House Edge on playing a "blind hand" on Ultimate Texas Hold'em
Thread Rating:
What is the House Advantage (Edge) when the player chooses the option of playing a "Blind Hand" (obliged 4x Play Bet, no option to look at the cards, i.e. a forced play) on Ultimate Texas Hold'em?
The published HA for the game is 2.185%.
I assume the HA remains the same, however the best strategy is not employed hence Bet Element of Risk is higher.
All suggestions, calcualtions welcome...
Quote: LadyLuckThe casino only allows the play of a Blind Hand when there are no waiting players and boxes are unoccupied.
I can spend some time and pull up some numbers, but many may chine in here before that.
It is huge; one can look at Mike Shackleford's analysis of UTH, which has a detailed spreadsheet that breaks down the return to player from all raise type actions vis-à-vis all win/push/loss results.
Quote: PaigowdanI can spend some time and pull up some numbers, but many may chine in here before that.
It is huge; one can look at Mike Shackleford's analysis of UTH, which has a detailed spreadsheet that breaks down the return to player from all raise type actions vis-à-vis all win/push/loss results.
Using the data in that page its about 14%. There are 5,335,144,079,760 hands that should be folded. The player will only win 388,398,630,980 of them, push 236,209,548,412, and lose 4,710,535,900,368. I'm not going to calculate how many of the hands are from the dealer not qualifying, bit if they always did for both the winning and losing hands, the house edge would be 15.34%
As the player does not have the option to fold... how do you formulate the totals for hands won/pushed/lost over these folded hands?
Let alone the HA !
I can see from the Wizard Table:
Total Hands that win on a 4 x raise = 6'168'509'417'080
Total Hands that push on a 4 x raise = 285'142'270'600
Total Hands that lose on a 4 x raise = 4'034'210'312'320
NEED HELP. Please explain!
The house edge is way higher then what other are reporting for playing a hand in the blind. Here are the numbers my C++ code gives me:
1X Play: -0.445212
3X Play: -0.476456
4X Play: -0.492079
(Based on a simulation of 10M rounds)
Anyways, believe it or not the difference isn't too severe. Now, obviously the 1X play will have significantly less variance. The casino in question will allow a blind 1X play to a blind 4X play (I have personally witnessed 1X, 2X, 3X, and 4X in one night by multiple players). I didn't do the 2X play because it would be sub-optimal for the play I was considering...
jet
That means that a player who plays every hand against the casino (does not fold, regardless of their cards) at a 1 x Play Bet has the HA stacked against them at 44%?
Quote: jetLOL, I think I have actually played at this "casino" before. I think I have actually even done the play you are thinking about doing (you need a lot of practice to do it, but man is it fun!!!). I will not tell others why you are interested in this but let me just say this, those cards are "sticky".
The house edge is way higher then what other are reporting for playing a hand in the blind. Here are the numbers my C++ code gives me:
1X Play: -0.445212
3X Play: -0.476456
4X Play: -0.492079
(Based on a simulation of 10M rounds)
Anyways, believe it or not the difference isn't too severe. Now, obviously the 1X play will have significantly less variance. The casino in question will allow a blind 1X play to a blind 4X play (I have personally witnessed 1X, 2X, 3X, and 4X in one night by multiple players). I didn't do the 2X play because it would be sub-optimal for the play I was considering...
jet
Oops! I had a typo in my spreadsheet. -0.435529233944407 is the worst case assuming the hands that should be folded, but lose that the dealer qualified;and hands that the player wins, the dealer doesn't qualify.
Others have actually done a break down of this game by each betting component and have found that the blind bet has a -0.31 edge, ante -0.165 and play with 0.45, bringing the house edge to about 2.5%. This give you insight to how much of a disadvantage civilians are playing at by not raising Aces, suited kings, or even queens and jacks, coupled with failing to raise low pairs off the flop, and bad calls after the river. I have seen numbers saying that a typical civilian plays this game at a 20% disadvantage. That's why they are always saying, "trips, that's where the moneys at!", it actually true for them! There are no playing decisions for the trips bet, so the house edge is fixed between 1-6%, which is a lot less than 20%
jet
I am trying to contact Mr. Elliot Frome who did the intial HA calculations for UTH.
As I need to formally show HA calculations for a Blind Hand option to the government.
Agreed it is not a strategical play.
I suppose the argument put forward by many I have spoken to is... The HA is determined before the cards are dealt. If a player choose a poor or good strategy that does not change the official HA of the game provided...
Eg. On American Roulette if a player chooses to play both red and black at the same time, they will evenutally loss at the zero will take both bets. The HA is not published for each individual bet play as in this case the HA is 100%, although the option to play this bet is not forbidden...
Hope to obtain a formal calculation to present to the Gov. soon.
LadyLuck
Quote: LadyLuckI suppose the argument put forward by many I have spoken to is... The HA is determined before the cards are dealt. If a player choose a poor or good strategy that does not change the official HA of the game provided...
This is a flawed argument. It confuses the theoretical house edge with the effective house edge, which is the edge experienced by players depending on the strategy they employ. In games that feature player decisions, including BlackJack and novelty Poker games, the effective house edge is the only one that matters. It is the one that affects the players' loss and casino's profit.
Roulette is an unacceptable comparison, because there is essentially no strategy in the game. The exception is the 5-way 0-00-1-2-3 bet, which does have a different house edge than the rest of the game. If your strategy was to play that bet part of the time, your effective house edge would be higher than the official house edge of roulette.
Quote: LadyLuck
Eg. On American Roulette if a player chooses to play both red and black at the same time, they will evenutally loss at the zero will take both bets. The HA is not published for each individual bet play as in this case the HA is 100%, although the option to play this bet is not forbidden...
