One for the Money -- New Page
If you think the dealer looks familiar, she is one of the *ahem* well-endowed dealers on the those ShuffleMaster multi-player games with a big screen of several lovely dealers. She was about ten years older when I took this photo at Raving last year.
As always, I welcome comments, questions, and especially corrections. I did the math myself, which was verified against the official math report by our own CrystalMath.
I gotta assume its NOT arbitrary, but governed by a House Rule. Either left, right, or by suit preference.Quote: RulesThe dealer will turn over both his cards and select the higher card. If the cards are equal in rank, the dealer may choose either one arbitrarily.
Leaving it up to the dealer would affect the perfect part of the Perfect Match side bet.
That should be fast paced.Quote: ConclusionThe player should be aware that this is a faced paced game, ...
Was it a deliberate decision to not mention that it was invented by a WoV member?
Upon closer examination of the photo (which I assume was from Raving), the side bet looks like 3 Card Poker. Was that what it was then?
There also appears to be a paytable below the raise circle. What's that about?
Quote: DJTeddyBearWas it a deliberate decision to not mention that it was invented by a WoV member?
look again
no name, but I guess there is an assumption we know who it was from previous threads
So this is Babs? Only about 11 years old too [g]
Quote:Any number of decks can be used. To minimize shuffling time, I would expect to see six or eight.
I'm curious, how many decks are used at Diamond Jo's?
The Perfect Match bet does not depend on which card the dealer plays: it is an aggregate of both the dealer cards plus the player's one. In the base game, suit does not matter. In Perfect Match, it does.
I'm not quite sure why the Wizard does not mention my name in the article; perhaps because it's intended for a much wider audience on the WoO site than the forum members. I am the inventor and designer, with help from my family in testing, and gaming advice from Paradigm of this forum refining it several times down to its base, math work and reports from CrystalMath of this forum, Vulnerability Analysis from Charles Mousseau (CRMousseau) of this forum, purchased for distribution by Roger Snow (Pacman) of SHFL/Bally of this forum, and represented by RichN (Rich Newman) of this forum. In short, if not for this forum, I would have had no idea I could even do this or where to look for the professional specialists, so I'm indebted to the Wizard forever for providing the resources and attracting the high quality participants. I also highly recommend any of those named above in your endeavors if you are one of the many who've lately come here looking for similar development.
This is from Raving in November. SHFL was marketing it with a different sidebet at the time. That sidebet is available, as are several others, at the casino's option. The Perfect Match paytable and sidebet are listed because this is the first install; I expect the Wizard will update the page if others are used in other casinos.
The paytable below the raise is for what I call the low-odds-win paytable, (under separate patent) which is an option for a casino that wants to lower the HE on this or any similar game. (We refer to it as a Feature for contract/legal purposes) The particular paytable demo'd here was, if a player won a hand with a 5 (dealer had some combination of 4-3-2 ranks in both cards), all bets would pay 2:1. Win with a 4 pays 5:1 on all bets. Win with a 3 pays 10:1 on all bets. With this paytable, the HE went down to about 1.1%. On a practical basis, this paytable would almost always apply to your Ante and Trade bets, because you would not raise on these cards, and you would not have stood on those cards. At the Diamond Jo, they are not using this paytable. If used, it can be adjusted to provide a comparative HE to nearly any table game now in play, including the best blackjack or baccarat rules.
Quote: tringlomaneI'm not too surprised that Diamond Jo is not using it, but I thought the "low win" paytable added a nice touch to your game. Hoping your game is doing well overall!
I agree, trin; I would also like to see it used, but I don't think this is the end of the road for any option on the game; I developed 3 versions, in order to offer variety in play and sidebets, as well as the Feature which can be used on any of those, as well as at least one other game already in play. A different version of the game with more cards available allows for a 5 card progressive jackpot sidebet similar to Let It Ride, for example, while still playing the base game, which can stand alone or be interlinked with other games for a bigger jackpot. It will be up to Bally whether they offer any options beyond the one they're currently marketing, but again I hope they do, because different options will map well to regional player demographics.
