Double Up

Double Up is a new game on field trial at the D casino in Las Vegas. Please check out my new page on the game. I welcome all comments, corrections, and questions.

Quote:

Element of Risk 2.77%.

Assuming a maximum Red or Black bet, the overall ratio of expected loss to total amount wagered is 1.59%.

why two figures? if you have discussed this plenty already, sorry

Quote: odiousgambit

why two figures? if you have discussed this plenty already, sorry

The first figure mixes in the Ante and Double up only. The second combines the Ante, Double Up, and either color bet.

Quote: odiousgambit

why two figures? if you have discussed this plenty already, sorry

I don't think it's been discussed at all, at least on this board. It appears to me that the game provides a surprising opportunity for the bettor to play less than optimal strategy by making the red/black bet optional. They must bet the ante to play it, and many players won't bet a sidebet, because "everybody knows" the sidebet is a sucker bet. Most other players won't bet a sidebet equally to an ante, because usually the odds act independently of the base bet. So, here's a side bet that, while not +ev, is so much better a bet than the base game it improves the player's position from 2.77% to 1.59%. It's kind of sneaky, definitely counter-conventional wisdom.

I like it a lot that they provide the strategy right on the felt, so there's a caveat emptor in being open about what needs to be done to maximize the odds. Is that just the strategy you list on the page, or does the felt include the fact that playing the red/black to the maximum dampens the HE to a much better rate? Chances are, though, if you don't know red/black is a 50/50 bet and bound to improve your odds on any game, you shouldn't be putting real money on felt.

It appears the frequency of making the Double Up wager is 34.4616% (you bet it on 1 hand in 3, but it is optional) with optimal strategy, and you win that bet 72.66% when you have the opportunity to make it. This game requires you to be aggressive even more often than UTH; a passive strategy without betting, and without betting the maximum on an optional sidebet, is going to be a much less favorable game for the player.

So there have to be 2 EoR's for full disclosure on this game, because the sidebet should be a requirement for the player (the game doesn't require it, but the player must be prepared to bet double the ante on every hand, triple on 1/3 of them) if they want their best odds. The HE of 3.72% is pretty steep without being tempered by the optional bets. I think this is unique in table games I've seen, where the sidebet odds improve the base bet to such an extent.

I would have to play this before I knew if I liked it, but it seems to be built in a way to take advantage of players with only a casual understanding of traditional betting structures and, oh yeah, MATH. My first impression of this design feature is at least mixed, probably negative. Why not present it as an ante = red/black format for double minimums to encourage optimal play rather than the extra cues and opportunities to hurt their chances? 6:5 BJ is right in the same range at around 1.55 and making plenty of money as a straightforward, though less than desirable game than 3:2 BJ.

6:5 BJ is right in the same range at around 1.55 and making plenty of money as a straightforward, though less than desirable game than 3:2 BJ.

But being dealt from a 6 deck shoes in many places. Close to 2% HE. How close ? 1.998

May want to point out in the strategy section that Red/Black has a house edge of 0% (right?), so you should always play it.

Quote: Buzzard

6:5 BJ is right in the same range at around 1.55 and making plenty of money as a straightforward, though less than desirable game than 3:2 BJ.

But being dealt from a 6 deck shoes in many places. Close to 2% HE. How close ? 1.998

Buzz,

Your point is well taken, and the house is being a bit greedy IMO, but the instructions on this say it's a single deck, shuffled after every deal: 4 cards and it has to be shuffled. There must be a significant PA if all 4 cards are either red or black, or you've seen certain combinations, like more than 1 ace, or maybe 4 faces. Anyway, I think we have to compare them only as single-deck.

dwheatly,

I would agree; the strategy on the felt should indicate somehow, and it may; the Wizard hasn't confirmed either way. I'm guessing all they have to do is indicate on the felt that the sidebet pays 1:1.

Quote: beachbumbabs

I like it a lot that they provide the strategy right on the felt, so there's a caveat emptor in being open about what needs to be done to maximize the odds. Is that just the strategy you list on the page, or does the felt include the fact that playing the red/black to the maximum dampens the HE to a much better rate?

There is a table indicating how many ranks are in the player's and dealer's favor, according to the total points after three cards. When the number of ranks in the players favor >=7 then the player should make the raise bet. It wouldn't surprise me if some players didn't understand the table and didn't consult it. After I looked at the table I remarked, "So the player should raise with 12 or less, or 24 or more." The dealer (a party pit dealer mind you) shrugged as if to say, "Whatever you say."

Quote:

So there have to be 2 EoR's for full disclosure on this game, because the sidebet should be a requirement for the player

I disagree there. I would equate mandating the red or black bet to mandating an odds bet in craps.

Quote: Wizard

Double Up is a new game on field trial at the D casino in Las Vegas. Please check out my new page on the game. I welcome all comments, corrections, and questions.

Mike, the game is on trial until November 15th. I'm not sure what the reaction to the game has been like but 'Free Bet Blackjack' is being installed into The D shortly after that date.

