Crazy 4 Poker question:

A casino that I visit occasionally, Downstream in Joplin, MO, has Crazy 4 Poker. And there, if the dealer's hand does not qualify with a king or better, then they pay on the player's "Play" bet even if the player's hand is beaten by the dealer. Does anyone know if this common? Would this change the minimum hand that the player should bet in order to minimize the house advantage?

Yes, the "play" bet wins if the dealer doesn't qualify, regardless of the player's hand. This is according to standard Crazy 4 Poker rules. (The "ante" bet pushes in this case, which contributes to the house edge.)

What you're seeing at your casino is how Crazy 4 Poker is played virtually everywhere.

I'm not positive, but I think the dealer qualifies too much for this to make much of a difference here. Do you lose the Super Bonus bet if the dealer fails to qualify and he beats you? If that bet pushes as well, it may change things.

Quote: YouCanBetOnThat

Yes, the "play" bet wins if the dealer doesn't qualify, regardless of the player's hand. This is according to standard Crazy 4 Poker rules. (The "ante" bet pushes in this case, which contributes to the house edge.)

What you're seeing at your casino is how Crazy 4 Poker is played virtually everywhere.

The way the Wiz wrote the game on his site, I wouldn't have guessed that. If the dealer doesn't get King high, someone with 8 high dumb enough to play wins his play bet and pushes the Super Bonus?

Edit: Looking at a play sheet from Washington State Gaming Commission, this looks like the case, so raising KQ84+ is still the proper strategy.

Quote: CircusBob

A casino that I visit occasionally, Downstream in Joplin, MO, has Crazy 4 Poker. And there, if the dealer's hand does not qualify with a king or better, then they pay on the player's "Play" bet even if the player's hand is beaten by the dealer. Does anyone know if this common? Would this change the minimum hand that the player should bet in order to minimize the house advantage?

Yes, this is very standard.
This is the normal "half-pay" for a non-qualifying dealer hand, in most casino-banked poker games where the dealer plays his hand blind:
1. The ANTE Pushes and the PLAY wins, or
2. (As in three card poker) the ANTE Wins, and the PLAY is a push.
Same thing: it is a one-half pay on a dealer's hand non-qualification. The player always wins one-half of his amount wagered, if the dealer fails to open. It is done by pushing one bet, and paying the other bet - instead of paying BOTH on a hand so bad that the dealer cannot qualify. In very rare cases, the player would have a worse hand that would actually lose or tie, but he still gets paid on one bet if the dealer doesn't qualify.

Automatically, on most casino-banked poker games, if the dealer hand does not qualify, then one player bet is an automatic push, and the other bet is a player automatic win, and the hand is resolved - regardless of dealer holdings. It is to be assumed that the dealer would have lost the full hand, - both bets - and so he makes a half-pay, by paying one of the two poker bets, either the ante or the play bet. This generates the house edge advantage, as the dealer can only play blind.

This is Because the dealer would normally lose BOTH hands with a very weak hand, so a very weak hand level on the dealer's part is structured as a "half-pay" payout, even in rare cases where the player had had a weaker hand.

This type of mechanism provides a house edge to casino-banked poker games, where the dealer plays blind, and makes no advantageous decision against a player who may play his hand fully out with best player strategy.

Quote: tringlomane

The way the Wiz wrote the game on his site, I wouldn't have guessed that. If the dealer doesn't get King high, someone with 8 high dumb enough to play wins his play bet and pushes the Super Bonus?

That's how it's supposed to work. Have you encountered different behavior?

Quote: JB

That's how it's supposed to work. Have you encountered different behavior?

Nope. I've never played the game in an actual casino. The way it's written in the WOO though, I don't know if I would have thought that was the way it was supposed to go. However, that could be due to my lack of reading comprehension.

Yes, the way Rule #12 is written on WOO is what made me think that the casino was playing different than by the standard rule. Using the practice game on WOO, I see that it pays the "Play" the same as the casino. Thanks for the information everyone.

I read Mike's Crazy-4 poker description, - and it was just a "very tiny tad nebulous" on the RAISE bet part, not fully describing the handling of bets when a dealer non-qualfies with a player with less hand/rare case scenario.

Still a 'Dealer non-qualifer' paragraph is in order, stating "THIS is what ALWAYS happens when the dealer doesn't qualify, regardless of player's hand - then go to side bet payouts...." - a la the Three Card Poker equivelant description.

Quote: tringlomane

I'm not positive, but I think the dealer qualifies too much for this to make much of a difference here. Do you lose the Super Bonus bet if the dealer fails to qualify and he beats you? If that bet pushes as well, it may change things.

I was studying the game Crazy 4 Poker for a trip to Vegas in June. It is a surprise trip to so I will try this game out after trying UTH last month. It is my understanding reading the rules that Super bonus loses anytime the player has less than a straight and loses to the dealer. I didn't see it distinguish between a qualifying and a non-qualifying hand in the rules. So, I think the super bonus would lose if the player had say a Jack high and the dealer had a Queen high. I would be happy to be corrected if that is not the case.

BTW, if it is a breach of etiquette to revive these old threads, a moderator can let me know. I just didn't want to start a new thread to get clarification on a simple yes/no situation. I am looking forward to trying this game out. Hopefully, it will be as much fun for me as UTH was.

Good explanation.

The exception seems to be Ultimate Texas Hold'em. If the dealer does not qualify, the ante is a push, but the play bet is still in action and can win, lose, or push depending on who beats whom.

All the other games come out as 1/2 pay. UTH is at best 1/2 pay, and possibly less.

I am going to Vegas on a surprise trip in June and this is a game that I want to try. I understand the rules now and the strategy is simple with the KQ84.

I guess I am a rules stickler but I wanted to see if anyone knew how the rare hand scenario was resolved for the Super Bonus.

Let's say I have a 10 high and the dealer has a Queen high and I'm foolish enough to play. My understanding is that because of the half pay scenario as PGD described, that the play bet would win and the ante would push since the dealer didn't qualify. It isn't clear what happens to the Super bonus since the dealer would have beaten me and I had less than a straight. Do I lose the super bonus in that situation.

The wizardofodds site by rule 10 indicates that qualifying is only for the ante bet so both the Super bonus and play bets would lose according to his site. But, other sites seems to indicate different. Does anyone have any input in that? It would be much appreciated.