Ultimate Texas Hold 'em live at Fiesta

This news caught my ear, Fiesta Henderson installs a UTH table. Good news for a good game.

It might not seem unusual for a Casino to install UTH, but for a 10 open table casino, it is. (Though it is up to 20 tables on Friday & Saturday nights).

Fiesta is a local's place of Blackjack(5), Craps(1), Pai Gow Poker(2), and Roulette(1), and a Three-Card table(1) in the main pit. Very Generic staples, no poker room, and so this is progress. Anything like Crazy 4 Poker, BJ Switch, etc., is left for the strip. They removed a single deck 6:5 for the game. The game's strategy may challenge a crowd like this ("Ace-7 suited? Check!"), and this is my only concern. The need for a SHORT but effective strategy card is a need here; any beefy-looking strategy like a dissertation strategy would just make heads hurt. A quiet call to CRM on this.

If you're in the Vegas/Henderson area, check it out and support it.

Grosjean's strategy is short and simple. The wizard has a link that you can buy it from on his site. Best $6 I ever spent. I don't really need it any more (I have it memorized) but I am sure it saved me a hell of a lot more than $6 in the time it took me to remember it all. I still occasionally check it for close decisions that don't come up much (eg, betting a flush draw after the flop)

I know that you are probably not Grosjean's biggest fan but I'm sure that you'll agree that his game analysis is rock solid.

deleted

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

Grosjean's strategy is short and simple. The wizard has a link that you can buy it from on his site. Best $6 I ever spent. I don't really need it any more (I have it memorized) but I am sure it saved me a hell of a lot more than $6 in the time it took me to remember it all. I still occasionally check it for close decisions that don't come up much (eg, betting a flush draw after the flop)

I know that you are probably not Grosjean's biggest fan but I'm sure that you'll agree that his game analysis is rock solid.

No, I'm a fan. I buy and use his Strategy cards, - love 'em. Yes, his strategies are indeed rock solid.

But for the average non-UTH player, his strat card are like instructions for a nuclear power plant. There are 17 bullet point steps for his UTH. REMEMBER, this board is composed of the One percenters.
We need something like, - as an example:

Before the Flop:
* Bet 4x any King or better hole cards, except a pocket pair of 2's, else check.

On the flop:
* Bet 2x if you connected to the board with non-lowest card, and there isn't a flush/open straight draw you don't have;
* Bet 2x with four-to-Flush or open straight with Jack or better and there's a pair on the board;

After the river:
* Bet 1x if you connected to the board, or board will play only, or you have high kicker and board has pair or better.

Something extremely simple that has 5 total bullet points, that'll bring you 90% of the way, and can go on the how to play card. We don't want people to misplay hands, get cleaned out, and leave muttering.....can this be done, - a Five Bullet Point Strategy for the game, in plain English, that can fit on one BUSINESS card side in 12-point type?

Quote: Paigowdan

No, I'm a fan. I buy and use his Strategy cards, - love 'em. Yes, his strategies are indeed rock solid.

But for the average non-UTH player, his strat card are like instructions for a nuclear power plant. There are 17 bullet point steps for his UTH. REMEMBER, this board is composed of the One percenters.
We need something like, - as an example:

Before the Flop:
* Bet 4x any King or better hole cards, except a pocket pair of 2's, else check.

On the flop:
* Bet 2x if you connected to the board with non-lowest card, and there isn't a flush/open straight draw you don't have;
* Bet 2x with four-to-Flush or open straight with Jack or better and there's a pair on the board;

After the river:
* Bet 1x if you connected to the board, or board will play only, or you have high kicker and board has pair or better.

Something extremely simple that has 5 total bullet points, that'll bring you 90% of the way, and can go on the how to play card. We don't want people to misplay hands, get cleaned out, and leave muttering.....can this be done, - a Five Bullet Point Strategy for the game, in plain English, that can fit on one BUSINESS card side in 12-point type?

I would not skimp on the preflop strat. It's fairly simple anwyay. Grosjean's strategy does fit on a business card but I guess it's not 12 pt. Still simple to follow though. The strategy on the end is the hardest part; you could probably simplify that without losing too much.

Yes, closely agree.

1. I think a good simple change for preflop is any Q8 or better except pocket 2's. Lose the JT, J8 suited, as those are borderline in terms of result, they're like 51%-49%. This really should be close as a very simple pre-flop rule. Knocks out a lot of bullet points.
2. The rest are decent approximations.

Disagree on "simple enough to follow." Remember, John Q. Public and the ploppies make the game. A Five-Point strategy that is "easy AND better than ploppie play" is sought. Challenge for a writer-player here?

I don't think most would follow strategy guide no matter how simple it is. You can tell someone all day they should bet 4x on Ace-King, but it is just too much risk for most recreational/occasional players to handle.

A lot of people justifying thinking that since there is no optimal strategy for the game, then the silly "well, it's a gut feeling" is able to rise up.

