Super 4 Progressive Blackjack
September 28th, 2015 at 3:33:07 PM
permalink
Quote: BleedingChipsSlowlyI expect it will be just like Mohegan Sun Connecticut: the Super 4 Progressive side bet is fixed and independent of table minimums. I'm surprised the bet amount isn't the same between Connecticut and Pocono so they could combine the bonus play.
Did you see it last week? It almost hit $1 million. It's back to just over 100k now. I still haven't played it and don't plan to. The million didn't entice me at all.
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
September 29th, 2015 at 5:26:17 AM
permalink
I did not visit last week, but I would have put up a nickle once or twice with the side bet at +EV. As I have written, so far I placed one bet and won the dealer-ace payout. I'm not planning on wagering again unless I see a +EV jackpot. I have noticed more Super 4 Progressive bets being placed. I haven't seen the jackpot above +700K yet, but I'm not at Mohegan Sun regularly this summer.
“You don’t bring a bone saw to a negotiation.” - Robert Jordan, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia
December 18th, 2016 at 7:52:19 AM
permalink
Super 4 shows up on every table at The D, downtown Vegas.
January 3rd, 2017 at 1:50:40 PM
permalink
Sorry to be late to the party but I just did a full page on the Super 4. Both the version Miplet analyzed and one I saw somewhere in Vegas (as evidenced by the rule card under a pile of junk on my desk).
As usual, I welcome questions, comments, and especially corrections.
As usual, I welcome questions, comments, and especially corrections.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
January 3rd, 2017 at 3:51:29 PM
permalink
Thanks Wiz. I had a braino in my version 2. I forgot to remove an Ace as dealer hole cards for dealer Ace up. I updated my google doc. Will update my spreadsheet on my website soon.Quote: WizardSorry to be late to the party but I just did a full page on the Super 4. Both the version Miplet analyzed and one I saw somewhere in Vegas (as evidenced by the rule card under a pile of junk on my desk).
As usual, I welcome questions, comments, and especially corrections.
“Man Babes” #AxelFabulous
January 3rd, 2017 at 4:22:14 PM
permalink
Quote: mipletI forgot to remove an Ace as dealer hole cards for dealer Ace up. I updated my google doc. Will update my spreadsheet on my website soon.
You're welcome. You are always keeping me on my toes so I'm happy to return the favor.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
January 11th, 2017 at 9:56:57 PM
permalink
At The D, Vegas, for a couple of days. There are 10 tables linked with Super 4 ($5 wager).
1/10/2017 8 PM meter $67,560
11PM meter $67,621
1/11/2017 10 Am meter $67,712
6:30 PM meter $67,767
8:30 PM meter $67,810
I did not see anyone played it.
What exactly is the house edge? When the meter increased $250 between 1/10 to 1/11, assuming a 50% meter contribution and 25% house edge, The D made $125 for yesterday with the progressive, 10 tables. This was not even enough to tip the dealers-dancers or pay the electric bills.
1/10/2017 8 PM meter $67,560
11PM meter $67,621
1/11/2017 10 Am meter $67,712
6:30 PM meter $67,767
8:30 PM meter $67,810
I did not see anyone played it.
What exactly is the house edge? When the meter increased $250 between 1/10 to 1/11, assuming a 50% meter contribution and 25% house edge, The D made $125 for yesterday with the progressive, 10 tables. This was not even enough to tip the dealers-dancers or pay the electric bills.
March 5th, 2017 at 10:55:43 PM
permalink
Just got back from Mohegan Sun in CT, the super 4 meter was over 1 million dollars. I played but no luck; someone did hit 10% of the jackpot.
March 6th, 2017 at 5:08:33 AM
permalink
That one gets hit all the time apparently.
I was there one night and it was hit for 400k.
I was there one night and it was hit for 400k.
March 16th, 2017 at 6:38:28 PM
permalink
So is the progressive bet worth playing for someone who goes to Mohegan maybe once a month. I've played for 8 hours straight and never got any decent payouts from it and probably was just giving away my profits from winning on the bet. There have been other times when I don't play it and I'll hit for three of a kind which pays out 750. Only thing is that I play two hand so I'm throwing away 10 bucks each hand. Every 10 hands I'm giving away 100 bucks which could potentially be my profits from winning on just the bet. That's why I don't play it. Even when I do hit for 750, I'm probably just breaking even due to giving away 10 dollars per hand. 75 hands of not winning on the progressive bet would be giving the 750 right back. That's why I don't play it cause I only gamble once a month or so. People who go everyday and play all day are the ones chasing this side bet. Not ur regular gambler who's just going to have a good time and win a few hundred bucks. Then again I was there the other day and I heard a 21 year old girl hit the 1.2 million jackpot on her second hand. Lol.
