill elements to it (in addition to a considerable amount of luck) and most of the lessons for tournament play don’t translate into regular casino play. We reached a deal for me to host two events over the next year.

The only tournament software they had was for Jacks or Better.  An unusual choice for a video poker tournament, but I could adjust my class accordingly.

One of the major points in tournament strategy is that on the last hand, if you aren’t “in the money,” you should go for broke. If a tournament had 250 entrants and paid out 50 places, then being in 51st place was tied with 250th place. Zero is zero. This is very different from casino play, where 51st place might represent a profit of $100 and 250th place might be a loss of $500. These aren’t the same at all.

Players are used to the concept that a higher score is better than a lower score, but this is only true in tournaments if you’re above the “bubble.” If you’re below the bubble, all scores are equal.

Since it was a Jacks or Better tournament, the example hand I used was being dealt AAAAT on the last hand where you weren’t already in the money. Assuming 125 coins (the payout for four aces in this game) wouldn’t be enough to move you into pay dirt, you should throw away three of the aces and just hold the suited AT. Your only chance was to get a royal flush. You didn’t have a big chance — actually 1-in-16,215, but a small chance was better than no chance at all.

If this were the more standard Double Double Bonus tournament, I would have picked a different hand. Four aces pay at least 800 credits, maybe 2,000, and just that score would usually be enough to move you into the money.

The following year I received a call from “Cheryl” who was Richard’s assistant. She said Richard was busy, but she was asked to call and see if they could get me to Laughlin again for two more events. But there would have to be a few changes in the contract.

First, they wanted to lower my fee by $100 each time. Since I had already prepared my notes, it would be easier on me and that should be reflected in the price. I told Cheryl that I wasn’t crazy about this change. At that same time, there was a casino in Las Vegas that was giving away the store (I didn’t tell her this was the MGM Grand).  To induce me to come down to Laughlin for two days at a time would take more money, not less. But what was the other change you were talking about? Maybe that would offset the money.

She told me there were complaints from some of the seniors that I was telling them to throw away four aces! They didn’t get such a good hand very often and they just KNEW this couldn’t be right. Since the complaints went through her, it would be making her life easier if I never told them to throw away four aces.

I asked her if she understood the context behind sometimes throwing away the aces. She didn’t. She didn’t care. She never gambled anyway so she paid no attention to somebody else’s silly ideas about gambling. She really only cared about getting fewer complaints from the players.

I asked her if Richard knew about the changes she was requesting. She said no, but she was sure he would be proud of her for reducing the costs and not making the players angry.

I told her “No thanks,” but if they wished to increase my fee and allow me to teach the class as I saw fit, she knew how to get in touch with me. She never did.

I never taught there again, but as I recall things worked out pretty well for me at the MGM Grand.

 

Author’s Note:  The next semester of classes at the South Point will begin Tuesday January 9. The original schedule of classes on bobdancer.com accidentally said Sunday January 7. The schedule has been repaired, but I want to make sure everybody has gotten the word.

Should anyone be worried about the classes upsetting them, I promise that this semester I will never tell you to throw away four aces!

Posted on by — 7 Comments

Understanding a Flow Chart in Super Double Bonus

Super Double Bonus is a version of Double Bonus where four jacks, queens, and kings earn 600 coins instead of 250 and the straight flush returns 400 instead of 250. The best-paying version, which returns 45 for the full house and 25 for the flush, returns 99.695% when played well. When combined with a decent slot club and/or set of promotions, this can be a profitable game to play when you find it.

One of the trickiest parts of the strategy is when you are dealt an ace of one suit and a “JT” of another. Depending on the other two cards, sometimes you hold the “JT”, sometimes you hold the ace by itself, and sometimes you hold AJ.

For me to learn this, I created a flow chart which I believe is 100% accurate in this area of the strategy chart — although it presumes you know that a 4-card open-ended straight and a 3-card straight flush with one high card and two insides are both more valuable than the options presented in the flow chart. It follows relatively simple logic — but even relatively simple logic requires more concentration and study than some of my readers wish to endure.

What I thought I’d do is to present my flow chart, give you some sample hands to play, and let you see how you do. Afterwards, I’ll go through the flow chart more slowly and maybe it will be easier to understand.

And if you’re not in the mood for the logic of 9-5 SDB, it’s okay with me if you always play “JT” when you come to these hands. You won’t be giving up a whole lot. For some folks, making these kinds of distinctions cause their heads to hurt. If that’s you, take this column off and come back next week.

A versus “JT”:

 

Is there a flush penalty to the “JT”?