A lot of people do ask, "What does The Book say?" knowing there IS an optimal strategy above 'gut feeling.' Having one that is both easy and better than gut instinct is a good option.

What helps is to notice how much is lost by not making the proper 4x bet.

I have to say, if people played optimally, the game would probably not last. 2.3% of the ante is not much in such a slow moving game.

So, I look at it like blackjack. I think that an optimal strategy should be readily available, but I'm not looking to force it down anyone's throat. If someone wants to play well, great. If not, that's great too -- someone's got to keep the lights on.

Honestly, Grosjean's full strategy is still a lot easier to follow than blackjack basic strategy.

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

I have to say, if people played optimally, the game would probably not last. 2.3% of the ante is not much in such a slow moving game.

So, I look at it like blackjack. I think that an optimal strategy should be readily available, but I'm not looking to force it down anyone's throat. If someone wants to play well, great. If not, that's great too -- someone's got to keep the lights on.

Honestly, Grosjean's full strategy is still a lot easier to follow than blackjack basic strategy.

I agree with that, the game banks on errors, but its high variance keeps fish happy with occasional winning sessions. A real homerun for Roger and Shufflemaster. And my hat's off to Grosjean if you think his UTH strategy is easier to memorize than BJ basic strategy! I have heard raving reviews about it, but that comparison was still unexpected to me!

Honestly, I have always had problems with the pair splitting and soft-doubling of BJ basic strategy. I can keep one set of rules straight but if I jump around between games (DD to 6D, or S17 to H17, or DAS to no DAS) I can never remember the strategy variants without checking. This is basically my problem with video poker as well. Maybe part of the problem is that there are so many different rule variants that all require slightly different strategies, but with UTH there is only one strategy to remember.

I have a similar problem with video poker. I can remember a strategy and play almost flawlessly but then if I want to switch games I will have no clue. I can memorize that strategy for the new game but it will cause me to forget the first one.

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

I have to say, if people played optimally, the game would probably not last. 2.3% of the ante is not much in such a slow moving game.

I'm surprised to hear a house edge of 2.3% as considered too small to maintain the game, when most at this board would view it as usurious. Also, it's 2.3% of two units, not one, because to ante you have to bet both the ANTE and the BLIND bets; it's a more expensive game to play. In perfect practice, the house edge drops to 0.5% when considering the Element of risk, and with perfect players. In actual practice, the game has a long term hold percentage of about 25%, indicating that it "effectively" operates with a 2.5% HE or so. The game is a solid performer for good players.

Quote: AxiomofChoice

So, I look at it like blackjack. I think that an optimal strategy should be readily available, but I'm not looking to force it down anyone's throat.

A concise, short & easy sample strategy could be on the "how to play" card.

Quote: AxiomofChoice

Honestly, Grosjean's full strategy is still a lot easier to follow than blackjack basic strategy.

Very true, but Blackjack is an easier and cheaper game to play aside from strategy, and has a century of momentum behind it.

UTH became prominent in just the past several years. Remember, Carribean Stud, Let It Ride, and Deuces Wild were once very prominent games that exploded in growth before totally fizzling out.

Only Three Card Poker held on to its installs to become a mainstay game partly because of the VERY simple Strategy of "Play a Queen or better hand and you're okay." This saved players from burning out themselves on the game. It's important that a fine game not be a fad.

I think having a simple strategy on the How to Play card isn't a bad idea. And here, I don't mean a James Grosjean or Steve How "Atomic Energy Strategy" that a serious "One percenter Player" would have gotten from Grosjean's or Steve How's Discountgambling.net sources anyway. Something that 99% can jump on and use.

Quote: Paigowdan

I'm surprised to hear a house edge of 2.3% as considered too small to maintain the game, when most at this board would view it as usurious.

As the wizard has pointed out before, element of risk is a better way to measure the true edge than house edge. It's only 2.3% of the ante, but you get so much more money in play that the edge on the total money bet is a lot less. Someone who is usually a green chip player might only want to be $10 or $15 on the ante, since that would often be putting much more at risk.

Quote:

Also, it's 2.3% of two units, not one, because to ante you have to bet both the ANTE and the BLIND bets; it's a more expensive game to play.

No, the total edge is 2.3% of one unit, including everything. The house edge on the blind is massive, but the player makes up for that by having a massive bet on the play bet. The house has a much smaller edge on the ante itself (due to the fact that you must sometimes fold hands that end up being winners, and also due to the fact that the dealer not qualifying benefits the dealer more often than the house). This is also why passive play is so expensive. If you don't make those big bets when you have the edge, you are still getting eaten alive by the blind bet without getting your play bet edge to make up for it.

Quote:

In perfect practice, the house edge drops to 0.5% when considering the Element of risk, and with perfect players. In actual practice, the game has a long term hold percentage of about 25%, indicating that it "effectively" operates with a 2.5% HE or so. The game is a solid performer for good players.