March 16th, 2017 at 6:39:22 PM
permalink
So long story short. Do u guys thing this side bet is worth playing. Or is it just a sucker bet making it even harder to win by the time u leave the tables?
March 16th, 2017 at 9:37:44 PM
permalink
Quote: LazSo long story short. Do u guys thing this side bet is worth playing. Or is it just a sucker bet making it even harder to win by the time u leave the tables?
This is an awful bet. Hit frequency terrible too.
March 16th, 2017 at 9:52:13 PM
permalink
Yea I agree. I feel that if ur not that lucky person hitting on it big then ur just making it harder to win from the bet. There have been a few times that I would have won 750 from three of a kind, but I wasn't playing it. I would have gave it all back anyways considering I was playing for hours on hours that day and was also playing two hands. I must have played well over 200 hands. If I played progressive I would be giving back 10 bucks each hand essentially just probably breaking even after hitting for 750. This side bet is for the gamblers that go everyday all day.
April 21st, 2017 at 9:45:31 PM
permalink
I have been counting and playing the side bet at true 5 or higher with some success (against six decks). I don’t keep a separate count of aces, but that would probably add to one’s odds of winning the side bet.
After about ten trips (5 hours per trip), I have hit the straight twice, the flush once; and the same color, pairs, dealer’s blackjack, and dealer’s ace up-no blackjack several times.
Since the count is high when I make the bet, the chances of my getting 20, or at least one 10 count, is good; which makes the possible matches with the dealer’s cards more likely.
I am fairly certain that I am ahead making the side bet at true 5 or higher. And I am playing at a casino where they pay $50 less than the chart on the big payouts, though they do pay $15 for any dealer’s ace (rather than $10).
At a true 5, I also bet two hands. While this means a loss of $10 each hand that I don’t hit, I do get paid on both hands if the dealer shows an ace. Also, when he shows an ace, and the count is 5 or higher, I take insurance; so, in addition to winning on the side bet, I don’t lose my initial bets. Today, for example, at a true 6, I made the side bets, and the dealer had a blackjack with an ace showing against my two hands of 17 and 15. I lost neither bet ($60 each) because I had taken insurance, and I won $75 on one hand that was the same color, and $50 on the other, which had a pair with the dealer’s 10.
I honestly don’t know the math on this side bet while card counting, but I know that I am not losing overall when making the bet at a true 5. And I am way ahead betting Lucky Ladies at a true 5.
After about ten trips (5 hours per trip), I have hit the straight twice, the flush once; and the same color, pairs, dealer’s blackjack, and dealer’s ace up-no blackjack several times.
Since the count is high when I make the bet, the chances of my getting 20, or at least one 10 count, is good; which makes the possible matches with the dealer’s cards more likely.
I am fairly certain that I am ahead making the side bet at true 5 or higher. And I am playing at a casino where they pay $50 less than the chart on the big payouts, though they do pay $15 for any dealer’s ace (rather than $10).
At a true 5, I also bet two hands. While this means a loss of $10 each hand that I don’t hit, I do get paid on both hands if the dealer shows an ace. Also, when he shows an ace, and the count is 5 or higher, I take insurance; so, in addition to winning on the side bet, I don’t lose my initial bets. Today, for example, at a true 6, I made the side bets, and the dealer had a blackjack with an ace showing against my two hands of 17 and 15. I lost neither bet ($60 each) because I had taken insurance, and I won $75 on one hand that was the same color, and $50 on the other, which had a pair with the dealer’s 10.
I honestly don’t know the math on this side bet while card counting, but I know that I am not losing overall when making the bet at a true 5. And I am way ahead betting Lucky Ladies at a true 5.
April 22nd, 2017 at 2:55:09 AM
permalink
Perhaps I'll have some help for you shortly. I've been working on a single page app[lication] that might answer some questions about this side bet. The questions I wanted answered is given a pay table and shoe content, what is the expected return? The "perfect deck" answer given by the Wizard of Odds write up for Super 4 is a great starting point, but nobody gets to make a bet against a perfect deck: a burn card is removed before play. Is it significant? Well, the table below shows what I've come up with for the Pay Table 2 - 6 Decks case given at the referenced link:
With the Envy Bonus and number of other players betting taken into consideration, the minimum meter needed for +EV varies by -5/+23% for the first deal of a new shoe in this case. I hope to have the app available next month. You will be able to use the pay table that applies to where you play. (The minimum meter needed for +EV drops to 770,944.44 with Envy Bonus 3000/1000 and all six players betting.)
| Burn Card | +EV=> |
|---|---|
| 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 | 794,021.37 |
| T | 807,583.19 |
| none | 814,835.65 |
| J,Q,K - S,H,C | 821,032.32 |
| A - S,H,C | 877,028.58 |
| J,Q,K - D | 929,698.36 |
| A - D | 993,105.89 |
With the Envy Bonus and number of other players betting taken into consideration, the minimum meter needed for +EV varies by -5/+23% for the first deal of a new shoe in this case. I hope to have the app available next month. You will be able to use the pay table that applies to where you play. (The minimum meter needed for +EV drops to 770,944.44 with Envy Bonus 3000/1000 and all six players betting.)