The game is doing very well overall; there are several more installs in the works. Preliminary numbers from Diamond Jo's, as well as player and dealer feedback, are very good. We're pretty happy with things so far, but lots of hurdles to go before it's the Next Big Thing we hope it might be.
At the bottom of the page you have the following verbiage.....
"The player should be aware that this is a faced paced game, so I would recommend keeping this in mind in deciding how much to bet."
Is it supposed to read "fast paced game" or does the faces of the 10 value cards have anything to do with the individual playing of the game?
Babs, let me know how things are going in Iowa!!!
Quote: TomspurWiz,
At the bottom of the page you have the following verbiage.....
"The player should be aware that this is a faced paced game, so I would recommend keeping this in mind in deciding how much to bet."
Is it supposed to read "fast paced game" or does the faces of the 10 value cards have anything to do with the individual playing of the game?
Babs, let me know how things are going in Iowa!!!
Tomspur,
Things are going very well, but still in preliminary mode as far as I know, so still keeping fingers and toes crossed.
I'm sure you're right about the edit. Good catch.
Quote: TomspurWiz,
At the bottom of the page you have the following verbiage.....
"The player should be aware that this is a faced paced game, so I would recommend keeping this in mind in deciding how much to bet."
Is it supposed to read "fast paced game" or does the faces of the 10 value cards have anything to do with the individual playing of the game?
Babs, let me know how things are going in Iowa!!!
That's funny. I read "face up" the first time, then "fast paced" the second time. I had to actually look at each individual word to see what it really said.
Quote: CrystalMathThat's funny. I read "face up" the first time, then "fast paced" the second time. I had to actually look at each individual word to see what it really said.
Our minds are quite incredible aren't they. We very rarely read every word, in fact we most often do not.
I have to on many occasions force my eyes to go back and slowly read what I just read to try and make sense of it......I hope that means I'm really smart and not that I suffer from adult ADHD :)
Quote: beachbumbabsThe game is doing very well overall; there are several more installs in the works. Preliminary numbers from Diamond Jo's, as well as player and dealer feedback, are very good. We're pretty happy with things so far, but lots of hurdles to go before it's the Next Big Thing we hope it might be.
Babs, when did the game go live? Congrats on the early reports!
In staying with the thread, the "faced" vs. "fast" was the only item I saw needing correction.
Quote: beachbumbabsI agree, trin; I would also like to see it used, but I don't think this is the end of the road for any option on the game; I developed 3 versions, in order to offer variety in play and sidebets, as well as the Feature which can be used on any of those, as well as at least one other game already in play. A different version of the game with more cards available allows for a 5 card progressive jackpot sidebet similar to Let It Ride, for example, while still playing the base game, which can stand alone or be interlinked with other games for a bigger jackpot. It will be up to Bally whether they offer any options beyond the one they're currently marketing, but again I hope they do, because different options will map well to regional player demographics.
The game is doing very well overall; there are several more installs in the works. Preliminary numbers from Diamond Jo's, as well as player and dealer feedback, are very good. We're pretty happy with things so far, but lots of hurdles to go before it's the Next Big Thing we hope it might be.
I'm hoping your game comes to Atlantic City in the near future. I'd love to play it.
Quote: beachbumbabsThey started dealing it on February 7th, so we just passed 1 month.
Congrats.
The game sounds a lot like the original Vegas casino card game, Faro. The weakness of Faro, was that it was easy to count. Is OFTM countable? Could tracking aces and faces, or 2 - 6 open AP opportunities?
I only have one suggestion for the analysis. Could the "Match" in the Perfect Match table be clearly defined as "Rank" (as opposed to "Suit")? Similarly, the description of, "Perfect Match" should mention "Rank and Suit" somewhere at least once.
Quote: AyecarumbaCould tracking aces and faces, or 2 - 6 open AP opportunities?
It isn't countable, even with perfect knowledge of the deck composition.