The high hold is due to the fact that almost everyone plays absolutely terribly, and mistakes are extremely expensive. It's also due to the fact that almost everyone plays the trips bet, which is another 3.5% HE.

Look at it this way. Consider a $10 minimum table. If all 6 spots are full, and everyone plays the minimum on the ante & blind, doesn't play the trips, and plays perfectly, the house is pulling in 2.3% of $60 per hand. That is $1.38 per hand. The problem is that the game tends to go extremely slowly with that many players. If 25 hands / hr are being dealt, that is $34.50 per hour of EV for the house. Subtract the costs of dealers' salaries and benefits, the fractional cost of the supervisor watching the game, the fractional cost to just run the casino, the cost to bring players drinks, etc, and there is not a lot, if anything, left. I don't know how much a table needs to make before it starts "breaking even" (probably depends on the casino) but I'm guessing that $35 an hour is not great. The house would have to either make the game worse or raise the minimums. Higher minimums would probably not go over well (given the 4x bets preflop). The blind bet is already a terrible pay table (to make up for the play bet) but I suppose it could be made worse.

Of course, this would never happen in practice. Blackjack BS cards are everywhere (you can buy one from the casino gift shop for a couple of bucks) and people still play the game terribly. It's the same thing -- if it wasn't for those players, there would be no 3:2 games below the black chip levels. The house is not going to survive on a 0.5% edge of $10 per hand (more hand per hour in blackjack, of course, but still not enough IMO)

I agree with you that Steven How's strategy is just too difficult, but I find Grosjean's strategy very straightforward. Have you seen his strategy card? Even if people screwed up some of the postflop stuff, just 4x'ing the right hands preflop would significantly improve most peoples' play.

Look at these AMAZING numbers on Ultimae Texas Hold 'em, as reported to the Missouri Gaming commission - publicly posted information:

Missouri Casino Harrah's Maryland Heights, October 2012 data
GAME------------------------------tables----------Drop-----------------------hold-----------------hold %
Ultimate Texas Hold'Em_______2______$635,254.00_________$205,261.49________32.312%

Now Axiom mentioned something about this game "paying the bills".....let's take a look:

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

......
Look at it this way. Consider a $10 minimum table. If all 6 spots are full, and everyone plays the minimum on the ante & blind, doesn't play the trips, and plays perfectly, the house is pulling in 2.3% of $60 per hand. That is $1.38 per hand. The problem is that the game tends to go extremely slowly with that many players. If 25 hands / hr are being dealt, that is $34.50 per hour of EV for the house. Subtract the costs of dealers' salaries and benefits, the fractional cost of the supervisor watching the game, the fractional cost to just run the casino, the cost to bring players drinks, etc, and there is not a lot, if anything, left. I don't know how much a table needs to make before it starts "breaking even" (probably depends on the casino) but I'm guessing that $35 an hour is not great. The house would have to either make the game worse or raise the minimums. Higher minimums would probably not go over well (given the 4x bets preflop). The blind bet is already a terrible pay table (to make up for the play bet) but I suppose it could be made worse

Well, for a slow game, two tables of Ultimate Texas Hold 'em dropped 635,254 Dollars, and held onto $205,261.49 at Harrah's Maryland Heights, Missouri, in October. Performs similarly in many upscale casinos. All Public info here. Assuming BOTH tables were open around the clock for 48 table hours per day for the 31 days in October, incurring maximum expenses, that's 1488 hours for the money, or:

1. $427 per hour in buy-in money per table (or $854 every single hour from the two tables), for every hour of every day in October 2012.
2. $138 per hour in pure profit per table (or $276 profit per hour between the two tables), for every hour of every day in October 2012.

These real-world figures are through the roof, even assuming that BOTH games were open 24/7. SUPER popular game.
If the hours were less, well, the profit figures would be even higher for the same monthly drop and hold grosses.
Trouble paying the bills with this game? No, not with UTH. A number of other games? Yes, quite often. Midi Baccarat and Let it ride are losing money many months, either through lack of action, or poor hold on good action. Let's look at the casino's bills.

1. The dealers' salaries - with Benefits - is $75 a day per dealer in salary expenses. ($64 per dealer in salary @ $8/hr, plus $11 a day in health insurance. Tips are covered by player largess. Assume $90 a day in tips, then each dealer makes $154 per day, or $1,540 gross per two-week pay period.) Now, 8 dealers a day to man two tables of three shifts a day with a relief dealer = $600 a day or $18,600 in dealer labor costs per month, at maximum 24/7 on two tables.

2. Share of supervisory and property expenses (utility, security, floormen, etc.) are pro-rated, say $9,400 for two tables. Total casino cost to run two jammed up tables around the clock, non-stop 24/7 = $28,000. So this assumes that for ONE table, to take care of dealers, floormen, security, power & lights, etc., is $14,000 a month at a jammed-up top-tier casino. This is generous: an office rental of $14K a month gets you thousands of luxury square feet with security, and we're talking here about a single 7' x 5' table space. That is.....IF the table is popular, and it holds correctly to cover this nut. It has for UTH, I'd say.

