"Survivor" star trials new poker table game at Golden Nugget

Excerpt:

Quote:

The game creator, Rupert Boneham, is one of the best-known contestants to ever participate on the CBS reality television series "Survivor." Fans know him by his first name, his unkempt hair, his wild beard, his tie-dyed clothes and his oversized personality.

Rupert's Island Draw began its field trial Thursday at the Golden Nugget. The game is sort of a reverse version of 21, or a simplified concept of lowball poker.

"There really isn't another game like it on the casino floor," Lemon said. "It's totally different."

The second article has more details on how the game is played.

Casino City Times

Las Vegas Weekly

I saw this game the day before it started the field trial. The rule card was rather confusing. When Rupert first appeared on Survivor I was still a big fan, so I have a curiosity about the game. I'm tempted to go downtown to play the thing and then do an analysis.

Quote: Wizard

I saw this game the day before it started the field trial. The rule card was rather confusing. When Rupert first appeared on Survivor I was still a big fan, so I have a curiosity about the game. I'm tempted to go downtown to play the thing and then do an analysis.

I've played it. It's like a clever hybrid of Blackjack (dealing style), Poker (side bet) and Baccarat (Play) but ends up as a mix of games with no real identity.

Some hands you cannot win and others you cannot lose. The 'choice' that you get as to whether to draw or let the dealer draw is actually no real choice at all as it is obvious which one you should pick depending on the totals.

I don't watch Survivor so I have no idea who Rupert is. If he is very popular then this may give the game some adrenalin, however, IMO, I don't see it spreading any further than the confines of The Golden Nugget.

I was confused about the "choice" about what the dealer does. What happens if the players choose differently? This game is crying out for somebody to properly explain the rules. Not only was the rule card confusing, but had errors in grammar too.

To borrow a joke from one of the articles, it sounds like the game will get voted off the floor by the players.

Quote: Wizard

I was confused about the "choice" about what the dealer does. What happens if the players choose differently? This game is crying out for somebody to properly explain the rules. Not only was the rule card confusing, but had errors in grammar too.

To borrow a joke from one of the articles, it sounds like the game will get voted off the floor by the players.

I haven't got the player's card now as I gave it to someone :-)

If I remember right, the dealer will offer the player the choice to either draw a card or give the dealer a card if the dealer has a total of 5, 6 or 7 showing. The aim of the game is to score lower than the dealer or higher than 12 (which counts as 0). So, if you have 2,3 or 4 and the dealer has 5 or 6 you cannot lose by letting the dealer draw. if the dealer has 7 and you have 2 then you should let the dealer draw as he needs a 6 whearas you lose with a 6 and tie with a 5. If the dealer has 6 and you have 10 then you have to work it out - if dealer draws then he loses with 5 or 6 and pushes with 4 - if you draw then you win with 3, 4, 5 or 6 so you draw.

I played with someone who sat down and hit 4 6's on the sidebet ($500 win) on the first hand and ended up winning $1,000 on the game, mainly from success on the low-hit freq'/ high payout side-bet.

EDIT: It's generally a bad sign when you win on a game but still come away without fully enjoying it.

Quote: Switch

I don't watch Survivor so I have no idea who Rupert is.

I didnt, until I read the article. When I saw the picture, I instantly recognised him from the Survivor Spinning Streak Slot machine. It was Rupert's image on the screen which led me to shouting "Come on you beardy B*stard" whilst playing at the Tropicana.

Quote: Croupier

which led me to shouting "Come on you beardy B*stard"

My last trick said that too!!

I found my rule card. After reading it several times I still have a hard time understanding it. If anyone can better explain the rules, I'm all ears.

I think the best way to explain the game is that it is like reverse Baccarat. Instead of the highest total winning the lowest total wins and you use the total score of the cards, not just the last digit. If the player's score is greater than 12 it is an automatic win for the player, no matter what the dealer has. The drawing rules are quite odd and are what is listed by the bullets. As mentioned about, the "choice" is really not a choice at all and is just there to make people feel good.

I had to read the rule card several times before I "got" it.

It's confusing because, when there is a decision, it's unclear what happens with the cards. Sure, all players make a decision, but is it one community card that, based on the player's decision, is added to the dealer or player hands? Or is one card dealt to the dealer as well as dealt to all players that asked for the card?

If it were me, I would not only make it a community card, I'd make the third card, if dealt to the players by rule 1, a community card as well.

This will avoid the big problem in BJ of one person taking another person's card. (Yeah, I know that's a falacy, but there's no escaping players who complain about it.)


My second thought is that if the dealer has 12, you will NEVER give him another card, so why is it in rule 3 rather than rule 1?


My last thought about this is that it may be beaten by card counting. But then I started to really think about the strategy of Rule 3 with an infinite deck. It's pretty simple. The only real decision is when you have a total of 8:

	2	3	4	5	12
2	D	D	D	D	P
3	D	D	D	D	P
4	D	D	D	D	P
5	D	D	D	D	P
6	D	D	D	D	P
7	D	D	D	D	P
8	P	P	D	D	P
9	P	P	P	P	P
10	P	P	P	P	P
11	P	P	P	P	P
12	P	P	P	P	P

Dealer's hand across the top, player's hand down the side.
D = Dealer takes card. P = Player takes card.