I'm over on the 17th.

Which company is marketing this game? DEQ/Galaxy/Shufflemaster? Or is it the rare independent designer going it alone.

Quote: AcesAndEights

Which company is marketing this game? DEQ/Galaxy/Shufflemaster? Or is it the rare independent designer going it alone.

I'm not familiar with the company, 'Game Time Of Nevada LLC'.

Quote: Wizard

There is a table indicating how many ranks are in the player's and dealer's favor, according to the total points after three cards. When the number of ranks in the players favor >=7 then the player should make the raise bet. It wouldn't surprise me if some players didn't understand the table and didn't consult it. After I looked at the table I remarked, "So the player should raise with 12 or less, or 24 or more." The dealer (a party pit dealer mind you) shrugged as if to say, "Whatever you say."



I disagree there. I would equate mandating the red or black bet to mandating an odds bet in craps.

I'm going to have to figure out what you're saying about how the felt indicates it vs. what you said the strategy was; your way is much clearer. EDIT: ok, I get it; they're saying 7 below 20 or 7 less than 30; you're moving the point 1 in each direction respectively to say 12 and 24. Thanks.

Your point is well taken on red/black craps equivalent. It still feels dishonest somehow, but I see where you're going.

Quote: Switch

I'm not familiar with the company, 'Game Time Of Nevada LLC'.

The address for them is a house on Alhambra. Probably
2 guys that invented the game and started a company
around it, they have no website.

Quote: beachbumbabs

I'm going to have to figure out what you're saying about how the felt indicates it vs. what you said the strategy was; your way is much clearer. EDIT: ok, I get it; they're saying 7 below 20 or 7 less than 30; you're moving the point 1 in each direction respectively to say 12 and 24.

I generally agree with making advice available to the player on brand new casino games. Players always butcher the strategy, lose too much, and leave unhappy. There is also a regulation in Nevada that the hold percentage can't be greater than 25% for trial period games to get a full blown license.

However, in this case they made a whole big table, one at each betting spot. I've never seen anything like it before.

Quote: Wizard

Players always butcher the strategy, lose too much, and leave unhappy. .

This is really true. First impressions are really important
for the hoopleheads with new games. I remember the
first and only time I played Caribbean Stud. I lost my
$25 buy in on the first 4 hands and never tried it again,
why would I. Hooplehead deluxe reaction..

Quote: Wizard

I generally agree with making advice available to the player on brand new casino games. Players always butcher the strategy, lose too much, and leave unhappy. There is also a regulation in Nevada that the hold percentage can't be greater than 25% for trial period games to get a full blown license.

However, in this case they made a whole big table, one at each betting spot. I've never seen anything like it before.

Here's an anecdote for you re: felt. I had talked my brother and sister-to-be into looking at other games to play socially (I "gamble" alone, though I've gotten her to enjoy UTH lately) than 3 card poker while at Harrah's LV during G2E. We walked up to Black Jack Attack at my suggestion. The felt was dense with paytables and whatever, really intimidating, so she asked the dealer (who was standing alone in a pretty busy casino otherwise) how to play. He went into a long, confusing spiel about the rules and features, and she got a look of horror on her face and said, "No way; this is too complicated!" and we walked away....to 3 card poker. Again. It was a really good lesson for me about simplicity and the amount of time you have to sell a new player, also about how much dealer interest and knowledge matters.

I still want to try BJA; I don't think I can ever get her near it again. EDIT: The correct name is "Triple Attack Blackjack".

If you could (and did) explain optimal strategy in one sentence, why did they need to cover the entire felt with it?

Quote: beachbumbabs

so she asked the dealer (who was standing alone in a pretty busy casino otherwise) how to play.

Oh god, asking a dealer how to play is
the worst thing, it's like asking the guy
in the meat dept at Walmart what the
expiration date means. These people
aren't trained to, and have no desire
to, wise people up. If anything, they
just wish you'd leave them alone.

I have always maintained that the dealer
is the killer of most new casino carnival
games. They don't like dealing them, and
will often go out of their way to make it
as hard as possible on new players. Not
all dealers, but certainly enough of them.

The dealers at the Isle of Capri in Blackhawk killed Digital 21 and Bonus Let It Ride. I am sure the same happens elsewhere.
Don't tell Dan but if I was a dealer I would kill Buffalo Bust Bonus. Having to ask after each hand Bust Bonus anybody Bust Bonus ? GRRRR

Quote: Buzzard

The dealers at the Isle of Capri in Blackhawk killed Digital 21 and Bonus Let It Ride.

If the dealer has to shuffle after hand in Double Up,
they'll kill it too. I sure would if I was a dealer.

Quote: Switch

I'm not familiar with the company, 'Game Time Of Nevada LLC'.

The D is generally very conservative in taking on any new game. To get a field trial at The D is very impressive, if the game inventor is not merely a good friend to "D", the owner.