If no, play “JT”  — end

If yes, continue

 

Is the flush penalty to the “JT” a 2-6 and the fifth card suited with the A?

If yes, is it an 8 or 9?

If yes, play AJ — end

If no, play “JT” — end

If no, continue

 

Is the flush penalty to the ”JT” a 2-5 and the fifth card an 8 or 9?

If yes, play A — end

If no, play “JT” — end

 

Is the flush penalty to the ”JT” a 6 and the fifth card a 7, 8 or 9?

If yes, play A — end

If no, play “JT” — end

 

Using the above logic, play these hands:

  1. A♠ J♥ T♥ 2♠ 5♠
  2. A♠ J♥ T♥ 9♠ 7♦
  3. A♠ J♥ T♥ 9♠ 8♥
  4. A♠ J♥ T♥ 3♣ 7♥
  5. A♠ J♥ T♥ 9♣ 5♥
  6. A♠ J♥ T♥ 7♣ 6♥
  7. A♠ J♥ T♥ 7♣ 5♥
  8. A♠ J♥ T♥ 8♣ 2♥
  9. A♠ J♥ T♥ 8♠ 2♥
  10. A♠ J♥ T♥ 7♠ 6♥

Here are the answers. If you easily got them all correct, you don’t need to read any further:

  1. A♠ 2♠ 5♠
  2. J♥ T♥
  3. J♥ T♥ 9♠ 8♥
  4. J♥ T♥ 7♥
  5. A♠
  6. A♠
  7. J♥ T♥
  8. A♠
  9. A♠ J♥
  10. J♥ T♥

If you missed one or more of the above problems, the following explanations may help:

 

Is there a flush penalty to the “JT”?

If no, play “JT”  — end

If yes, continue

This rule is the easiest. Just look for a card suited with the “JT”. If you don’t find one, then “JT” is the play — unless, of course, some higher-ranking combination is in the hand.

 

Is the flush penalty to the “JT” a 2-6 and the fifth card suited with the A?

If yes, is it an 8 or 9?

If yes, play AJ — end

If no, play “JT” — end

If no, continue

We only get to this rule if there is a flush penalty to the “JT” and also a flush penalty to the A. Also, this is the only time we can hold AJ.  Notice that the flush penalty to the J cannot be a 7 or higher as that would make it a higher-ranking 3-card straight flush or 3-card royal flush. Also note that this says that if there is a flush penalty to the A, but it is not an 8 or 9, we hold the “JT”.

 

Is the flush penalty to the ”JT” a 2-5 and the fifth card an 8 or 9?

If yes, play A — end

If no, play “JT” — end

By the time we get here, there is no flush penalty to the ace.

 

Is the flush penalty to the ”JT” a 6 and the fifth card a 7, 8 or 9?

If yes, play A — end

If no, play “JT” — end

By the time we get here, there is no flush penalty to the ace. The only difference in the last two rules is when the fifth card is a 7. If the flush penalty to the J is a 6 (meaning it is not a straight penalty to the A), we hold the A by itself. If the flush penalty to the J is a 2-5 (which are all straight penalties to the A), we hold the J.

 

Do the notes in green help you any? If so, welcome to them.

Posted on by — 24 Comments

The Las Vegas Massacre and Me

Many of us are sick and tired of discussing the terrible events of October 1 and the speculation afterwards of what made this unhinged man do what he did. If that’s where you are and you want to skip this article, I won’t blame you.

Once it was discovered that Stephen Paddock played video poker, I started getting calls from a variety of news outlets. Although I didn’t get nearly as many calls as Anthony Curtis did, when something related to video poker makes the news, my name comes up as someone who might be able to offer some insight.

For each telephone interview, I started it off with the fact that I didn’t know the guy and had never heard his name until after he was dead. I don’t know if he was a winning player or not, but I have my doubts. And in my opinion, there is nothing inherent in the game of video poker that will create such a monster. So, with that said, how can I help you?

Some reporters wanted to know the difference between video poker and regular poker, or video poker and blackjack, and those were easy for me to answer. Some wanted to know why the game was so popular. To my mind it’s because the game is beatable, and even casual players can get relatively inexpensive casino vacations out of the game.

From there, the questions usually evolved to what other casino games were beatable. Years ago, I would have said blackjack, poker, and sports betting and that would have been the end of my list. But since I’ve been hosting the Gambling with an Edge podcast I’ve become aware that there are LOTS of different avenues for profiting in a casino other than just these games.

Some wanted to know how many winning players there are, and I had to say that any number I came up with would be a wild-assed guess.  I don’t know how much any other player nets, let alone how many of the tens of thousands of players (most of whom I have never met) had net scores greater than zero.

