i ran the numbers and you should break up the FH.
but the weird thing was that if you get AAA with 2 kickers you should keep one of the kickers.
ive always thought that you should never keep kickers as 2 pulls to quads was the better bet.
that was b4 TDB tho.
is this play correct?
In TDB only, AAA + kicker is better than AAA only.
Think of it this way, in TDB, AAA + kicker is similar to a 4 to a Royal draw. One card will win you 4000 credits.
does that mean you should hold the kicker with all AAAXY not FH.
Quote: movieguy73i understand going for AAAA with AAAxx but i didnt think you should hold kickers with AAA.
does that mean you should hold the kicker with all AAAXY not FH.
Seems you should hold kickers with the 2, 3, 4 as well according to the Wizards strategy maker here
https://wizardofodds.com/games/video-poker/strategy/a-1-b-120-c-1-d-0-d-1-d-1-d-2-d-4-d-7-d-9-d-50-d-80-d-160-d-400-d-800-d-50-d-800/
Quote: movieguy73i understand going for AAAA with AAAxx but i didnt think you should hold kickers with AAA.
does that mean you should hold the kicker with all AAAXY not FH.
Always hold AAA2, AAA3, AAA4 whether the deal hand was a Full House or not. As was pointed out, this is effectively the same thing as holding 4 to a royal. You should also always hold 222A, 2223, 2224, 333A, 3332, 3334, 444A, 4442 and 4443.
i was thinking that when i started playing TDB.
but i had read somewhere about not holding a kicker with trips.
i might have missread it and it was talking about job ddb etc.
ill take one pull at 4ac.
when i dont just get 4ac dealt to me.
------------------------------
is the Video Poker Strategy Calculator for TDB and DDB?
it says i should hold the kicker with 222,333,444.
the diff between having a kicker and not having a kicker is only double so i would think you should go for the quads first and let the kicker hit on its own.
Quote: JBAlways hold AAA2, AAA3, AAA4 whether the deal hand was a Full House or not. As was pointed out, this is effectively the same thing as holding 4 to a royal. You should also always hold 222A, 2223, 2224, 333A, 3332, 3334, 444A, 4442 and 4443.
id that on DDB and TDB?
Another time I was dealt AAA3X and I dropped the kicker violating proper strategy because I wanted to maximize my chance of picking up the fourth ace -- and I drew two blanks so it didn't matter that I dropped the kicker.
Another time I was dealt 33XXX and of course I held the 3s and drew an ace and the other two 3s for the big win.
And once I held only a Jack (came with four small cards) and drew the four royal cards.
My point is -- over the years I've played TDB and only once in my life was I dealt trip aces with a kicker, and I dropped the kicker and it didn't matter. So this hand is so damn rare I wouldn't pull my hair out over it and I wouldn't fault anyone for dropping a kicker for trying to maximize their chance at quad aces.
''Quote: AlanMendelsonI sometimes play TDB. Once I was dealt AAAA and did not draw the kicker.
Another time I was dealt AAA3X and I dropped the kicker violating proper strategy because I wanted to maximize my chance of picking up the fourth ace -- and I drew two blanks so it didn't matter that I dropped the kicker.
Another time I was dealt 33XXX and of course I held the 3s and drew an ace and the other two 3s for the big win.
And once I held only a Jack (came with four small cards) and drew the four royal cards.
My point is -- over the years I've played TDB and only once in my life was I dealt trip aces with a kicker, and I dropped the kicker and it didn't matter. So this hand is so damn rare I wouldn't pull my hair out over it and I wouldn't fault anyone for dropping a kicker for trying to maximize their chance at quad aces.
By the math you will flop three aces with a kicker every 1504 games.
Quote: AlanMendelsonI sometimes play TDB. Once I was dealt AAAA and did not draw the kicker.
Another time I was dealt AAA3X and I dropped the kicker violating proper strategy because I wanted to maximize my chance of picking up the fourth ace -- and I drew two blanks so it didn't matter that I dropped the kicker.
Another time I was dealt 33XXX and of course I held the 3s and drew an ace and the other two 3s for the big win.
And once I held only a Jack (came with four small cards) and drew the four royal cards.
My point is -- over the years I've played TDB and only once in my life was I dealt trip aces with a kicker, and I dropped the kicker and it didn't matter. So this hand is so damn rare I wouldn't pull my hair out over it and I wouldn't fault anyone for dropping a kicker for trying to maximize their chance at quad aces.
thats how i feel too.
id rather have 2 pulls for quads and maybe back in to a kicker.