Does the strategy change if you're counting? Depends on the count. I'm not sure what kind of count it needs to be to make a change...

Quote: Wizard

I found my rule card. After reading it several times I still have a hard time understanding it. If anyone can better explain the rules, I'm all ears.

"16 twenty-four card decks"? That sounds like a joke. But more to the point, this sounds like it should be a dice game:

1) Dealer rolls 2 dice.
1a) If dealer's total is 6, 7, 8, player then rolls 3 dice. Go to step 2.
1b) If dealer's total is 9-11, dealer rolls another die. Then player rolls 2 dice. Go to step 2.
1c) If dealer's total is 2-5 or 12, player rolls 2 dice. Then the player decides whom to give a 3rd die roll to; the 3rd die is rolled and added to the chosen party's hand.
2) After step 1 (1a-1c), the dealer's and player's hands are totaled. Any 3-dice total > 12 is worth 0. Lowest hand wins; ties are pushes except for ties on 7 which lose half the player wager. Wins are even money.

You can approximate the card-based analysis using dice anyway; the difference between 16 decks with card values 1-6 and standard dice is insignificant. Given that, the analysis should be straightforward. Steps 1a and 1b are non-strategy. Step 1c strategy if the dealer has 12 is trivial -- you always take the 3rd roll (card) for your hand. Step 1c if the dealer has 2-5 will depend on your hand value so far, but even then it's not complicated -- just look at the EV of the final total.

Note that the only way a party (player or dealer) can have zero is if they have three cards. Since only one party ever has 3 cards, there is never the possibility of pushing with zero.

Quote: MathExtremist

"16 twenty-four card decks"? That sounds like a joke.

Only slightly more of a joke than a 6 deck BJ shoe game. 384 cards for Rupert vs 312 for BJ (or 416 for an 8 deck BJ shoe).

FYI: You and I were typing at the same time. I put up a strategy chart on the last post of page 1.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Only slightly more of a joke than a 6 deck BJ shoe game. 384 cards for Rupert vs 312 for BJ (or 416 for an 8 deck BJ shoe).

FYI: You and I were typing at the same time. I put up a strategy chart on the last post of page 1.

Did you compute the EV based on that chart, then?

I did it in my head. Here's what I came up with:


As you mentioned, in all cases, if the dealer has 12, it doesn't matter - unless the player has 6, for a possible push. All other cases the player loses, so the player should take the card.


Otherwise:

If the player has 9, there is always a 50/50 chance of a win if the player takes the card. If the dealer has a 5, there are three chances for a loss, one chance for a tie and two for a win. So in all cases, when the player has 9, either way, there's three chances for a loss. So take the card to have three chances for a win, rather than two wins and one push.

If the player has 7, there is only one chance to exceed 12 by taking the card. However, if the dealer has a two (the worst case), there is one chance he'll draw to a higher total. So there's still one chance to win. But there is also one chance to push when the dealer draws. So if the player has 7, always let the dealer take the card.


I had to think a little longer to get the strategy when the player has 8, but is the same types of logic.

Quote: MathExtremist

"16 twenty-four card decks"? That sounds like a joke. But more to the point, this sounds like it should be a dice game:

Exactly what I thought when I saw the rules, it's a dice game made with cards. I suspect it was a dice game with both sides having a third roll as optional and as a way of gambling between friends.

The extra dice rules are as annoying as Baccarat, and thus, makes it's not very interesting to play (for me).

Now if someone could invent a game with the choices of Blackjack, but retain it's simplicity, I'd be interested.

Quote: MathExtremist

Did you compute the EV based on that chart, then?

Oh. You mean the EV for the entire game? No. I just came up with the strategy chart....

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Oh. You mean the EV for the entire game? No. I just came up with the strategy chart....

Using DJTeddyBear's strategy chart and an infinite-deck model (or MathExtremist's dice model), I get a house edge of 3.58%.

deleted

Quote: ChesterDog

Using DJTeddyBear's strategy chart and an infinite-deck model (or MathExtremist's dice model), I get a house edge of 3.58%.

I get the same (278/7776 to be exact). I get 2.3038113086465 % for the side bet (using the 16 decks, not infinite-deck).

There is a dice game out there with some similarities, although it is a "high score" game versus a low ball game. It is called Double Dice and was trialing out in Gary, IN on the Majestic Star per this article on the web:

http://scoblete.casinocitytimes.com/article/double-dice-58200

The inventors were at G2E in either '08 or '09 as I recall. Don't know if the game is still in play.

Quote: miplet

I get the same (278/7776 to be exact). I get 2.3038113086465 % for the side bet (using the 16 decks, not infinite-deck).

That's a new twist -- a side bet with a lower edge than the main bet. Especially because the main bet number is predicated on optimal play, which won't happen, and will on average be worse than the 3.58% figure. The side bet has no strategy...

Looks like Rupert got his game approved, here is the article:

http://www.vegasinc.com/news/2011/jul/05/surviving/

That seemed really quick: field trial beginning in March and NGCB approval 4 months later. I thought it took over a year to get a game approved in NV. Is this normal timing?

I'd bet that the NGCB backlog has shrunk considerably now that they're charging the $3000 fee for variation approvals.