One question from the Associated Press was one that I didn’t want to address. The reporter argued that this attack exhibited a great deal of planning and would a successful video poker player have the ability to do such planning? I didn’t want to answer this question because the answer is “Yes!”

What I said was that a successful lawyer would have those planning skills, as would a successful architect, as would a successful chef, as would a successful political advisor, as would a successful reporter, as would basically a successful anything. So yes, you can add successful gambler of any stripe onto that list, but the list is very long.

One reporter told me that CNN reported Paddock was ahead more than $5 million in a recent year. Was this possible? I told them it was very possible that a high-stakes player had more than $5 million in W2G jackpots, but that’s an entirely different matter than being ahead that much. Or even ahead at all! Getting the total of W2Gs from the IRS might be obtainable by the police. But knowing whether he was ahead or behind was a totally different matter.

Four days after the shooting, Bonnie and I left for a long-scheduled two-week cruise from Boston to Quebec City and back again. While in Boston the night before the cruise, I checked my email and found one from Ryan Growney, the general manager of the South Point. He said that an FBI agent wanted to talk with me about the shooting and I should call him back right away to get that FBI agent’s phone numbers. Since I teach classes at the South Point and that casino sponsors the podcast, that casino was a reasonable place for the FBI to start looking for contact information.

Shit!

I’ve heard Bob Nersesian and other attorneys say you NEVER should talk to a police officer without having an attorney present. I figured that went double for talking to the FBI. Still, I was a couple thousand miles away from home and about to sail northwards soon. The $3.99 a minute charge for talking when the ship is actually at sea is relatively small change, of course, but I still didn’t want to pay it. I figured I could handle this, so I found out the number of the FBI special agent and called him.

The agent told me that my name was mentioned by several people when they asked, “Tell us the name of the most likely person you know who might have known Stephen Paddock.” Due to our “video poker connection” and the fact that I play what many would consider high stakes, it didn’t surprise me that my name had come up. When I said I had never heard of him, basically the interview was over.

Except, the agent wanted to fill out the form in front of him and he asked me if my name was Bob, or perhaps Robert? Another question I didn’t want to answer, but I told him that Bob Dancer was a pseudonym used for teaching and writing purposes.

This led to the next question of, “Would you mind telling me your real name?” The truthful (unspoken) answer was of course I minded, but I told him anyway, along with my address and phone number. That information could be easily obtained by the FBI anyway if they really wanted it, but I would prefer I wasn’t in their databases.

Oh well. I wasn’t going to lie to the FBI and making a big stand about something that wouldn’t be difficult for them to find out anyway would just make me look suspicious.

I said at the beginning of this article that I had my doubts that Stephen Paddock was a winning player. Why did I say that? Because articles said he’d been playing for high stakes for more than a decade and he was still allowed to play at a number of the biggest Las Vegas Strip casinos. From both personal experience and talking to many other successful players, I know that these places tend to restrict and/or remove players over whom they do not believe they have an advantage.

So, if he did have an actual advantage, he would have needed to fool several different casinos for more than a decade. And this, I believe, is unlikely. Even more unlikely is that the casinos would have allowed him to be $5 million ahead in one year.

Posted on by — 17 Comments

Be Careful What You Wish For  

Say you’re playing 9/6 Jacks or Better and are dealt a hand like A♦ K♣ J♦ T♦ 3♦. The best play, of course, is AJT3. Many players hold the inferior AJT. As I see it, players make the lesser play for one of two reasons:

  1. They simply do not know that AJT3 is worth 3.7¢ more than AJT for the 5-coin dollar player — given that the fifth card dealt was an off-suit king. Holding the flush kicker is a rather advanced play and many players aren’t students of the game. Or maybe they go back and forth between games without understanding the differences between them and make more-or-less the same plays for all games.

 

  1. They know AJT3 is better and they just don’t care. They really love to get royals and 3.7¢ isn’t that big of a cost for a chance to get such an exciting hand.

 

Today I want to address that second group of players, namely the ones who are willing to pay an extra premium in order to get the royal flush. My position is that for most players, this is a costlier move than they realize.

When I spoke of that 3.7¢ difference in value between the two plays, the math included a 1-in-1,081 chance of getting a $4,000 royal flush. The trouble is that the $4,000 royal flush for most people isn’t worth $4,000.

First of all, there’s tipping. When they bring you your money, they usually provide you with 39 $100 bills and five twenties. You’re not required to tip, but many players give away one or more of their twenties to the casino staff. If you’re generous enough to give away all five twenties, you have increased the difference between holding AJT and AJT3 from 3.7¢ to 12.9¢. If you got the best hand available holding AJT3, namely a $30 flush, no casino employee would be there holding his/her hand out expecting a share of it.