3. Now, the Table hold minus the local casino expenses equals $181,261. Subtract an assumed $3,000 in licensing fees to the distributor, you got $178,261 to be sent up to corporate per month - from two 7' x 5' tables - after the local casino pays the bills.


$178,261.49 in net local profit, from two tables, per month. Your comment of "Subtract the costs of dealers' salaries and benefits, the fractional cost of the supervisor watching the game, the fractional cost to just run the casino, the cost to bring players drinks, etc, and there is not a lot, if anything, left." is not true.

Quote: AxiomofChoice

Of course, this would never happen in practice. Blackjack BS cards are everywhere (you can buy one from the casino gift shop for a couple of bucks) and people still play the game terribly.

BJ players play decently. At local casinos, and in Atlantic City. Even the Missouri Blackjack numbers sometimes struggle. Because people DO play near at least the wizard's simplified strategy. For the casino operator's side, 6:5 helped, side bets help, higher limits help, and CSM's help. Many Blackjack games are in the single digits in hold, as are many Baccarat games. Fiesta took out a Blackjack game to put in UTH.

Quote: AxiomofChoice

It's the same thing -- if it wasn't for those players, there would be no 3:2 games below the black chip levels. The house is not going to survive on a 0.5% edge of $10 per hand (more hand per hour in blackjack, of course, but still not enough IMO).

UTH has been doing fine, as seen. A player makes THREE bets minimum to play out the hand, and 4 with the trips bet; and this is at 1x. At 3 or 4 units plus, it's a high-stakes high, roller game that can afford a lower HE. But a $5 or $10 Blackjack game cannot, though $3 blackjack can with a CSM. THIS says a lot.

Quote: AxiomofChoice

I agree with you that Steven How's strategy is just too difficult, but I find Grosjean's strategy very straightforward. Have you seen his strategy card? Even if people screwed up some of the postflop stuff, just 4x'ing the right hands preflop would significantly improve most peoples' play.

Grossjean's strategy IS well written, but you have to look at it through the eyes of a tourist player seeing the game for the first time. You need to have a strategy here that can be explained in 30 seconds, or else they'll get creamed and never play the game again. For some, this is the case. If people bet 4x on the hole-card PLAY bet with a Q-8 or better, 90% of the time they'd be correct in comparison to perfect play. Currently, the average ploppie isn't anywhere close to this. The table hold on these TWO Ulimate Texas Hold 'em tables were 32% about a third of the drop; this somewhat approaches the player burn-out area...

deleted

What is the HE if you only bet 4x on top hands like 9-9 or better and nothing else? The majority of players I see check all middle to low pairs and Ace-x then bet 2x if the board looks innocuous.

Quote: 1arrowheaddr

What is the HE if you only bet 4x on top hands like 9-9 or better and nothing else? The majority of players I see check all middle to low pairs and Ace-x then bet 2x if the board looks innocuous.

I don't know exactly. I trust the mathematicians strategy. For that matter, I never tried to calculate and write out my own basic strategy for Blackjack, but went with basic stratetgy card, too, for Blackjack. I trust the experts' math. What I do not trust are Baccarat's "trend boards" of the Big Road, the little road, the grasshopper road, and what have you.

Anyway, as for only raising pocket 9's or better, You'd be giving up a LOT of starting hands where you'd have the win advantage from your hole card launch point, and where you can bet 4x knowing that you'd have this advantage. Remember, in this game you make a LOT of money getting paid 4x on your play bet, and losing this advantage is very detrimental.
Also, People assume it's real Texas Hold 'em poker, but it's not quite, when you realize you're playing against one player (the dealer), and who is playing blind and can't fold, only you can.

This is like playing heads up against a blind and drunk player who checks when you check, and calls every raise you make, and without looking at his cards. If you start with about a Q-8 or better as your hole cards, just go to the limit of 4 times and show down the dealer.

Granted, you can get some bad beats by plowing on straight through, and if you check you can save yourself when the board turns out to be disasterous for you. But the gimmick of this game, the catch, is to make you go to the limit against gut instinct and all fear from jump street. The fact that some can't is really where UTH gets its house edge from, - from player fear and timidness. It's a game for gamblers who trust the math of it all.

There's 1326 starting combinations of two-card hole card hands.

You'd give up all ace-high hands, suited and off suit.
Plus all K5-KQ, and K2-K4 suited.
Plus all Q8 to QJ, and Q6 & Q7 suited
And all J10 hands
and all pairs 3's to 8's
that's something like 456 hands or so, I think, or about a third of the hands. Seeing this people will scream, "Sheesh - You raise all the time on NOTHING!" - when in reality, it is they who check on powerhouses who will lose out.