Quote: JBAlways hold AAA2, AAA3, AAA4 whether the deal hand was a Full House or not. As was pointed out, this is effectively the same thing as holding 4 to a royal.
At the risk of sounding nitpicky, it is close to the same as holding 4 to the royal, but the opportunity cost of not getting an extra shot at drawing quad aces sans kicker is not paralleled in the 4 to the royal example
Quote: movieguy73thats how i feel too.
id rather have 2 pulls for quads and maybe back in to a kicker.
This is an extremely expensive mistake.
Using the hand analyzer on WoO, you can see the holding the kicker is worth 19.43 bets, and not holding it is worth 15.66 bets. So, not holding the kicker throws away 3.77 bets (not coins -- bets). If you are playing $1 VP, it costs you $18.85 to throw away the kicker.
If you don't want the increased variance, why are you playing TDB? Go find a 9/6 JoB game or something. It doesn't really make sense to intentionally seek out a high variance game and then play it sub-optimally in order to reduce variance.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceThis is an extremely expensive mistake.
Using the hand analyzer on WoO, you can see the holding the kicker is worth 19.43 bets, and not holding it is worth 15.66 bets. So, not holding the kicker throws away 3.77 bets (not coins -- bets). If you are playing $1 VP, it costs you $18.85 to throw away the kicker.
Let's look at the math again when your goal is four aces:
What does the math say about holding only the three aces when your goal is four aces... and what does the math say about holding three aces with a kicker when your goal is only the four aces?
Quote: AlanMendelsonLet's look at the math again when your goal is four aces:
What does the math say about holding only the three aces when your goal is four aces... and what does the math say about holding three aces with a kicker when your goal is only the four aces?
4 aces is an interesting, somewhat arbitrary, and rather expensive goal to have.
Maybe your goal should be 23589, so you should throw away anything that isn't one of these ranks. You should also set a goal to have a doubled bet of 16 at blackjack, so you should double down on all your 6's.
Quote: IbeatyouracesIf your goal is to just get aces, don't play TDB.
My goal is to make money, so here's the situation playing $5 TDB (which is what I play):
Dealt AAA3X if I hold only the aces I have two shots at drawing the case ace for a $4,000 win. Or I hold the kicker and I have a 1/47 shot at winning $20,000.
Frankly, a $4,000 win by itself would make my day...and my weekend and my trip.
You know the old saying a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush? Well in this case a $4,000 payoff that is closer than a $20,000 payoff sure makes the $4,000 payoff a nice thing to happen.
It is very easy to pontificate about the "correct strategy" when you really don't have money "on the line" or you're not looking at a "better chance" of taking home $4,000.
Quote: AlanMendelsonLet's look at the math again when your goal is four aces:
What does the math say about holding only the three aces when your goal is four aces... and what does the math say about holding three aces with a kicker when your goal is only the four aces?
I'm to drunk to answer the question tonight. But if no one will take the question on. I will answer it when I sober up.
Quote: AlanMendelsonLet's look at the math again when your goal is four aces: What does the math say about holding only the three aces when your goal is four aces... and what does the math say about holding three aces with a kicker when your goal is only the four aces?
Alan, there is no way in hell I will dig them answers out for you. I know damn well you have the ability to dig them answers out for yourself. Don't play lazy with me, Alan. You are too slick to be asking such questions, Alan. At least that is the way I envision you. Maybe you don't know how to do the math, but I do. I will give yor even money that you and I are friends.
Quote: mickeycrimmAlan, there is no way in hell I will dig them answers out for you. I know damn well you have the ability to dig them answers out for yourself. Don't play lazy with me, Alan. You are too slick to be asking such questions, Alan. At least that is the way I envision you. Maybe you don't know how to do the math, but I do. I will give yor even money that you and I are friends.
Alan, I have heard that there are photoshoppers over there on your website. And one strange punk named Robert Argentino, alias Rob"the fake out artist" Singer. You are a great host, Alan. I would like to ask you how much you would welcome me after I stomp a mudhole in Rob Singer''s ass. If I ever meet that man face to face, I swinging. I'm gonna knock a punk called Rob Singer out.
Quote: AlanMendelsonMy goal is to make money, so here's the situation playing $5 TDB (which is what I play):
Dealt AAA3X if I hold only the aces I have two shots at drawing the case ace for a $4,000 win. Or I hold the kicker and I have a 1/47 shot at winning $20,000.
Frankly, a $4,000 win by itself would make my day...and my weekend and my trip.
You know the old saying a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush? Well in this case a $4,000 payoff that is closer than a $20,000 payoff sure makes the $4,000 payoff a nice thing to happen.