Second, and far more importantly, there’s a W2G that comes along with that $4,000. If you’re playing in Mississippi, the state takes away $120 — with no chance of getting it back. Louisiana takes $240, and you can get some or all of that back by filing a Louisiana state income tax form. If you fill out the form yourself, it takes an hour or more and you may not do it correctly. If you hire a tax professional to do it, it can cost more than the $240 you’re hoping to get back. There are a few other states with similar policies. If you shrug off that extra $240 every 1-in-1081 times it occurs when you draw two cards to AJT, that increases the difference in EV between the two plays by an extra 22.2¢.

Possibly different from the state where you’re playing, the state where you reside has tax rules too. Some states let you deduct your gambling losses from your gambling winnings. Some don’t. Some states have a state income tax on gambling winnings. Some don’t. Professional gamblers have different rules than non-professionals. If you itemize your W2Gs, it reduces other benefits you can claim.

I’m not a tax expert by any means, but I can safely say that there are significant costs to getting a $4,000 royal flush for many players.

The third reason royal flushes can be “bad news” is that casinos get excited if you get too many of them. Not so much for $4,000 royals perhaps, but if you play for larger stakes, $20,000 or higher royal flushes end up with you being discussed by casino management. Although exactly how many royals you hit is largely luck, being lucky can get you kicked out. Nobody has everbbeen kicked out for hitting too many flushes.

If players correctly understood the factors discussed today, even on a hand like A♣ 6♥ J♣ T♣ 3♣, where AJT is superior to AJT3 by 5.1¢, these players would intentionally and intelligently go for the flush — simply because ending up with the royal has so many additional costs.

(I understand that the two hands presented today look virtually the same to many players and they cannot see why the correct play is different. That’s a discussion for another day.)

Playing for quarters or less makes you immune from these considerations at most casinos. Some casinos, however, do make a $1,000 jackpot a hand-pay situation. If that’s the case where you play, some of your immunity disappears.

Taking slightly the worst of it to go for a jackpot that creates a financial burden strikes me as similar to paying money to buy heroin. Heroin ends up destroying an individual and to pay money to do this boggles the mind. Most healthy people are disciplined enough to stay away from heroin. Few gamblers are disciplined enough to be willing to pay a small premium in order to stay away from royal flushes.

Posted on by — 14 Comments

Is This Correct?

I get lots of emails from players asking about this or that. If the questions aren’t too frequent from the same player, I usually answer them. I recently got a question which I very much disliked from a player named Gary.

“Bob, I’ve been trying to figure something out that Linda Boyd said on YouTube. She said that when you were dealt the 4♠ 9♣ J♥ Q♥ K♠ that you would hold the J♥ Q♥. Is that true, because to me the 9♣ is a penalty card, not really sure what to think of all this, would you help me out?”

Here are my problems with this question:

  1. It is so easy to look up how to play a hand using software. Any player trying to learn should have one or more video poker software products. This level of information is also available for free online. Emailing me to ask how to play a hand is equivalent to asking me to add 432 to 743. Yes, I know how to do it, but I’m not interested in being a calculator for you. If you are unable or unwilling to look up how to play a hand, playing video poker well is beyond your capabilities.

 

  1. Gary didn’t tell me what game he was talking about. For some games, 9/6 Jacks or Better among them (which is the game most authors write about), J♥ Q♥ is the correct play. For other games, such as the versions of Double Bonus where you receive 5-for-1 for a straight, you play 9♣ J♥ Q♥ K♠. Somehow, I’m supposed to figure out the game that Gary is interested in.

 

  1. Gary mentioned a penalty card, although not in a way that indicates he knows what he’s talking about. Penalty cards are a consideration for advanced players — and many such players think they are more trouble than they’re worth. At the minimum, however, you need to know basic strategy cold before you start messing with penalty cards. And if Gary is asking about this particular hand, he clearly doesn’t have basic strategy mastered.

The fact that Gary is at the intermediate level is neither here nor there. Everybody starts at the beginning and each one of us is at a different point along the learning curve. I’ve had raw beginners in my classes as well as students who are professional video poker players. If Gary were to attend class or discuss private lessons, that would be fine.

But asking me questions that he could answer easily himself is abusing my generosity. I do answer questions via email for free, but not questions like this.

Posted on by — 26 Comments

How Often Do Things Happen?