You either trust the math of guys like Mike Shackleford, James Grosjean, Charles Mousseau, and Steve How et al, or you trust superstition - your "gut feelings." That's what craps is for.

Below is a full chart on how much checking each of the 4X hands cost. Only 4X on pocket 9's-A's costs 0.10379838612368 antes.

Quote: miplet

Below is a full chart on how much checking each of the 4X hands cost. Only 4X on pocket 9's-A's costs 0.10379838612368 antes.

Thanks for the great info!!

I only ask because that's how most people around here play and the dealers encourage it. Everyone, dealers included think I'm crazy for raising King-Seven

I decided to bust this post, as I have found a simpler way to express this on page 5.
FWIW I do well with the short version, though not optimal.

Your strategy is more complicated than Grosjean`s,and has many mistakes. The op was looking for a simplified strategy.

Quote: Paigowdan

1. $427 per hour in buy-in money per table (or $854 every single hour from the two tables), for every hour of every day in October 2012.
2. $138 per hour in pure profit per table (or $276 profit per hour between the two tables), for every hour of every day in October 2012.

Right. Because people play terribly. If people played well, those numbers would plummet.

UTH is kind of unique because,

1. The strategy that is "intuitive" for most people is not even close to correct, and
2. Mistakes are extremely

costly.

Compare to a game like Mississippi stud. Most people actually play that game fairly close to correctly. Now, don't get me wrong; they don't play perfectly. I rarely (if ever) see anyone 3-bet a small pair on 3rd street. Most people also don't 3-bet their 4-card outside straight or flush draws, or their big 4-card straight flush draws. But these plays don't come up that often, and, other than refusing to 3-bet the 4-flush, aren't hugely costly. Most people intuitively "feel" that they should never fold a pair, and that they should have a big card and a middle card or better to see 3rd street. In other words, they play most of their hands correctly. Even though the house edge against optimal play is over double that of UTH, I'm sure that it doesn't make as much money for the house when played at the same limits.

Quote:

These real-world figures are through the roof, even assuming that BOTH games were open 24/7. SUPER popular game.
If the hours were less, well, the profit figures would be even higher for the same monthly drop and hold grosses.
Trouble paying the bills with this game? No, not with UTH.

Why do you continually argue against points that I never made?

I fully understand that UTH is insanely profitable right now. In fact, I take advantage of this fact. All I am saying is that the vast majority of that profit comes from player mistakes, and, if everyone played well, those profits would take a monstrous hit. At it's base HE, it doesn't make enough money. With bad players giving away 10+% of the ante, yes, it does quite well. If all those players were educated overnight, I think that the game would die.

Luckily, this will almost certainly never happen. Personally, I think that this is the best possible design for a game. The game has a low house edge against those who play optimally, but a large one against those who can't be bothered to learn to play well (which is almost everyone). So, the house does well overall, and the educated gambler can still get a good deal.

Also, you have to understand that the HE is 2.3% of the ante, total, for the whole hand. That includes the blind bet and the play bet (not the trips bet since that is optional). In other words, if I bet $10 on the ante and $10 on the blind and don't play trips, and play the hand optimally, the house's EV is 23c for that hand. The way that most people play, I'd estimate that the house's edge is closer to $1, not to mention the additional 3.5% edge on the trips bet that almost everyone makes. Mistakes really are that costly.

Quote: 1arrowheaddr

What is the HE if you only bet 4x on top hands like 9-9 or better and nothing else? The majority of players I see check all middle to low pairs and Ace-x then bet 2x if the board looks innocuous.

You get absolutely crushed. That is the point. I would say that most people check TT and lower, and AJ and lower.

Figuring out exact numbers wouldn't be that hard, although, it's more work than I'm willing to do. I'm perfectly happy to sit there and play and collect the ridiculous comps that come as a result of the game being so profitable. I'm fairly sure that the comps exceed my expected losses.

Quote: miplet

Below is a full chart on how much checking each of the 4X hands cost. Only 4X on pocket 9's-A's costs 0.10379838612368 antes.

Thanks Miplet! Everything I was always curious about, but never bothered to figure out for myself :) As I suspected, the average player is probably giving up 10+%. If they played optimally (or close to it) the profits would plummet by a factor of 4 or so.

I've seen someone check QQ before...

deleted

Quote: Ibeatyouraces

A lady checked AA just today. Isn't the first time I've seen it done either.

Wow. I must admit I have never seen that. I guess I need to play more :)

deleted

Quote: AxiomofChoice

Why do you continually argue against points that I never made?

When you are wrong, I simply say so, and how so.
No ad hominen attacks, and no name-calling; indeed, Axiom, I think you are on of the sharper members here.
But the game is a monster, a brilliant design, and with the right player populations, the game is a smash hit with insane action. The numbers back it up: It Pays The Bills.
Besides, I say it is YOU who blindly disagrees with ME as a sport, just for the sake of "disagreeing with Dan." .....Saying UTH can't cover its nut is nuts. At least look at me as a broken clock, right twice a day, - so check first.

