Please Settle a 3 Card Dispute
I know you do not recommend making the "pair plus" wager due to the greater element of risk for that wager and advise against ever making that bet; however, as you have noted, almost everyone who plays this game makes the "pair plus" wager
This debate and question assumes that the player will disregard your advice and make the "pair plus" wager
My friend advocates one unit on "pair plus" and two units on "ante" in order to realize a net "win" instead of a "push" whenever the dealer fails to qualify and your "pair plus" wager is a loser - thus, my friend has three units at risk instead of two units had the two wagers been made for the same amount
I maintain that the ratio between the "pair plus" and "ante" wagers is irrelevant as they are separate and independent wagers; I further maintain that the "wins" on hands when the dealer fails to qualify are more than offset by the greater losses you suffer when the dealer does qualify with a superior hand since the loss will be two units and not one unit
thus, one unit on "pair plus" and one unit on "ante" is not an inferior "strategy" to one unit/two unit advocated by my friend and are in essence equivalent strategies in the long run
any analysis and help that you can provide would be greatly appreciated
Both of the bets are negative expectation bets, so the fewer of those you make, the better. Unless you have some sort of angle that yields a positive expectation, (what you are describing does not) then the best possible, “Strategy,” for ante and Pair Plus is to play neither.
That said, your friend has a greater expected loss than you do because he is betting more, unless you’re playing with bigger units, of course.
The two bets are independent and one does not have to be made to make the other.
The strategies are not equivalent, betting less on a -EV game is better than betting more, so your, “Strategy,” is better, but not Optimal. Optimal is to not play.
He’s obviously correct that he will net a one unit profit if the dealer doesn’t qualify AND he doesn’t hit PP. It’s doesn’t really qualify as a, “Strategy,” he is just playing the way he thinks is fun. He doesn’t think it’s fun to break even on many hands by losing PP and the dealer not qualifying.
I guess you could tell him that, if he hits a pair and loses, he’s now down three units overall whereas it would’ve been just one had he been betting one unit on Ante/Play.
But, my friend would not relent until hearing from "The Wizard"
The more money you bet on negative expectation bets, the more money you'll lose in the long run. Thus, if your friend bets more, he's going to be the bigger loser in the long run. However, I hope you realize that this means if you were to NOT PLAY THE GAME AT ALL that's mathematically/technically a better strategy than playing 1 unit 1 unit on the PP/Ante.
Quote: Mission146There’s really not a lot to say on this.
Both of the bets are negative expectation bets, so the fewer of those you make, the better. Unless you have some sort of angle that yields a positive expectation, (what you are describing does not) then the best possible, “Strategy,” for ante and Pair Plus is to play neither.
That said, your friend has a greater expected loss than you do because he is betting more, unless you’re playing with bigger units, of course.
The two bets are independent and one does not have to be made to make the other.
The strategies are not equivalent, betting less on a -EV game is better than betting more, so your, “Strategy,” is better, but not Optimal. Optimal is to not play.
He’s obviously correct that he will net a one unit profit if the dealer doesn’t qualify AND he doesn’t hit PP. It’s doesn’t really qualify as a, “Strategy,” he is just playing the way he thinks is fun. He doesn’t think it’s fun to break even on many hands by losing PP and the dealer not qualifying.
I guess you could tell him that, if he hits a pair and loses, he’s now down three units overall whereas it would’ve been just one had he been betting one unit on Ante/Play.
I think Mission misspoke in the last paragraph, though the rest was correct (and contradicted that last part). If he hits a pair with 1 unit on PP and 2 units on Ante, but has a lesser hand than the Dealer, he will lose a net 1 unit.
If the bets are equally sized in the same circumstances, you will have a net push (the PP will pay for the lost Ante ).
Quote: beachbumbabsI think Mission misspoke in the last paragraph, though the rest was correct (and contradicted that last part). If he hits a pair with 1 unit on PP and 2 units on Ante, but has a lesser hand than the Dealer, he will lose a net 1 unit.
If the bets are equally sized in the same circumstances, you will have a net push (the PP will pay for the lost Ante ).