Today’s paper is on simple video poker mathematics. Let’s assume you are playing a game where, on average, you hit a quad (i.e., a 4-of-a-kind) every 400 hands. Further, let’s assume you play for a total of 1,200 hands. I’ll arbitrarily say that it takes you two hours to complete the 1,200 hands. How many quads can you expect to end up with over that number of hands?

It appears obvious that the answer should be three, but this is the wrong answer. To get the correct answer, we need to look at the binomial distribution, the results of which appear here:

 

0 5%
1 15%
2 22%
3 22%
4 17%
5 10%
6 5%
7 2%
8 or more 1%

 

What this says is that 5% of the time you won’t hit any quad; 17% of the time you’ll hit four; 2% of the time you’ll hit seven; etc. These numbers don’t tell you WHICH quad you’ll hit. Just how many.

These numbers are accurate, but not really precise. For example, the chance to get exactly three quads could more precisely be written as 22.4322%, but that is far more precision than we need for today’s discussion. It looks like they only add up to 99%, but that’s rounding error and also not important for today.

One of the interesting features of this distribution is that the number of quads that we think we “should” get, namely three, actually occurs less than one time in four. Another typical feature of the distribution is that the probability of getting one fewer quad than typical is virtually the same — actually 22.4135%, which is slightly less.

We could, I suppose, refer to getting either zero or one quad as “bad luck”, getting two, three, or four as “typical luck”, and getting five or more as “good luck”. It doesn’t change anything by assigning terms dealing with luck to the results. When somebody asks me, “How much skill and how much luck was involved?” in describing whatever happened yesterday, my answer is often, “I have no idea.”

Let’s assume that on this particular day in question, we don’t hit any 4-of-a-kind. Definitely worse-than-average luck, but it happens about one day in twenty. Slightly rare, but not extraordinarily so. Now the question is, since you’ve just gone through worse-than-average luck, what will be the distribution of quads for your two-hour session tomorrow? For this, the following distribution will hold:

0 5%
1 15%
2 22%
3 22%
4 17%
5 10%
6 5%
7 2%
8 or more 1%

 

The distribution, of course, is the same as first given. Just because we had a bad day says absolutely nothing about what our score will be the next day. There is no tendency to either, “Once you start running bad you keep running bad because you’re an unlucky player,” or “You’ll get more quads the next day to make up for the shortfall.”

Let’s assume we change machines halfway through. Now the distribution of the quads expected over the 1,200 hands is:

0 5%
1 15%
2 22%
3 22%
4 17%
5 10%
6 5%
7 2%
8 or more 1%

 

Is this distribution beginning to look familiar? It should. Changing machines has nothing to do with changing the distribution.

In this discussion so far, we’ve said nothing about skill. We are assuming players are playing perfectly. If players play imperfectly, the distribution will change. For example, on a hand like K♥ K♠ 4♦ 4♣ 5♦, it is correct in almost every game to hold KK44, although many seat-of-the-pants players playing games where two pair only return even money incorrectly hold just the pair of kings. Making this kind of mistake systematically will IMPROVE your chances for hitting quads, but COST you overall. The increased number of quads you get by holding only one pair rarely compensates for the reduced number of full houses.

The numbers are for three “cycles.” If full houses normally come around every 90 hands on average, the numbers above apply to how many full houses you hit in 270 hands. If royals come about every 40,000 hands, the numbers above apply to how many royals you hit in 120,000 hands. In games where the royal cycle is 45,000 hands, the numbers apply to how many royals you hit in 135,000 hands.

Posted on by — 7 Comments

A Matter of Perspective

If you’re a computer programmer working on a video poker game, the hand A♠ Q♥ T♥ 8♠ 3♥ is equivalent to A♦ Q♣ T♣ 8♦ 3♣, but both of those are different from A♣ Q♥ T♥ 8♠ 3♥. Can you see why?

The ranks of the cards are the same and in all three hands QT3 is suited. In the first two hands, the ace and eight are suited with each other. In the third hand, the ace and eight are unsuited.

To 99% of all players, 99% of the time, that distinction is irrelevant. It could possibly be important, for example, in a Double Bonus game where there is a progressive on four aces. At reset, you hold QT on this hand. If the progressive on four aces is high enough, you just hold the ace. How high the progressive has to be will be different if there are 12 cards still in the pack unsuited with the ace than if there are “only” 11.

With that kind of thinking in mind, assuming you are playing 9/6 Jacks or Better, do you see any difference between A♦ Q♣ T♣ 8♦ 3♣ and A♠ Q♥ T♥ 7♠ 3♥?

For anyone who would hold just the ace on either of these hands, you’re a hopeless Jacks or Better player. Holding the ace can be correct in certain other games, but not Jacks or Better.