Quote: CrystalMathIt isn't countable, even with perfect knowledge of the deck composition.
What do you mean by that? Clearly the correct playing decision depends on the deck composition.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceWhat do you mean by that? Clearly the correct playing decision depends on the deck composition.
There are games and game situations where the changing shoe composition helps neither player or dealer. An example of this is Banker and Player bets in Baccarat.
Quote: PaigowdanThere are games and game situations where the changing shoe composition helps neither player or dealer. An example of this is Banker and Player bets in Baccarat.
Are you sure about this? I thought deck composition could change the win frequency of the Banker and Player. i thought there were certain cards in the deck that were better for banker or player even though it would rarely, if ever, overcome the house advantage.
Quote: PaigowdanThere are games and game situations where the changing shoe composition helps neither player or dealer. An example of this is Banker and Player bets in Baccarat.
When counting cards, there are generally two things that you can do:
1. Vary your bet size as the expectation of the game changes due to deck composition (ie, bet more when you have the edge)
2. Vary your playing strategy as the correct strategy changes due to deck composition.
In games like baccarat, there are no playing decisions, so #2 is moot, and (for baccarat in particular) #1 is not effective, for the reason that you gave.
However, this game does have playing decisions, so #2 is not moot, even if #1 is not very effective.
Having said that, I just looked at the EVs for each decision, and the only one that looks close enough that might swing back and forth with any regularity based on deck composition is stand vs switch on an 8.
Clearly the real advantage play here is to see one of the dealer's hole cards :)
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceWhat do you mean by that? Clearly the correct playing decision depends on the deck composition.
Even if you utilize a perfect count, and you know exactly which cards are left in the deck, this game is not countable.
Quote: CrystalMathEven if you utilize a perfect count, and you know exactly which cards are left in the deck, this game is not countable.
Define "countable". Do you mean "beatable"?
If there is a lopsided rank distribution, that increases the chance of a match. A lopsided suit distribution increases the chance that a match will be perfect.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceDefine "countable". Do you mean "beatable"?
Yes, when I say not countable, I mean not beatable. You can count it all you want, but it will not help you.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceDefine "countable". Do you mean "beatable"?
Isn't that what "countable" usually means among AP's?
Quote: WizardWhat I don't get is why casinos have a penetration of only 75% or so in Casino War. Especially if they do a hand shuffle. The game is simply not beatable by card counting, so why not deal to the bottom? My educated guess is OFTM wouldn't be beatable either.
My analysis of One For the Money assumed a 90% penetration, and the player can expect a positive hand about every 7000 shoes with 6 decks.
Quote: Beethoven9thIsn't that what "countable" usually means among AP's?
I consider them to be very different things.
Eg, in this game, you can count, and it would (slightly) reduce the house edge, but not give you an advantage. So it is countable but not beatable, by my definition.
In another thread, a guy was asking if it was possible to count baccarat just enough to reduce the house edge to 0.8% (because he was getting some dead chips for his action). So, beatable for some might be different than beatable for others.
75% for a multi-deck shoe does seem excessive. But you wouldn't want to deal all the way or even almost all the way to the bottom, because then you run the risk of running out of cards if there is a war or double-war.Quote: WizardWhat I don't get is why casinos have a penetration of only 75% or so in Casino War. Especially if they do a hand shuffle. The game is simply not beatable by card counting, so why not deal to the bottom? My educated guess is OFTM wouldn't be beatable either.
Quote: IbeatyouracesThe tie bet is supposedly beatable. It's mentioned in Exhibit CAA.
Good answer. I hadn't thought of that. However, it shouldn't be any more countable than the pair bets in baccarat. As long as you guard against baccarat counting apps, I think it would be safe to deal War to 90-95% penetration. Not everything in CAA is a practical advantage play.
Quote: DJTeddyBear... you wouldn't want to deal all the way or even almost all the way to the bottom, because then you run the risk of running out of cards if there is a war or double-war.
What is a double war?