It is very easy to pontificate about the "correct strategy" when you really don't have money "on the line" or you're not looking at a "better chance" of taking home $4,000.
If you are making sub-optimal plays like this because a smaller win is so important to you, then you are quite clearly playing much higher than you can afford. Perhaps not financially, but certainly psychologically.
$4,000 is nothing in a $5 VP game, particularly a high-variance one like TDB. If it's so important to you that it would make your weekend, then, again, you are playing too high.
Playing $5 VP, that mistake costs you over $90. That is significant for a game with such a low house edge. Depending how generous the slot club is where you play, you could very well be turning a break-even game into a losing one. The situation that you describe is not that rare, and you are flushing $90 down the toilet every time it comes up.
Why don't you just play DDB? Your "goal hand" of four aces is still worth 160 bets, and the lower hands have higher payoffs to compensate for the fact that 4 aces with a kicker (which you aren't willing to draw to anyway) is worth less.
Quote: IbeatyouracesThis is what happens when you get brainwashed by someone, and start following their delusional sights of a "win goal."
I was wondering about that. Is this Rob Singer crap?
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI was wondering about that. Is this Rob Singer crap?
Yes, it is. I never laughed so hard in my life when Rob Singer said in a a public debate with Steve Fezzik "When I achieve my win goal I immediately leave the casino and drive back home to Scottsdale." Fezziks's response was "What do you do? Tag the building?" Rob had no response for that. LMAO!
As I wrote earlier, only once in my life playing TDB was I dealt AAA with a kicker... and I dropped the kicker... and it didn't matter. I didn't draw the ace and I didn't even draw a full house.
But had I kept the kicker and then drawn a blank I would have been left wondering "what if" I wasn't greedy and gave myself two "shots" at the ace?
That's how I play. You bet your money your way.
And I don't think Rob Singer is the only person to play this way. It might be wrong, but how often are you dealt trip aces?
Quote: IbeatyouracesIn TDB, by keeping three aces only and dumping one kicker, (let's assume the other card is a 5 or higher), I get 1 in 98.272727... To draw aces with a kicker. There is one ace and eleven possible kickers left so that's just eleven possibilities of the 1081 remaining. 1081/11 = 98.272727... If both cards are a kicker and you dump them, you'll get the AWAK 1 in 108.1 draws.
Also, by dumping the kicker, you make it a bit harder to get a full house.
Holding just three aces, you'll get a full house 1 in 16.378787... draws as opposed to 1 in 15.666... While holding a kicker.
But by dropping the kicker and holding AAA what are the odds for getting quad aces?
Quote: AlanMendelsonBut by dropping the kicker and holding AAA what are the odds for getting quad aces?
2/47
Quote: AlanMendelsonIt might be wrong, but how often are you dealt trip aces?
Fairly often. That's why this is such an expensive mistake.
Mickey already answered this question with an exact answer.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceFairly often. That's why this is such an expensive mistake.
Mickey already answered this question with an exact answer.
Fairly often? I was dealt trip aces ONCE playing TDB. (I am not counting the time I was dealt quad aces and didn't draw the kicker.)
I like to separate "theory" from "reality" in a casino. Theory says when you have trip aces with a kicker you go for the big win. Reality says "well... maybe I shouldn't be so greedy and winning with quad aces wouldn't be too bad, now would it?"
Quote: AlanMendelsonFairly often? I was dealt trip aces ONCE playing TDB. (I am not counting the time I was dealt quad aces and didn't draw the kicker.)
I like to separate "theory" from "reality" in a casino. Theory says when you have trip aces with a kicker you go for the big win. Reality says "well... maybe I shouldn't be so greedy and winning with quad aces wouldn't be too bad, now would it?"
If you're making strategy changes (big difference between changes and errors) youll want to move down in denoms since you're playing too high
Quote: AlanMendelsonFairly often? I was dealt trip aces ONCE playing TDB. (I am not counting the time I was dealt quad aces and didn't draw the kicker.)
I like to separate "theory" from "reality" in a casino. Theory says when you have trip aces with a kicker you go for the big win. Reality says "well... maybe I shouldn't be so greedy and winning with quad aces wouldn't be too bad, now would it?"
That is absolutely insane. You are trading in 1 shot at $20,000 for two shots at $4,000. It's not even remotely a close decision.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceThat is absolutely insane. You are trading in 1 shot at $20,000 for two shots at $4,000. It's not even remotely a close decision.
+1
Mickey, can I ask how you calculated this?