.............

My last visit at the Orleans I got pocket Aces twice in three hours, once were quads.
First time: chunked, to plow on through at 4x - got crushed by dealer's straight.
Second time: caught trips on the flop, caught the fourth Ace on the River.

The game is really a No Guts, No Glory challenge. Gotta be General Patton on UTH.

Axiom is right, a few bad breaks can make mincemeat of you. But the only was to leave with gonzo dollars is to use every 4x opportunity you can.

Quote: miplet

Only 4X on pocket 9's-A's costs 0.10379838612368 antes.

How did you get "0.10379838612368 antes"?

Quote: Paigowdan

When you are wrong, I simply say so, and how so.

Except, as usual, you are arguing against points I never made.

I said, if players played well, the game would not make much money.

You proceeded to pull out a bunch of numbers to show that it makes lots of money right now. Well, of course it does! Players play terribly. I never said that the game doesn't make a bunch of money -- I know very well that it makes money hand over fist. My only point here is that most of those profits are due to player errors. If those errors went away and the house reverted to making 2.3% of an ante on each hand, those profits would plummet.

Quote:

The numbers back it up: It Pays The Bills.

Yes, it makes tons of money, because players play terribly. If players did not play terribly, it would not make so much money. Is this really such a difficult concept to grasp?

Quote:

Axiom is right, a few bad breaks can make mincemeat of you.

I also never said that. I mean, it's true, but I don't care. I was commenting that if you don't play properly and never 4x bet (or almost never 4x bet) then you get crushed. ie, you get crushed long-term. I don't care about short-term swings.

No.
Even if the players played well, - the game itself is solid, and will make money.
Before shufflemaster released the game, they reviewed the math and all scenarios of play.

But to project that the game would fail or is failing flies in the face of the real world results.

There are casinos in places where strong local players who know the game and play well, enjoy the game without taking it down, without killing it.

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

I said, if players played well, the game would not make much money.

The genius of the game is "Players will never play well or right." Roger Snow wins here.

Quote: UCivan

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

I said, if players played well, the game would not make much money.

The genius of the game is "Players will never play well or right." Roger Snow wins here.

My point is if players play it right, the hold is about 23%, now that most players do not play it right, so the hold is over 32%. BTW, in Thunder Valley, CA, the hold is also 32% since day one.

Quote: UCivan

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

I said, if players played well, the game would not make much money.

The genius of the game is "Players will never play well or right." Roger Snow wins here.

The game has an adequate house edge no matter who plays it. A Theoretical table Hold of 23% is strong, and a real world table hold of 33% is strong, also. Weak play adds more house profit. Shufflemaster didn't shoot themselves in the foot with this game. Phil Ivey can't take make it a loser for the casino.

Quote: UCivan

How did you [Miplet] get "0.10379838612368 antes"?

Miplet did it by this by summing the house edge losses between properly playing the strong "4x" hands lost by this strategy (of 88 down to J10) at 4x, versus checking on these same hands. Click on this "show table" and sum all the ANTE ["Anti"] column returns, excluding hands 99 and above.

Quote: Paigowdan

No.
Even if the players played well, - the game itself is solid, and will make money.
Before shufflemaster released the game, they reviewed the math and all scenarios of play.

But to project that the game would fail or is failing flies in the face of the real world results.

There are casinos in places where strong local players who know the game and play well, enjoy the game without taking it down, without killing it.

I don't believe for a second that there are casinos where most people play UTH well.

As for real-world results ... we dn't have any for the situation where most people play it well. Poor players do not pad the house's results, they quadruple them. To assume that the house's profits would not fall if people went from playing with a 10+% HE to a 2.3% HE flies in the face of simple arithmetic and common sense.

deleted

Did they at least let you buy the Raise this time?

deleted

That's crazy! What is he saving the money for, Roulette? What better position can you ask for?

I've only played UTH (at least, I think it was UTH) once in a live game and got PO'ed when a Flopped Straight got beaten by a dealer Flush that was picked up on the River. It made me so angry to lose on that hand that I haven't looked at that table since! I started out with K-Q, suited, and made the 4x Raise, even though I had no idea whether or not that was correct. (It was)

deleted

I'm glad that Lady Variance smiled warmly upon you with respect to UTH. If MakingBook catches this thread, perhaps he can enlighten me as to whether or not it was UTH at Wheeling Island. I honestly don't remember. Whatever it was, it was some THE Variant, and I remember asking, "Okay, what's the most that I can bet at this point?" I'll also try to remember to look at the table next time I am there.

[

There are casinos in places where strong local players who know the game and play well, enjoy the game without taking it down, without killing it.

I have yet to see a casino where most players play well,I do see players playing better than they did 2 or 3 years ago. Look at blackjack,correct basic strategy has been out there for 50 years and players have improved but most still play poorly.