“You don’t bring a bone saw to a negotiation.” - Robert Jordan, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia
May 22nd, 2017 at 3:46:48 PM
permalink
The app is ready, I hope those interested in this side bet find it usefull. Enjoy!
Super 4 Blackjack Progressive Single‑Level Analysis
Super 4 Blackjack Progressive Single‑Level Analysis
“You don’t bring a bone saw to a negotiation.” - Robert Jordan, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia
May 29th, 2017 at 1:51:06 PM
permalink
Can you explain the math?
I get "pay occurs" and probability, - there's a 1 in ~ 598,000 chance of hitting a diamond royal flush.
I also get that when the bonus is really high, placing a 1 chance in 598,000 times bet in order to win a million is a better than when it's $20,000.
I've heard of theories of betting every single powerball combination when the jackpot is millions.
Can you define the other columns in layman's terms? I get that deck composition will effect the probabilities, but the numbers change, without my knowing what they mean.
I can enter the composition of the deck in the "Shoe" tab, but I'll need to take some time to figure out the composition of a TC +4 deck, vs. +3, and so on. I'm not going to keep track of aces when I'm playing, so all I'll have in my head during a shoe is the TC, not the composition of the deck.
If I could plug in a "+4" TC along with the variable paytable amounts, and get back numbers that I understand, that would be better.
I do like the part where you;ve put in all this work, and the results are available for free. I'm reminded of that gift horse...
If however, you do make these changes, continue to provide the fruits of your labors for free, and then I bet the progressive and win...
You'll have my undying gratitude.
I get "pay occurs" and probability, - there's a 1 in ~ 598,000 chance of hitting a diamond royal flush.
I also get that when the bonus is really high, placing a 1 chance in 598,000 times bet in order to win a million is a better than when it's $20,000.
I've heard of theories of betting every single powerball combination when the jackpot is millions.
Can you define the other columns in layman's terms? I get that deck composition will effect the probabilities, but the numbers change, without my knowing what they mean.
I can enter the composition of the deck in the "Shoe" tab, but I'll need to take some time to figure out the composition of a TC +4 deck, vs. +3, and so on. I'm not going to keep track of aces when I'm playing, so all I'll have in my head during a shoe is the TC, not the composition of the deck.
If I could plug in a "+4" TC along with the variable paytable amounts, and get back numbers that I understand, that would be better.
I do like the part where you;ve put in all this work, and the results are available for free. I'm reminded of that gift horse...
If however, you do make these changes, continue to provide the fruits of your labors for free, and then I bet the progressive and win...
You'll have my undying gratitude.
May 29th, 2017 at 10:56:34 PM
permalink
Thank you for your kind words, racquet. Before I address you questions, I'd like to inform the forum in general that the Super 4 Blackjack Progressive Single‑Level Analysis web application was not available for several days due to a hosting service issue. That is corrected and the application is available. No installations necessary, no ads, no graphics.
I would also like to mention that the Super 4 Progressive meter at Mohegan Sun was at $950,000+ when I left there on Saturday. That made the side bet about +7% EV. You don't often find a bet in a casino with a value like that without "cheating." Sweet!
Here's a quick explanation of 5 columns for the main Analysis table. By the way, the same 5 table columns are given in the Wizard's write up on Super 4, only with different names.
Hand - The paying hands for the side bet, plus entries for non-paying and total.
Pays - The current values supplied from the Pay Table tab for each hand.
Pay Occurs - Based on the current shoe composition supplied from the Shoe tab. For each hand, the value given is the permutations for that hand less the permutations that will be classified as and paid at a higher value. For example, the "All Same Color" value is the permutations for that hand less what will be paid as "Two Pair," "Flush," "Straight," "Three of a Kind," and "Royal Flush."
Probability - The probability of the hand occurring based on shoe composition. For each hand, this is the "Pay Occurs" value divided by the "Total Permutations" value.
Bet x Return - The "x" will be the wager entered on the Pay Table tab. The return is the "Pays" value times the "Probability" value, less the wager since the wager is not returned. The total for this column is the overall expected return for the wager. The wager divided by that total is the expected value.