Quote: beachbumbabsThe real-world play on OftM is bearing out CrystalMath's multi-deck report. They are reporting no counting or AP issues so far. The game is dealt out of a shoe, so the cards are being slid face-down to the dealer, with no need to expose until bet resolution. So hole-carding is not working either. I do not know the current min-max on either the base game or the sidebet as Diamond Jo's is dealing it.
The only thing I would worry about if I were you is collusion between the dealers and their accomplices. Of course, this doesn't point to a weakness in your game and is plain cheating but if the hole card does give as strong a information as it seems it does, then this is where the casino can get hit.
This will also affect your report building and could put your placement in danger if the game isn't holding what it should due to nefarious employees.
Just a thought
Quote: TomspurThe only thing I would worry about if I were you is collusion between the dealers and their accomplices. Of course, this doesn't point to a weakness in your game and is plain cheating but if the hole card does give as strong a information as it seems it does, then this is where the casino can get hit.
This will also affect your report building and could put your placement in danger if the game isn't holding what it should due to nefarious employees.
Just a thought
The last report I had was that the game's hold is down the middle of the strike zone and the casino is very happy with the level of interest and the numbers.
Quote: beachbumbabsThe game is dealt out of a shoe, so the cards are being slid face-down to the dealer, with no need to expose until bet resolution. So hole-carding is not working either.
Hey, IBYA said his biggest score ever came from a CSM. He won't tell me how though. I'm hoping that if I bring it up once a month or so he eventually will.
People do hole-card shoe games though. It's not exactly a secret -- Eliot even wrote about it on APheat.
this is a very good point.Quote: TomspurThe only thing I would worry about if I were you is collusion between the dealers and their accomplices. Of course, this doesn't point to a weakness in your game and is plain cheating but if the hole card does give as strong a information as it seems it does, then this is where the casino can get hit.
This will also affect your report building and could put your placement in danger if the game isn't holding what it should due to nefarious employees.
Just a thought
this happens a lot in the SoCal Indian casinos I go to. and I am not there that often and I see it at Blackjack and a few other poker based games I watch.
the Dealers are fast but sloppy at times and many times from a shoe or single deck they expose the hole card.
why not just have the House hand dealt after all the players have played their hand?
it should not make any difference in the math with 6 or 8 decks I would imagine.
set it in the rules as the players get to draw the cards first then the dealer draws each card one at a time
that might even offer another betting round.
but the anticipation after the first card is drawn and as the 2nd is being turned should be a nice wow factor I would imagine
like the time waiting for the dice to stop rolling or as the Dealer turns over that 6th card at 4 card poker
Sally
Quote: mustangsallythis is a very good point.
this happens a lot in the SoCal Indian casinos I go to. and I am not there that often and I see it at Blackjack and a few other poker based games I watch.
the Dealers are fast but sloppy at times and many times from a shoe or single deck they expose the hole card.
why not just have the House hand dealt after all the players have played their hand?
it should not make any difference in the math with 6 or 8 decks I would imagine.
set it in the rules as the players get to draw the cards first then the dealer draws each card one at a time
that might even offer another betting round.
but the anticipation after the first card is drawn and as the 2nd is being turned should be a nice wow factor I would imagine
like the time waiting for the dice to stop rolling or as the Dealer turns over that 6th card at 4 card poker
Sally
We could do this, no question. We've had the conversation. I hope we can avoid having to do it that way, by personal preference if nothing else. I don't like playing this way in Blackjack (they didn't deal the 2nd dealer card until all players had acted in England) or 3CP (where some casinos are leaving the dealer's hand in the machine until all players have acted); I want the dealer's hand to NOT be dependent on whether the other people at the table trade or not. I think it invites arguments among drunks and self-proclaimed experts, even with a completely straightforward optimal strategy. This game is designed for beginners, though it will be played by more advanced people in some places and at some times. I like the dealer cards staring them down from the other side of the table, not coming out of the shoe last. I think it suits the simplicity of the game.