Has this game made it down to Mississippi yet?

deleted

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

I don't believe for a second that there are casinos where most people play UTH well.

Have you been to the Orleans on Tropicana Ave? They play it well there. There are numerous areas where people play it well. In many markets, the game is not three days old. Look for "old installs" in mature markets. It's a mixed bag. Don't confuse a "noticeable minority" with "most."

Quote: AxiomofChoice

As for real-world results ... we dn't have any for the situation where most people play it well. Poor players do not pad the house's results, they quadruple them. To assume that the house's profits would not fall if people went from playing with a 10+% HE to a 2.3% HE flies in the face of simple arithmetic and common sense.

No one is saying bad play doesn't help the house edge or table hold.

But there is no reason to assume either:
1. There are no places with good play on it, or
2. The game would fail if it were played well.

The HE on the ANTE is 2.3%, about the same as Pai Gow Poker, a fellow "slow game." AND Pai Gow Poker has mostly strong veteran players. PGP is staying, and so is UTH, - doesn't matter who plays it - just as long as they play it. If PGP isn't going anywhere, then neither is UTH. Math assumptions could also say that PGP should have failed.

Also, the greater risk of ruin that players have on this game, and which the casino doesn't have, contributes to the table hold with strong "4x" expert players. A few bad beats at 4x play on a small buy in, and your session is over, no matter how well you play. A lot of the game's table hold comes from this, I would assume.

I think a major concern or problem with UTH is the absence of a widely disseminated and SHORT strategy. Players who play it poorly - and know not of the strategy when they should because they were not exposed to it - get burnt out early, never to return.

I would also say IF there were a hold problem because everyone played so well, and started with many units, SHFL could just tweak the BLIND payout table to tailor the HE.

Quote: PaigowDan

Before the Flop:
* Bet 4x any King or better hole cards, except a pocket pair of 2's, else check.

On the flop:
* Bet 2x if you connected to the board with non-lowest card, and there isn't a flush/open straight draw you don't have;
* Bet 2x with four-to-Flush or open straight with Jack or better and there's a pair on the board;

After the river:
* Bet 1x if you connected to the board, or board will play only, or you have high kicker and board has pair or better.

ALL SITUATIONS REQUIRE AT LEAST ONE CARD FROM POCKET!
For the 4x Raise, though not Optimal...
*Raise any pair 66 or better
*Raise any two cards ranked as 10-low or better
*Raise any Suited Ace or King
*Raise Suited Q8, Q9, J8, and J9
* Check all others

2x Raise
* Raise high-pair or 2nd high pair that is 77 or better
* Raise any 4-flush
* Raise an open-ended Straight that is Jack high or better (J Q and K high only)
* Raise any pat hand ranked 2-pair or better
* Check all others

Raise
* Any pair of Tens or better
* Any pair 66 or better with Ace or King in pocket, also Queen if Ace or King on Board
* Any pat hand ranked 2-Pair or better
* FOLD all others

Thats about as simple as I can make it, anyone else care to try? Jeez, this doesn't handle board hands... sigh

Quote: Paigowdan

The HE on the ANTE is 2.3%, about the same as Pai Gow Poker

See, this is why house edge is a misleading measure, and element of risk is so much better. Someone who bets $100 on a PGP hand has to risk a total of $100 on the whole hand. Someone who bets $100 on the ante of UTH has to risk a minimum of $200 and a maximum of $600 on the hand. As a result, a black-chip PGP player probably plays greens at UTH. So, realistically, the house is only making 1/4 as much on UTH against a good player as they are against the same player playing PGP.

Now, huge mistakes at PGP are rare (other than the choice not to bank) so the house ends up making more money from UTH, but, again, this is due to player mistakes.

Quote:

Math assumptions could also say that PGP should have failed.

Not at all. Most players don't bank, so they are giving up a monstrous edge. They give away about 4 or 5 x as much of every chip that they put into action as a good UTH player.

Quote:

Also, the greater risk of ruin that players have on this game, and which the casino doesn't have, contributes to the table hold

It doesn't contribute to the house's profits. At least, not in the long term. This is the same nonsense that the martingale bettors spew. Lots of small bust-outs are offset by the occasional huge win. The house wins exactly 2.3% of every ante bet against a good player, in the long term.

Quote:

I would also say IF there were a hold problem because everyone played so well

This will never happen. People are idiots and they will always play like idiots. No one wants to "play by the book", they want to follow their gut because the book doesn't know what cards are coming. Also, the game is set up in a way that poor play is positively reinforced. When they make a 1x bet on the river with their AJ and win, they win the hand so they are happy. If they lose the hand they are glad that they didn't 4x bet. The problem is that people react to hands won, not to money. It's the same reason that people become calling stations at limit poker. This game is really well designed to prey on the mathematically illiterate (I have no idea if this was intention or not, but it's the result) I predict a long and successful run for this game. If I were designing a new game, I would try for the exact same effect..