Your interest in a TC "Easy Button" analysis is understandable. I wish it were an easy thing to do. The difficulty starts with nailing down what counting method you want to use. No matter which one you select, a particular TC value represents millions of possible shoe compositions if not more. The application I designed works with one shoe composition that you can vary. So, what you request is pretty much a different application altogether that this application might provide a first step for.
Finally, TC values are an indicator for winning blackjack hands and blackjack-value hands are only part of that. I think that the meter value for Super 4 is a far better indicator of when to place the side bet than TC. I further speculate that an ace count might be the way to go to further refine when the side bet is a good value. I might be doing some further work on that speculation.
I would also like to mention that the Super 4 Progressive meter at Mohegan Sun was at $950,000+ when I left there on Saturday. That made the side bet about +7% EV. You don't often find a bet in a casino with a value like that without "cheating." Sweet!
Here's a quick explanation of 5 columns for the main Analysis table. By the way, the same 5 table columns are given in the Wizard's write up on Super 4, only with different names.
Hand - The paying hands for the side bet, plus entries for non-paying and total.
Pays - The current values supplied from the Pay Table tab for each hand.
Pay Occurs - Based on the current shoe composition supplied from the Shoe tab. For each hand, the value given is the permutations for that hand less the permutations that will be classified as and paid at a higher value. For example, the "All Same Color" value is the permutations for that hand less what will be paid as "Two Pair," "Flush," "Straight," "Three of a Kind," and "Royal Flush."
Probability - The probability of the hand occurring based on shoe composition. For each hand, this is the "Pay Occurs" value divided by the "Total Permutations" value.
Bet x Return - The "x" will be the wager entered on the Pay Table tab. The return is the "Pays" value times the "Probability" value, less the wager since the wager is not returned. The total for this column is the overall expected return for the wager. The wager divided by that total is the expected value.
Your interest in a TC "Easy Button" analysis is understandable. I wish it were an easy thing to do. The difficulty starts with nailing down what counting method you want to use. No matter which one you select, a particular TC value represents millions of possible shoe compositions if not more. The application I designed works with one shoe composition that you can vary. So, what you request is pretty much a different application altogether that this application might provide a first step for.
Finally, TC values are an indicator for winning blackjack hands and blackjack-value hands are only part of that. I think that the meter value for Super 4 is a far better indicator of when to place the side bet than TC. I further speculate that an ace count might be the way to go to further refine when the side bet is a good value. I might be doing some further work on that speculation.
“You don’t bring a bone saw to a negotiation.” - Robert Jordan, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia
May 30th, 2017 at 5:48:05 PM
permalink
It's obvious (now that you point it out... DUH!) that TC alone doesn't make it a good bet. If five of the six Aces of diamonds have gone by, a TC of +10 does nothing for you. I have tried to keep count of aces, but can't think up or read about an added advantage of knowing it. And it's not as easy as I thought, especially if it interferes with a Hi-Lo counting rhythm that I have grown used to and can do in my sleep.
Absent filling in all the blanks under the Shoe tab, I wonder if a TC of "+x" could presume an "average occurrence" of cards in a remaining shoe of "y" decks. Although a deck of the highest "plus" value imaginable could still be full of 7s 8s and 9s. For a royal flush in any suit, those cards get in the way, whereas they might be okay for a winning set of pairs, same color, or flushes.
I swim out to the deep end of the math pool now and then and sooner or later realize I am in way over my head. I'm there now.
I don't bet Match the Dealer, and I don't play Super 4. But I do buy $10 worth of Powerball tickets when they start advertising a pot of a few hundred million bucks. So I guess I'll throw $5 at this now and then when it gets over 1 million. But only on a positive TC. Who knows...
Absent filling in all the blanks under the Shoe tab, I wonder if a TC of "+x" could presume an "average occurrence" of cards in a remaining shoe of "y" decks. Although a deck of the highest "plus" value imaginable could still be full of 7s 8s and 9s. For a royal flush in any suit, those cards get in the way, whereas they might be okay for a winning set of pairs, same color, or flushes.
I swim out to the deep end of the math pool now and then and sooner or later realize I am in way over my head. I'm there now.
I don't bet Match the Dealer, and I don't play Super 4. But I do buy $10 worth of Powerball tickets when they start advertising a pot of a few hundred million bucks. So I guess I'll throw $5 at this now and then when it gets over 1 million. But only on a positive TC. Who knows...
June 1st, 2017 at 5:22:40 PM
permalink
I think Hi-Opt II with Ace side count is probably the perfect system to count this. If Ace saturation is 50% higher than normal it's already breakeven without the jackpots considered. Anyone have info on what the HE/PE is with Hi-Opt 2 ace side count?
June 1st, 2017 at 5:35:32 PM
permalink
That said, I just realized the irony of this side bet. To break even you need to increase the chance of natural blackjack to at least 50% more than normal. By hi-low system that means at least +8 TC.