The Basic Strategy play on both hands is to hold the QT. It’s the second-best play in both cases, but AQ is better. The fact that AQ is better than QT in these two hands is because the 3 is suited with the QT. This is known as a flush penalty and is generally only of concern to advanced players. Many players have enough trouble just learning the basic plays without dwelling on the fine points. What makes the hands different is that in the first hand, the 5-coin dollar player is making a nickel mistake versus a 2-cent mistake in the second.

The difference in the size of the mistakes is due to the 8 interfering with the straight possibilities of QT and the 7 not doing so. Why is this important? Well, it’s not if you’re playing the game with a 4,000-coin royal.  But if you’re playing a progressive, holding QT is correct in the first hand when the royal is at 4,685 and above, while in the second hand, holding QT is correct at 4,365 and above.

So, for whom is this kind of analysis important? Frankly, only to a pretty small self-selected group. Some pros learn these things — many don’t. A few recreational players become competent in these distinctions — although it may never be cost-effective for them.

Some of us just plain like studying things. This has been one of my “secrets to success.” The more I know about how and why things work the way they do, the easier it is for me to learn and memorize strategies.

If you think my secret is worthless to you, that’s your right. But in general, the more people study these things, the better their results turn out to be. Whether it makes sense dollars-and-cents-wise if you put a value on your time is debatable. But if it gives you pleasure to gain insight into these games, why the heck not do it?

Posted on by — 4 Comments

Comparing 9/6 Jacks or Better with 9/6 Bonus Poker Deluxe at the Advanced Level

This next semester of free video poker classes at the South Point casino will be on Wednesdays between August 2 and October 4. Each semester I include one game taught at the advanced level. The advanced level is much more difficult than what I usually teach, and is only for players interested in squeezing every last little bit out of the game.

This semester I’m teaching both 9/6 Jacks or Better (JoB) and 9/6 Bonus Poker Deluxe (BPD) at the advanced level. I’m teaching them back-to-back, on the same day, September 6, beginning at noon.

The games are very similar. All pay schedule categories pay the same amount except for 4-of-a-kind (25-for-1 versus 80-for-1) and two pair (2-for-1 versus 1-for-1). These two changes offset each other almost exactly, making JoB worth 99.54% and BPD worth 99.64%.

The reason I have room to teach two separate advanced classes is that both of these games have fewer fine points than most other games, and the ones they have are pretty easy. In addition, about half of the advanced points for the two games are identical.

But there are differences. Games that pay 1-for-1 for two pair go for straights much more often than games that pay 2-for-1 for the same hand.

Today I’m going to list 20 hands. Approximately half of them (maybe exactly half — maybe not) are played the same in the two games. The others, of course, are played differently.

Your job, should you decide to accept it, is to figure out which are which. At the end of the article, I’ll tell you which are which — but I’m not going to tell you what the correct plays are.  Let me give you an example. One of the hands is K♦ Q♣ J♥ 8♥ 7♥. There are two reasonable plays:  K♦ Q♣ J♥ and J♥ 8♥ 7♥.  (If you prefer a third play, you will get value out of the beginner classes — August 2 for JoB —- August 30 for BPD.)

If you think they are played the same, which is the correct play? If you think they are played differently, which play goes with which game? If you think that advanced plays aren’t that important so you don’t need to know which is correct, this particular hand is an intermediate play and should be in the repertoire of every player who plays for money that is important to him.

With available software, including some freebies available online, finding out the correct play on a hand is easy. If you can’t be bothered to check on the right play, you are never going to be able to play these games at the advanced level anyway. I’ll explain each of them in detail during the class.

  1. A♠ Q♥ J♠ T♥ 5♠
  2. A♦ K♣ J♥ T♥ 7♥
  3. A♣ K♣ T♣ 5♣ 3♥
  4. K♦ T♦ 9♣ 6♦ 5♠
  5. A♠ J♥ T♣ 5♦ 2♠

 

  1. K♥ J♠ T♠ 9♥ 5♣
  2. A♦ Q♣ T♣ 9♥ 8♠
  3. A♦ K♠ J♠ T♦ 5♠
  4. Q♣ J♣ T♥ 9♠ 9♥
  5. A♦ J♠ 7♥ 5♣ 4♥

 

  1. A♠ K♠ Q♥ T♠ 3♠
  2. K♦ T♦ 8♣ 6♦ 5♠
  3. Q♥ J♣ T♥ 8♠ 7♥
  4. A♠ K♥ J♥ T♣ 9♥
  5. K♦ Q♣ J♥ 8♥ 7♥

 

  1. A♦ J♠ T♥ 7♣ 4♥
  2. A♠ K♥ 5♣ 3♣ 2♣
  3. T♦ 8♠ 7♥ 5♣ 4♥
  4. A♠ J♥ T♣ 5♥ 2♠
  5. J♠ T♥ 9♠ 7♦ 5♣

 

The hands that are played identically in the two games are d, g, h, i, k, n, o, p, q, s and t. The others are played differently.