If you exclude full houses (eg, you count AAA29 but not AAA22) I get 1 in every 1230 hands. If you do count full houses (ie, you could AAA22) I get 1 in every 1152 hands. It's possible that I made some stupid mistake though.
So, basically, by playing 9/7 $5 TDB and throwing away $94 in EV every time you get dealt AAA + a kicker, you are turning a 99.58% game into a 99.25% game. Almost doubling the house edge... I hope they comp you well!
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceThat is absolutely insane. You are trading in 1 shot at $20,000 for two shots at $4,000. It's not even remotely a close decision.
This is wrong. It's not "one shot" -- it's 1/47 at 20,000.
If it were "one shot" as in a flip of the coin -- then yes, I would take the "one shot out of two" at 20,000.
Quote: AlanMendelsonThis is wrong. It's not "one shot" -- it's 1/47 at 20,000.
If it were "one shot" as in a flip of the coin -- then yes, I would take the "one shot out of two" at 20,000.
What bastardization of the English language are you using to determine that "one shot" implies a 50% chance?
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceWhat bastardization of the English language are you using to determine that "one shot" implies a 50% chance?
I am simply making it clear that the term "one shot" in video poker is not a 50% chance.
Quote: AlanMendelsonI am simply making it clear that the term "one shot" in video poker is not a 50% chance.
Why would anyone think that it was?
Quote: IbeatyouracesI think I'd jump of a roof if I dumped the kicker only to watch the last ace show up first followed by a 7!
The part that I don't understand about this is how someone who plays $5 TDB can care so much about $4000 that they are willing to flush all that EV down the toilet so often (about once every couple of hours at a decent rate of play).
$4000 is, what, a buy-in? You can easily lose it in a few hours at those stakes. It's not like we are talking about a prize in the millions, where you'd want to use Kelly Criterion and maximize the log of your expectation. If $4k represents a significant portion of your bankroll then you are playing several denominations too high. Hell, $1 is probably too high -- you should probably be looking for a 25c or 50c game. And, if it doesn't represent a significant portion of your BR... then why would you be willing to make such an expensive mistake?? It's mind-boggling.
Basically, in 80-100 hours of reasonable-speed play, making this mistake every time it comes up will cost you $4000!! Someone who intentionally makes this mistake every time clearly doesn't care about $4000 that much!
Quote: AlanMendelson
Another time I was dealt AAA3X and I dropped the kicker violating proper strategy because I wanted to maximize my chance of picking up the fourth ace -- and I drew two blanks so it didn't matter that I dropped the kicker.
So this hand is so damn rare I wouldn't pull my hair out over it and I wouldn't fault anyone for dropping a kicker for trying to maximize their chance at quad aces.
Going back to the original quote, I'm not sure what is so controversial that this is still being discussed with such fervor:
1.) Alan admitted in the initial post causing this line of discussion that his play violated, "Proper strategy."
2.) It was pointed out that the play mathematically sucks, quite possibly worse than AlanMendelson may have thought.
3.) It was pointed out that the situation may not be quite as rare as AlanMendelson seemed to believe.
4.) It's Alan's money, and Alan maintains that the greater likelihood of the Quad Aces takes precedence over the Expected Value.
With all due respect to those who are mathematically correct, it doesn't seem that AlanMendelson is defending his play as the, "Better," play, just that he attributes more subjective (read: non-monetary) value to the greater chance of Quad Aces. It's kind of like people who place $x inside at Craps, they're eating it in House Edge, but the action has the subjective value that satisfies them.
Even though no compromise is necessary, it is Alan's money, I would personally and respectfully recommend that he switch to Double Double Bonus, a game in which going for Quad Aces when dealt Trip Aces/FH Aces Full always seems to be the right move. It seems that the way you are playing behaves in direct contravention of the reason why people play Triple-Double to begin with.
Quote: IbeatyouracesAgree. I played the $5, 40/10/6 DDB game here quite regularly and on many occasions ran through $5000+ in less than an hour. And as volatile as DDB is, it's not nearly as volatile as TDB.
These guys are fixated on goals, not EV.
My God, that's ballin'! Jackpot/Handpay bonus promo?
Quote: IbeatyouracesI think I'd jump of a roof if I dumped the kicker only to watch the last ace show up first followed by a 7!
So, I've always wondered about this. Are the cards pre-shuffled (before you get your initial deal), and drawn in order for whatever you discard? Or is your draw randomized at the time that you hit the "deal" button?
In other words, is it true that if you drop the kicker and your first card in the case ace, you would have drawn AAAA+kicker had you held the kicker?
Not that is matters mathematically, of course, but I've always wondered.