The problem is, if it's +8 TC you really shouldn't be worried about a $5 side bet when you should be betting REAL big on your main bet.
I'm looking at Hi-Opt II with ace side count as the only hope for this side bet to be realistic.
But even so, the only realistic use for this bet is a harmless cover to make the pitboss not think you're a card counter when it's profitable to make the bet.
The problem is, if it's +8 TC you really shouldn't be worried about a $5 side bet when you should be betting REAL big on your main bet.
I'm looking at Hi-Opt II with ace side count as the only hope for this side bet to be realistic.
But even so, the only realistic use for this bet is a harmless cover to make the pitboss not think you're a card counter when it's profitable to make the bet.
June 14th, 2017 at 10:11:54 PM
permalink
Before invensting time in a search for a counting system I thought it would be a good idea to see whether or not the Super 4 side bet offers something worth measuring. In particular, how does the side bet fare independent of the meter value. I used the deck composition analysis tool I've already developed to see what the expected value (EV) is for the basic pay table relative to shoe penetration. The parameters reflect what is in use at Mohegan Sun: six decks, 75% penetration, and a 750/400/300/200/100/50/25/10 fixed pay table. 59 levels of deck penetration were simulated at 4-card intervals. 1,000,000 simulations were done at each level. Here's what I found:
(ModEdit: author corrected graph based on revised info. Please disregard this one and continue below.)
I think an 18% probability of a better-than-even side bet for the end of a shoe is worth looking at. Of course, when the meter is at $1,260,000+ as it is tonight at Mohegan Sun, you don't really need a method.
(ModEdit: author corrected graph based on revised info. Please disregard this one and continue below.)
I think an 18% probability of a better-than-even side bet for the end of a shoe is worth looking at. Of course, when the meter is at $1,260,000+ as it is tonight at Mohegan Sun, you don't really need a method.
Last edited by: beachbumbabs on Jun 15, 2017
“You don’t bring a bone saw to a negotiation.” - Robert Jordan, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia
June 15th, 2017 at 5:05:24 AM
permalink
Mea culpa! There is an error in my analysis related to generating a random shoe representation. I was removing cards from randomly selected card types rather than randomly selected cards. The initial results with that corrected suggest +EV shoes start showing up at 50% penetration and reaches about a 9% occurrence rate at 75% penetration. I'll post a corrected graph tonight. Sorry!
“You don’t bring a bone saw to a negotiation.” - Robert Jordan, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia
June 15th, 2017 at 9:32:19 AM
permalink
If an administrator could delete or redact the previous graph, that would be great!
“You don’t bring a bone saw to a negotiation.” - Robert Jordan, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia
June 15th, 2017 at 11:47:15 AM
permalink
Correction noted above, within text, but info retained for continuity. IMO process is instructive.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
August 19th, 2017 at 11:33:43 AM
permalink
Don't know if this thread is still active enough to garner a reply...
Is there an easy correlation between HiLow TC and deck penetration that makes the graph relevant?
I wouldn't think penetration alone is a valid indicator - 74% penetration (the last round of a deck cut off at 75%) with a TC of +2 would not seem to me to be a "better bet" (there is no "good bet" in this game's horrible house edge, that's a given).
The graph doesn't have "TC" as the label on its Y axis.
Then there's the size of the pot.
At a jackpot of $700K, I have been playing at TC +3 or better, but only based on my gut. More tens and aces left in the deck... a big windfall if it hits... what's another $5 when I have close to my max bet out there anyway... why not? A TC of +3 is hard to come by with 5 decks remaining, so by definition I'm closer to the end of the show. So penetration does enter in it.
But that's not science, Mr. White.
Someone who wants to play this progressive has to turn the graph into decision points related to penetration and TC. Or is it not that easy?
Is there an easy correlation between HiLow TC and deck penetration that makes the graph relevant?
I wouldn't think penetration alone is a valid indicator - 74% penetration (the last round of a deck cut off at 75%) with a TC of +2 would not seem to me to be a "better bet" (there is no "good bet" in this game's horrible house edge, that's a given).
The graph doesn't have "TC" as the label on its Y axis.
Then there's the size of the pot.
At a jackpot of $700K, I have been playing at TC +3 or better, but only based on my gut. More tens and aces left in the deck... a big windfall if it hits... what's another $5 when I have close to my max bet out there anyway... why not? A TC of +3 is hard to come by with 5 decks remaining, so by definition I'm closer to the end of the show. So penetration does enter in it.
But that's not science, Mr. White.
Someone who wants to play this progressive has to turn the graph into decision points related to penetration and TC. Or is it not that easy?