How did you do? If you aced the test, congratulations. You’ve done some work. If you didn’t ace this test, learning these distinctions is very likely within your capabilities. It’s not really that hard. But it takes effort. Whether or not it’s worth the effort is for you to decide.

Posted on by — 10 Comments

Accidental Quadruple Deuces

A version of this article first appeared about 10 years ago.

Regular Deuces Wild, played for quarters, returns $250 for four deuces. Double Deuces returns $500 for the same hand, but takes away elsewhere in the pay schedule. Loose Deuces returns $625 for that hand and Triple Deuces gives you $750. Each of these games can be found in Las Vegas.

How about Quadruple Deuces returning $1,000 for four deuces? Or even more? In 2007, this game existed accidentally for a few months at a large local casino in Las Vegas, but it could have happened anywhere. And while the base Deuces Wild game on which it was found wasn’t all that great, adding 3,000 coins to an every-4,400-hands event adds about 12% to the return. Apparently four players were able to exploit this and keep the information quiet for a couple of months. They certainly didn’t post it on one of the Internet bulletin boards as that would have killed the play in a day or less.

What happened was this (I might have the facts a little off as I am getting this secondhand): There were eight quarter games tied to a progressive. Six of these games had the progressive set normally, which means that it would be collected when the royal was hit. But two of the games had the progressive accidentally attached to the four deuces hand. Apparently, a slot tech got a little bit sloppy one day and nobody who worked for the casino caught it. So, the four deuces hand started at $1,000 and moved up from there.

Since these were ticket-in, ticket-out machines, winning the jackpot merely spit out a ticket and the players could keep playing, so long as the jackpot was below $1,200. And it usually remained at that level because four deuces is a fairly frequent hand with respect to having the progressive rise $200 or more. When the progressive did rise that high, which it did a few times, these players wouldn’t play. They hoped that one of the other machines would hit the royal so everything would look normal. And their luck held. No over-$1,200 set of deuces was hit on either machine.

The way the bubble burst was that someone “not in the know” was playing one of the two juicy machines and happened to hit the royal flush. The nerve of them! When they were only paid $1,000 instead of whatever the meter read, they understandably felt cheated and called it to the attention of the floor people. When it escalated to supervisors, it didn’t take long for the casino to realize what the error was. The two machines were shut down for a while and adjusted. Christmas was over!

I was told about this play after the fact. One of the four players who hit this hard was attending one of my free classes and told me about it. He had just finished reading my Million Dollar Video Poker book in which I write about taking advantage of a similar-yet-different casino mistake.  He wanted to tell me that these errors were still happening out there — if you could find them.  

He asked me if the casino could demand its money back because of the machine overpaying. While first making sure he realized that I wasn’t a lawyer and couldn’t speak authoritatively on the subject, I told him that I didn’t believe the casino could effectively take any civil or criminal action against him. If the casino could not show that he was in cahoots with the slot tech who made the improper settings, then the casino was stuck.

What the casino COULD do, however, was restrict him from the property if it so chose. Assuming these four players used their slot club cards while playing this game, it wouldn’t be difficult for the casino to check their records and determine who was playing these machines heavily over the past few months. Even if the players didn’t use their cards, they were surely caught on surveillance tape.

The casino could well decide that they didn’t want these players around anymore and that would be perfectly legal. Casinos in Nevada can restrict the play of anyone, so long as it’s not based on things such as race, gender, or national origin.

Of course while this was going on, the players couldn’t be sure how it would all turn out. They were regularly winning $2,000 a week or more apiece, week after week, and that’s big money for quarter video poker. Winning like that is EXCITING, especially since you don’t know how long it’s going to last.

I wasn’t there, but there had to be discussions about how to share time on the machines, how to keep it quiet from others, and how much they could play without the casino employees noticing that these same guys were playing the same machines EVERY DAY all day long. There are no unique best answers on how to do this and opinions vary widely.

However they decided to do it, it was impossible to predict when a casino employee would put two and two together, when other players might find out and demand a piece of the action, or when someone accidentally hit the wrong kind of jackpot at the wrong time. There would have been all KINDS of things to worry about.