No, the house edge is still 5.26%. The definition of house edge here is the percentage of your wager you lose on that spin ONLY. Most of the time, you push (lose 0%), not lose 100%.
(36/38)*0 - 2/38*1 = -1/19 = -0.0526
Quote: dwheatleyThis is a flawed argument. It confuses the theoretical house edge with the effective house edge, which is the edge experienced by players depending on the strategy they employ. In games that feature player decisions, including BlackJack and novelty Poker games, the effective house edge is the only one that matters. It is the one that affects the players' loss and casino's profit.
Roulette is an unacceptable comparison, because there is essentially no strategy in the game. The exception is the 5-way 0-00-1-2-3 bet, which does have a different house edge than the rest of the game. If your strategy was to play that bet part of the time, your effective house edge would be higher than the official house edge of roulette.
Right. Minimum paybacks for games of skill, like UTH, are only required to exceed minimum payback laws when optimal strategy is used. Playing 9/6 JoB with the intent to lose at all costs will only return the player 2.37%, well below Nevada's 75% minimum return on slots/video poker.
Unless I am missing something here, you'd likely be wasting a politican's time. Maybe you can get blind bets banned, but why do idiots actually do that anyway?
Quote: tringlomane
Right. Minimum paybacks for games of skill, like UTH, are only required to exceed minimum payback laws when optimal strategy is used. Playing 9/6 JoB with the intent to lose at all costs will only return the player 2.37%, well below Nevada's 75% minimum return on slots/video poker.
Unless I am missing something here, you'd likely be wasting a politican's time. Maybe you can get blind bets banned, but why do idiots actually do that anyway?
That's exactly what I'm thinking, with God-Awful strategy, any number of games could be under 75% return. Blackjack, for example, just always hit until you bust and then only your Naturals automatically resolve in a win if the dealer lacks a natural. Let it Ride is another example, just let every bet ride in the dark, and you'll find yourself well under 75% return.
Quote: LadyLuck
Eg. On American Roulette if a player chooses to play both red and black at the same time, they will evenutally loss at the zero will take both bets. The HA is not published for each individual bet play as in this case the HA is 100%, although the option to play this bet is not forbidden...
Hope to obtain a formal calculation to present to the Gov. soon.
LadyLuck
Who do you mean when you talk about the government? The ESBK? Now I would like to know who you work for, Swiss Casinos Zürich?
Anyway, from your above statement, I assume you are in management. Here is my advice: Hire a statistics expert! Otherwise, it is gonna be a train wreck (others have already pointed out your HA misconception). I really want the gambling environment here in Switzerland to improve, but casinos just don't get it right. So you're stuck with old rich bastards that are slowly going extinct. You offer me nothing except needlessly terrible Blackjack and hour long poker waitlists...
And finally: get some fucking Craps going!
Quote: tringlomanewell below Nevada's 75% minimum return on slots/video poker.
Can anybody confirm this number? I was under the impression the minimum return was 85%, though I have no idea where I got this number from. Thanks!
Quote: CanyoneroCan anybody confirm this number? I was under the impression the minimum return was 85%, though I have no idea where I got this number from. Thanks!
Regulation 14.040
1. Must theoretically pay out a mathematically demonstrable percentage of all amounts
wagered, which must not be less than 75 percent for each wager available for play on the device.
(a) Gaming devices that may be affected by player skill must meet this standard when using a
method of play that will provide the greatest return to the player over a period of continuous play.
http://gaming.nv.gov/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=2921
75% is the lowest requirement in the US that I am aware of. Most states are 80% or higher. Ohio and Pennsylvania are examples of states with an 85% minimum payout.
In reality, most slots and virtually all video poker pay above 85% in US casinos.
Quote: tringlomaneRegulation 14.040
1. Must theoretically pay out a mathematically demonstrable percentage of all amounts
wagered, which must not be less than 75 percent for each wager available for play on the device.
(a) Gaming devices that may be affected by player skill must meet this standard when using a
method of play that will provide the greatest return to the player over a period of continuous play.
http://gaming.nv.gov/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=2921
75% is the lowest requirement in the US that I am aware of. Most states are 80% or higher. Ohio and Pennsylvania are examples of states with an 85% minimum payout.
In reality, most slots and virtually all video poker pay above 85% in US casinos.
Thanks a lot tringlomane. And there I was calculating my theoretical slot loss with the 85% number. Might still be close though.
Heavy staff costs are killing french and crap tables....
Thank you for your advise I have hired a stats man, who has presented the HA for this game option...
Swiss Gaming regulations are some of the most complex to comply with I have come across in the world. Detailed until the end for any gaming or procedural changes. As you can see from this forum, everyone can provide you with a number, all a little different with a different spin or calcualtion method.
When presenting a house edge for a table game it is presented as % for the overall game...strategy HA are not presented ie BJ with good startegy 0.5 and bad strategy XXXX%...
Thanks to all for their input.
Lady Luck
Quote: LadyLuckClosest Craps table is in Campeone, open on Fri/Sat with one player if your lucky....
Heavy staff costs are killing french and crap tables....
Thank you for your advise I have hired a stats man, who has presented the HA for this game option...
Swiss Gaming regulations are some of the most complex to comply with I have come across in the world. Detailed until the end for any gaming or procedural changes. As you can see from this forum, everyone can provide you with a number, all a little different with a different spin or calcualtion method.
When presenting a house edge for a table game it is presented as % for the overall game...strategy HA are not presented ie BJ with good startegy 0.5 and bad strategy XXXX%...
Thanks to all for their input.
Lady Luck
Good decision, LL, and I wish you good variance.