August 22nd, 2017 at 3:44:26 PM
permalink
The graph has nothing to to with HiLo counting or any system's true count. It's purpose was to show that +EV shoes do exist for the Super 4 paytable without taking the jackpot meter into consideration.
The only takeaway the graph will give you is that it is better to bet the Super 4 after 2 decks are out. Sure you can win anytime, but your chances increase from almost-nothing to slim the closer to the cut card you get.
You can use the application I posted a link to on May 22nd to explore Super 4 payout probabilites based on deck composition. Set up a few high TC shoes if you want and see if that moves the Super 4 probability any significant measure. I would be very suprised if it does.
I hope to find time in the future to see if I can come up with some way to track play that is usefull for Super 4.
The Super 4 side-bet can be a good bet with a large enough jackpot meter. At Mohegan Sun, the meter was at $883K when I left there at shortly before noon today. At that level, any newly shuffled shoe is +EV except when the discard is a card that would figure into a major jackpot hand.
The only takeaway the graph will give you is that it is better to bet the Super 4 after 2 decks are out. Sure you can win anytime, but your chances increase from almost-nothing to slim the closer to the cut card you get.
You can use the application I posted a link to on May 22nd to explore Super 4 payout probabilites based on deck composition. Set up a few high TC shoes if you want and see if that moves the Super 4 probability any significant measure. I would be very suprised if it does.
I hope to find time in the future to see if I can come up with some way to track play that is usefull for Super 4.
The Super 4 side-bet can be a good bet with a large enough jackpot meter. At Mohegan Sun, the meter was at $883K when I left there at shortly before noon today. At that level, any newly shuffled shoe is +EV except when the discard is a card that would figure into a major jackpot hand.
“You don’t bring a bone saw to a negotiation.” - Robert Jordan, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia
May 8th, 2018 at 4:00:22 PM
permalink
In case anyone cares, they have the Super 4 at the Golden Gate on a cut card game. They use the pay table that pays $10 on a dealer ace. Jackpot, as I recall, was a little under $200,000.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
September 10th, 2018 at 2:41:17 PM
permalink
At Graton Casino, CA, there is a line item "must hit $200". I am not sure where it fits.
September 10th, 2018 at 3:26:47 PM
permalink
InBet Gaming's description of the game includes a button to view the multi-level game pay-table, which includes major/minor progressives. Perhaps what you are seeing is a guaranteed minimum for one or both progressives. Just speculation.
Maybe there is something else going on. It seems InBet Gaming is not keeping their site up to date. At least there is no mention of Super4 at Springfield MGM on their game locations page, and darkoz has reported the game is there.
Maybe there is something else going on. It seems InBet Gaming is not keeping their site up to date. At least there is no mention of Super4 at Springfield MGM on their game locations page, and darkoz has reported the game is there.
“You don’t bring a bone saw to a negotiation.” - Robert Jordan, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia
September 10th, 2018 at 4:12:31 PM
permalink
Quote: BleedingChipsSlowlyInBet Gaming's description of the game includes a button to view the multi-level game pay-table, which includes major/minor progressives. Perhaps what you are seeing is a guaranteed minimum for one or both progressives. Just speculation.
Maybe there is something else going on. It seems InBet Gaming is not keeping their site up to date. At least there is no mention of Super4 at Springfield MGM on their game locations page, and darkoz has reported the game is there.
The game was there with whats called Stax Progressive attached
I can confirm the bottom level was a must hit by $500
The way it was described to me the must hit rises with every wager and can hit at any time. Anyone with the wager on when it hits wins even if the dealer doesnt have blackjack
I believe the must hit was table specific while all the other progressives were shared with the other tables
Everyone would win at that particular table only. I didnt ask if it was split or every one got the amount shown.
The top progressive royal flush with diamonds was up to $92,000
For Whom the bus tolls; The bus tolls for thee
September 12th, 2018 at 4:07:48 PM
permalink
In Bet is not distributing the progressive game, it is now handled by AGS.
There is a playable demo at
http://playags.com/Super4BJ/
There is a playable demo at
http://playags.com/Super4BJ/
Beware, I work for the dark side.... We have cookies
December 8th, 2018 at 10:18:22 PM
permalink
please explain your excel graph. you can PM if you like. IS there a count a count you use with the progressive side bet
December 9th, 2018 at 12:19:52 AM
permalink
I developed a simulation to test the expected value (EV) of Super 4 Progressive side bets based on the static pay table for the bet relative to shoe penetration. The purpose was to determine how often shoes present a positive EV independent of the jackpot meter and at what penetration that occurs. The graph presents my findings. In summary, there is almost no chance of an +EV shoe for the first third of shoe play, rising to a 9% chance at 75% penetration.