I did not misspeak. If he had a pair, then he would make the, "Play," bet as 3CP strategy demands. If he makes the play bet and his pair loses to the dealer, then the dealer would take the four units off of the table for the play bet as well as ante (two units each) and give one unit for Pair Plus, or maybe it goes in the opposite order.
Either way, -4, +1.
The only way otherwise is true is if he would tuck his cards under the PP bet, though not make the Play bet. If he does that, then he REALLY should not be playing 3CP because there is no reason not to play a pair.
If the player bets a single unit across the board, THEN the net loss would be one unit. The player would make one unit on Pair Plus, lose a unit on Ante and lose a unit on Play. It doesn't change that you always make the Play bet with a pair.
Mission's confirmation of my thoughts was all I really needed
And, for his benefit, I do know what he is referencing by having an "angle" (literally and math-wise)
Quote: DallasBarristerThanks BB; I assumed he misspoke as well
Mission's confirmation of my thoughts was all I really needed
And, for his benefit, I do know what he is referencing by having an "angle" (literally and math-wise)
I don't know where anyone thinks I misspoke.
Ante: -2
Play: -2
Pair Plus: +1
Net: -3
Anyway, there are multiple possible angles that a person could have on 3CP. I'm not talking a specific angle, just saying an angle in general.
Quote: Mission146I did not misspeak. If he had a pair, then he would make the, "Play," bet as 3CP strategy demands. If he makes the play bet and his pair loses to the dealer, then the dealer would take the four units off of the table for the play bet as well as ante (two units each) and give one unit for Pair Plus, or maybe it goes in the opposite order.
Either way, -4, +1.
The only way otherwise is true is if he would tuck his cards under the PP bet, though not make the Play bet. If he does that, then he REALLY should not be playing 3CP because there is no reason not to play a pair.
If the player bets a single unit across the board, THEN the net loss would be one unit. The player would make one unit on Pair Plus, lose a unit on Ante and lose a unit on Play. It doesn't change that you always make the Play bet with a pair.
Yeah, I was multitasking and answered too quickly, without factoring the Play bet into the question. Just looked at your number and said, no... Oops. Thanks for catching it.
Quote: Mission146I don't know where anyone thinks I misspoke.
Ante: -2
Play: -2
Pair Plus: +1
Net: -3
Anyway, there are multiple possible angles that a person could have on 3CP. I'm not talking a specific angle, just saying an angle in general.
I think you misspoke but not in regards to what babs said..
You said the pairs plus and ante bet don’t both have to be made. That may be the case at some places , but where I play 3 card poker (mostly Borgata and Sands PA), you are not allowed to make just the pairs plus bet.
Side note. In 4 card poker at those places you are allowed to make just the Aces Up bet
Quote: gordonm888I'd rather "miss poke" than misspoke.
Can't say the same. But good to know. :)
Quote: michael99000I think you misspoke but not in regards to what babs said..
You said the pairs plus and ante bet don’t both have to be made. That may be the case at some places , but where I play 3 card poker (mostly Borgata and Sands PA), you are not allowed to make just the pairs plus bet.
Side note. In 4 card poker at those places you are allowed to make just the Aces Up bet
That might have been a misspeak on my part, but not exactly a misspeak, just not me thinking about making the Pairs Plus only. What I meant was that you can make the ante bet without making the Pairs Plus bet. I don't know whether the other way around varies by house or that you can never do it. I could count on one hand the number of times I've sat at a 3CP table in my life, and one of those is because one of my shoes was untied.
Quote: Mission146That might have been a misspeak on my part, but not exactly a misspeak, just not me thinking about making the Pairs Plus only. What I meant was that you can make the ante bet without making the Pairs Plus bet. I don't know whether the other way around varies by house or that you can never do it. I could count on one hand the number of times I've sat at a 3CP table in my life, and one of those is because one of my shoes was untied.
You may be right. I wouldn’t be surprised if some places allow only the Pairs Plus. There’s really no reason for them not to.
Quote: DallasBarristerI have seen a number of players in Las Vegas only make the pair plus wager and skip the ante - typical defy the odds and "hit the big one" mentality
Just play Pp and go blind...that's all 3cp is worth imo.