Quote: 98Clubs

ALL SITUATIONS REQUIRE AT LEAST ONE CARD FROM POCKET!
For the 4x Raise, though not Optimal...
*Raise any pair 66 or better
*Raise any two cards ranked as 10-low or better
*Raise any Suited Ace or King
*Raise Suited Q8, Q9, J8, and J9
* Check all others

2x Raise
* Raise high-pair or 2nd high pair that is 77 or better
* Raise any 4-flush
* Raise an open-ended Straight that is Jack high or better (J Q and K high only)
* Raise any pat hand ranked 2-pair or better
* Check all others

Raise
* Any pair of Tens or better
* Any pair 66 or better with Ace or King in pocket, also Queen if Ace or King on Board
* Any pat hand ranked 2-Pair or better
* FOLD all others

Thats about as simple as I can make it, anyone else care to try? Jeez, this doesn't handle board hands... sigh

I don't know why you keep putting 66 as the minimum pair. The correct answer here is 33. You have other mistakes too.

Just spend the $6 on Grosjean's strategy. It is simpler AND more correct.

Quote: AxiomOfChoice

[Quote Dan:The HE on the ANTE is 2.3%, about the same as Pai Gow Poker]
See, this is why house edge is a misleading measure, and element of risk is so much better. Someone who bets $100 on a PGP hand has to risk a total of $100 on the whole hand. Someone who bets $100 on the ante of UTH has to risk a minimum of $200 and a maximum of $600 on the hand. As a result, a black-chip PGP player probably plays greens at UTH. So, realistically, the house is only making 1/4 as much on UTH against a good player as they are against the same player playing PGP.

Never turned out to be the case. If you think the house edge is a misleading measure, forget about element of risk without ROR. So look at the game's real-world drop and hold figures - the very best indicator of a game's real performance. This are very fine with UTH, and are not out of line with UTH's 2.3% ANTE; some place hold in the 20's, reflecting stronger play.

Quote: Axionofchoice

[Dan:Math assumptions could also say that PGP should have failed.]
Not at all. Most players don't bank, so they are giving up a monstrous edge.

No. When Pai Gow players don't bank, they're giving up only 2.4%-2.7%, and this is not at all usury. When they do bank, player's disadvantage goes down but ROR goes up.
Many casinos have eliminated Pai Gow player banking because it is so seldomly requested, and because it is an anachronism that bogs the game down. Not just my opinion, but in casino operators opinions, too. But my opinion had a say, we recommended eliminating player banking in PGP as a burden or hinderance on the game, and they agreed.

Quote: AxiomofChoice

[Dan: Also, the greater risk of ruin that players have on this game, and which the casino doesn't have, contributes to the table hold.] At least, not in the long term. This is the same nonsense that the martingale bettors spew. Lots of small bust-outs are offset by the occasional huge win. It doesn't contribute to the house's profits.

Player bust-outs or "ruin" sure as hell increase table hold. You lose your bankroll or session gambling allotment on the table ("ruin"), you can't say to the dealer, "I lost my money and I can't play anymore. Can I have it back?" They answer No, - and they keep it as house profit. This is how casinos work: you lose, they keep it. All player bust-outs, including BIG bust outs too, are sessions of player "ruin," and increase casino profit. Expensive games have more of these. The occasional huge win was already covered by the house edge of the game.

Quote: AxiomofChoice

[Dan: I would also say IF there were a hold problem because everyone played so well, they may tweak the blind bet's bonus table.]
This will never happen.

Probably not. But if needed, it can be adjusted. That was my point.

Quote: AxiomofChoice

People are idiots and they will always play like idiots. No one wants to "play by the book", they want to follow their gut because the book doesn't know what cards are coming. Also, the game is set up in a way that poor play is positively reinforced. When they make a 1x bet on the river with their AJ and win, they win the hand so they are happy. If they lose the hand they are glad that they didn't 4x bet. The problem is that people react to hands won, not to money. It's the same reason that people become calling stations at limit poker. This game is really well designed to prey on the mathematically illiterate (I have no idea if this was intention or not, but it's the result) I predict a long and successful run for this game. If I were designing a new game, I would try for the exact same effect.

Ingenious, isn't it? I think so. I think it is one of the best designed games out there: opportunity to win, strong action, strong table hold. It's got my action, along with a gazillion other people. And no, the game is prey for the mathematically literate: Element of risk makes it a very sexy and low HE game for the smart 4x bettor.
I think we can agree it's a strong performer. I also think the house edge is safe against strong and consistent play, along with average ploppie play. As time goes on, those who don't adapt to playing 4x more appropriately will either learn strategy and join stronger players, or abandon the game, in the end leaving just strong players on it. If that affects table hold enough, the BLIND bet may be adjusted (flush pays even, or SF 40:1, what have you...)

I operate on the basis that this game is in a STRONG position for a long life, and I stated my reasons. If you disagree (and you had), stating that it can't support the casino houses that offer it, only time will tell.