Had I continued work on this, the next step would have been to determine what shoe compositions presented +EV situations, then develop a method to detect those +EV situations during play. That is, to come up with the counting method you ask about.
I did not develop a counting method. I believe one could be developed. The base game has deteriorated at the places I visit and they no longer offer a game I will play. That given, it is doubtful I will ever follow through on the work I first intended to do.
Had I continued work on this, the next step would have been to determine what shoe compositions presented +EV situations, then develop a method to detect those +EV situations during play. That is, to come up with the counting method you ask about.
I did not develop a counting method. I believe one could be developed. The base game has deteriorated at the places I visit and they no longer offer a game I will play. That given, it is doubtful I will ever follow through on the work I first intended to do.
Last edited by: BleedingChipsSlowly on Dec 9, 2018
“You don’t bring a bone saw to a negotiation.” - Robert Jordan, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia
July 6th, 2019 at 10:02:08 AM
permalink
I would be happy to do so. Expect a PM shortly.Quote: Wizard... Bleeding, I'd love to discuss your work on that sometime.
Super4 has morphed since this thread was started. To begin with, even though In Bet Gaming still lists Super4 as an offereing it seems the product has been sold or perhaps licensed to AGS, a company with headquarters in Las Vegas and offices in four other states and four other countries.
The AGS Super4 offering has converted payouts for trips and straights to two separate progressive jackpots. This negates analysis I have done of the side bet, so I'm intending this post to sort of close this thread I started.
But wait, there's more! AGS also offers a multi-level progressive jackpot add-on called STAX that can be applied to Super4 and other side bets. I have started this thread, Super4 STAX Progressives, to discuss that product as it applies to Super4.
“You don’t bring a bone saw to a negotiation.” - Robert Jordan, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia
September 29th, 2019 at 2:17:04 PM
permalink
We just got this side bet at one of the two casinos I work at. What a terrible side bet! Terrible payout percentage. Terrible frequency, Terrible flow. Yuck!
Along with the bad game, they replaced side bets that were $1 or more with this one that's $5. It's mostly a locals casino, so the players are pissed off. And to top it off, they set the must hit portion of the progressive way too high at $1,000. Should have been set much lower for continuous pursuit of the must hit, rather than only when it her's in the $950+ range.
ZCore13
Along with the bad game, they replaced side bets that were $1 or more with this one that's $5. It's mostly a locals casino, so the players are pissed off. And to top it off, they set the must hit portion of the progressive way too high at $1,000. Should have been set much lower for continuous pursuit of the must hit, rather than only when it her's in the $950+ range.
ZCore13
I am an employee of a Casino. Former Table Games Director,, current Pit Supervisor. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
September 29th, 2019 at 3:08:59 PM
permalink
I've played on tables at MS with this awful side bet. It caused people to actually root for a dealer blackjack? How the heck can that be right?
September 29th, 2019 at 4:16:55 PM
permalink
Super 4 is a big step below the 21 + 3 progressive from Galaxy, and Blazing 7's from SG. AGS has work to do to find a better solution for BJ progressives.
September 29th, 2019 at 5:11:50 PM
permalink
Quote: SM777Super 4 is a big step below the 21 + 3 progressive from Galaxy, and Blazing 7's from SG. AGS has work to do to find a better solution for BJ progressives.
They have some work to do to get some decent games and save their company. This one sucks, as do most of their games. And let's not forget their attempt to steal High Card Flush from Galaxy, which cost them heavily.
ZCore13
I am an employee of a Casino. Former Table Games Director,, current Pit Supervisor. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
September 29th, 2019 at 6:41:45 PM
permalink
Wait! Mr. ZCore, aren't you the person responsible for bringing new table games and progressives? How did this terrible side bet get in on your watch?Quote: Zcore13We just got this side bet at one of the two casinos I work at. What a terrible side bet! Terrible payout percentage. Terrible frequency, Terrible flow. Yuck!
Along with the bad game, they replaced side bets that were $1 or more with this one that's $5. It's mostly a locals casino, so the players are pissed off. And to top it off, they set the must hit portion of the progressive way too high at $1,000. Should have been set much lower for continuous pursuit of the must hit, rather than only when it her's in the $950+ range.
ZCore13
September 29th, 2019 at 7:11:47 PM
permalink
Quote: UCivanWait! Mr. ZCore, aren't you the person responsible for bringing new table games and progressives? How did this terrible side bet get in on your watch?
It would have never happened under my watch. I left my previous Director position about 3 1/2 years ago. I'm a Pit Supervisor at my current one. No input in selecting games.
ZCore13
I am an employee of a Casino. Former Table Games Director,, current Pit Supervisor. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
September 30th, 2019 at 4:56:00 AM
permalink
This is after less than about 10 hands playing their demo. I had blackjack three times within that time and the one was this win. I thought i had won the progressive at first but this is still a crazy win after 10 hands.