Mistakes continue to happen in casinos. To exploit them, you first have to FIND them. Players who do a lot of scouting have the best chances to find these kinds of mistakes. Players who don’t scout are left with complaining that other people find these things.

Posted on by — 5 Comments

Comparing Two “Super” Games

Super Double Bonus (SDB) and Super Aces Bonus (SAB) are both variations of Double Bonus. In “regular” Double Bonus, four aces get paid 160 for 1, four 2s-4s get paid 80 for 1, and four 5s-Ks get paid 50 for one.

Each of the variations we’re looking at today keeps that basic structure for the quads, with one exception each. In SDB, four Js-Ks receive 120 for 1 rather than 50 for 1 (and you receive more for the straight flush as well). In SAB, four aces receive a gigantic 400 for 1. In both games, the amount for the full house and flush is adjusted downward until it gets into the “acceptable” range. This means the pay schedule returns enough to attract the players, but not so much that the casinos are afraid of it. The two pay schedules discussed in this article are the highest allowed for these particular games. In many casinos, you’ll find lower pay schedules than these, but that won’t affect the discussion that follows.

 

9/5 Super 8/5 Super
Double Bonus Aces Bonus
Royal Flush 800 800
Straight Flush 80 60
Four Aces 160 400
Four Js-Ks 120 50
Four 2s-4s 80 80
Four 5s-Ts 50 50
Full House 9 8
Flush 5 5
Straight 4 4
Three of a Kind 3 3
Two Pair 1 1
Jacks or Better 1 1
Return 99.69% 99.94%
Variance 38.0 63.4

 

The strategies for the two games are very similar. This is largely because they receive identical amounts for flushes, straights, and two pair — which are the three pay-schedule categories that matter most when it comes to strategy.

In today’s column, I’m going to present four hands that are played differently in the two games. Your job is to figure out both plays. Even if you have never played either game, you have two important clues to help you out:

  1. The plays are different. This is a HUGE clue.
  2. The plays are different because of the pay schedule.

 

  1. 5♣ 6♣ 7♣ 8♣ 9♥
  2. A♥ Q♠ J♦ 9♣ 3♠
  3. A♠ Q♥ 8♦ 4♣ 3♠
  4. K♥ T♥ 8♦ 7♣ 6♠

 

Where dollar and cent amounts are indicated, it assumes you are playing for dollars, five coins at a time.

 

  1. There are only two reasonable plays here. The “chickens” keep the straight and the “gamblers” go for the straight flush. The different returns for quads has no bearing when you hold at least four cards of different ranks, so the determining factor must be that SDB returns more for the straight flush. In SDB, ‘5678’ is better by $2.87, and in SAB, 56789 is better by $1.39. Obviously neither play is close.
  2. With three unsuited high cards including an ace, the “standard” play in both Jacks or Better and Double Bonus is to discard the ace and hold the other two high cards. That’s the correct play in SDB by 10.6¢. In SAB, the much greater return for four aces means that you go for them more. In SAB, holding the single ace is the better play by 20.6¢.
  3. This is very similar to the last hand. In SDB you hold AQ by 2.6¢. In SAB, you hold the solitary ace by 19.6¢. And the reason, again, for the difference is the large amount you receive for four aces in SAB.
  4. This last hand is intentionally tricky, in that there are more than two choices. Holding ‘KT’ is obvious. Holding the inside straight, T876, is also an eligible choice. It takes some experience to know that inside straights with no high cards are worth considerably less than either single high cards or a single high card with a suited ten. Perhaps the hardest option to see is holding the king by itself. Some players can’t bring themselves to break up royal combinations no matter what the pay schedule. Once you realize that the king by itself is a viable option, then since SDB pays more for four kings, holding the single king in that game is the better play by 2.8¢. In SAB, the “normal” play of ‘KT’ is better by 3.0¢.

 

So how did you do? As a test, this wasn’t too difficult. But as a learning experience, there were some important things to remember. First of all, each game has its own strategy and those of you who use more-or-less the same strategy for most games are taking the worst of it. Second, sometimes the reason for the differences in the strategies is obvious once you closely examine the idiosyncrasies of the pay schedule.

Finally, I want to leave you with a hand that’s played the same in both games, assuming you are playing with the best pay schedule. K♥ K♠ 9♥ 9♦ 3♣. Although many seat-of-the-pants players will just hold the kings, in SAB, holding KK99 is better by 79¢. In SDB it’s a closer play because four kings pay so much, but KK99 is still better in that game by 19¢. If you find yourself playing a version of SDB where the full house pays only 40 or less instead of 45, that’s enough to change the correct play to KK.