October 8th, 2019 at 9:29:10 AM
permalink
It is tough for me to understand how this game was introduced in CT at one of the big properties (Mohegan Sun?!?) with a 50 table install and zero history on whether it would work...and yet MS installed all the necessary equipment for a game with no track record. I understood it was doing well there on the East Coast.
I agree with ZCore...I think the game is not that good. But to be fair, I am not sure I like any of the existing BJ progressives. I question the theory that regular BJ players are interested in bringing a slot type event to their BJ experience. But the players in the industry are pumping them to clients, so it has to be working for some of them, right?
At a local property I have visited, Super 4 gets less than 10% participation which can't possibly be enough to cover the lease fee. Query for TG management, what is the hurdle for participation to make a BJ Progressive viable as I understand lease fees are in the $500-$700/table/month range? The good news with the Progressive is you know exactly what kind of play you are getting, so your aren't guessing when it comes to the question of whether it is working with your player clientele.
I agree with ZCore...I think the game is not that good. But to be fair, I am not sure I like any of the existing BJ progressives. I question the theory that regular BJ players are interested in bringing a slot type event to their BJ experience. But the players in the industry are pumping them to clients, so it has to be working for some of them, right?
At a local property I have visited, Super 4 gets less than 10% participation which can't possibly be enough to cover the lease fee. Query for TG management, what is the hurdle for participation to make a BJ Progressive viable as I understand lease fees are in the $500-$700/table/month range? The good news with the Progressive is you know exactly what kind of play you are getting, so your aren't guessing when it comes to the question of whether it is working with your player clientele.
October 8th, 2019 at 9:44:39 AM
permalink
I'm a bit confused. Zcore liked this in 2015 and have a different take in 2019. (see quoted post in this same thread).Quote: Zcore13I think it's an excellent side bet and would give it a try at my place if everything fell together. I would however adjust the pay table to drop to the house edge to about 20-25%. Probably reducing the RF payouts and bumping up one of the lower level payments a little.
ZCore13
February 11th, 2023 at 8:00:52 PM
permalink
Not sure if you will see this six years later but I have been doing something similar for about three years. I have been doing an experiment with this bet at a TC of +3 and keeping track of what I spend and what I take in, because I can't find any solid info on it. Not sure why no one has done the runs on this.
February 11th, 2023 at 8:05:08 PM
permalink
Can you calculate at what true count this bet would be profitable?
February 12th, 2023 at 4:21:31 PM
permalink
I'd imagine this happens at a true count so high you would likely never get an advantageous hand in your lifetime. If the return is 66.6% (2/3) we would need the frequency of blackjack to be raised by 50% (3/2). The actual number would be less since the higher payout odds increase with TC also but its still too much. The odds of drawing a 10 would have to be 4/10.614 to make a blackjack 50% more likely. This means 9.54 non-tens would have to be missing per deck while leaving every 10-A untouched. So a true count of 6.3 or greater is needed and a true count even higher if any aces are missing to make this profitable. Besides the extreme volatility, I still don't recommend this even at a true 10 for a hi-lo counter. I've had 2 hands at this TC ever in my ~60 hours playing where the first was a dealt 10-10 and 3-5 vs dealer 6. You better believe I split and doubled those bad boys. Split to 3 hands and dealer busted. $750 hand was basically 1/3 of my bankroll. Yeah, variance was my best friend. The other hand was a dealt 4-4 vs dealer 4. I was going off gut feeling and split those suckers, which after checking on wizards hand calculator, was the correct choice. However, I lost each hand after getting 2 14's and the dealer's hole card was a 6. The dealer and the pit boss told me I a made a dumb choice believing you should never split fours which is completely untrue. Make sure to always play your cards and never your bet!
June 21st, 2024 at 11:01:41 AM
permalink
How is the TOAK # of permutations determined?
Using 5 decks as an example, I get
(5*4)*(5*4-1)*(5*4-2)*(5*4) as the total number of permutations for a TOAK for a single rank with the dealer having an ace in the last position
* 4 ranks
* 2 different ways of permuting the ace for the dealer
= 1094400, which is off by a factor of 2 from your answer
what am I missing?
EDIT: i forgot three of a kind aces.
Using 5 decks as an example, I get
(5*4)*(5*4-1)*(5*4-2)*(5*4) as the total number of permutations for a TOAK for a single rank with the dealer having an ace in the last position
* 4 ranks
* 2 different ways of permuting the ace for the dealer
= 1094400, which is off by a factor of 2 from your answer
what am I missing?
EDIT: i forgot three of a kind aces.
Last edited by: cubesnyc on Jun 21, 2024