Your point is well taken, Tom and Sally, and I do appreciate the feedback and the ideas. Again, I hope we avoid doing this.
Edit; we will double-check the math, but I don't think the game can balance with another betting round. We tried a double raise, and different bet proportions, and the sim did not show any other bet combination that was lower than an HE of 9+%, or a PE in the other direction.
Quote: beachbumbabsWe could do this, no question. We've had the conversation. I hope we can avoid having to do it that way, by personal preference if nothing else. I don't like playing this way in Blackjack (they didn't deal the 2nd dealer card until all players had acted in England)
That actually changes the game significantly (I don't like it either)
Quote:or 3CP (where some casinos are leaving the dealer's hand in the machine until all players have acted);
I think that it is HILARIOUS that casinos do this for 3CP. They are worried about giving away a 3% edge when you can get a 50% edge one table over where they don't do this.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI think that it is HILARIOUS that casinos do this for 3CP. They are worried about giving away a 3% edge when you can get a 50% edge one table over where they don't do this.
I absolutely agree. There are far worse things that can happen that will result in law suits or at least very bad verbal altercations with regards to leaving the cards inside the shoe. At the end of the day hole carding 3CP is not an exact science and if you, as an AP is making your living out of this, well, then good luck to you. I don't see it as such a large issue that we need to make silly fixes to ensure we don't get hit.
Just deal the game as is and make sure you train your dealers well enough not to give away hole card information, otherwise just let Surveillance do their jobs, it is what we get paid minimum wage to do anyway, isn't it? :)
Quote: TomspurI absolutely agree. There are far worse things that can happen that will result in law suits or at least very bad verbal altercations with regards to leaving the cards inside the shoe. At the end of the day hole carding 3CP is not an exact science and if you, as an AP is making your living out of this, well, then good luck to you. I don't see it as such a large issue that we need to make silly fixes to ensure we don't get hit.
Just deal the game as is and make sure you train your dealers well enough not to give away hole card information, otherwise just let Surveillance do their jobs, it is what we get paid minimum wage to do anyway, isn't it? :)
You seem to have a pretty enlightened approach to the whole thing, but I think that the problem is that most casinos are extremely reactionary and the people in charge don't really think. They don't actually want to fix the problem; they just want to do something and tell their boss that they fixed the problem.
They heard that some people were making money hole-carding 3CP (I wonder how much money was actually made doing this -- I suspect that it was overstated. If you don't see it just about 100% of the time it is really not a very strong play, and you stick out like a sore thumb for not betting the PP) and so they rushed to find a band-aid solution without trying to solve the more general problem.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceYou seem to have a pretty enlightened approach to the whole thing, but I think that the problem is that most casinos are extremely reactionary and the people in charge don't really think. They don't actually want to fix the problem; they just want to do something and tell their boss that they fixed the problem.
They heard that some people were making money hole-carding 3CP (I wonder how much money was actually made doing this -- I suspect that it was overstated. If you don't see it just about 100% of the time it is really not a very strong play, and you stick out like a sore thumb for not betting the PP) and so they rushed to find a band-aid solution without trying to solve the more general problem.
Completing the circle, as far as I know, we don't have a problem. So if it ain't broke...I don't want to fix it. If there is a problem, I'm guessing we'll reassess.
Quote: beachbumbabsCompleting the circle, as far as I know, we don't have a problem. So if it ain't broke...I don't want to fix it. If there is a problem, I'm guessing we'll reassess.
I'm not suggesting that your game has a problem. I'm suggesting that the casinos have a problem and they have no clue how to fix it.
I don't envy these guys their jobs but I do feel they make bad decisions based on over exposed information that has been previously circulated. If they simply did some investigating and found out that they were actually able to withstand the storm and inform their bosses accordingly, they would not have had to get crushed in the first place.
Still, they have difficult decisions to make, not based on what is best but rather what is best for their careers!
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceYou seem to have a pretty enlightened approach to the whole thing, but I think that the problem is that most casinos are extremely reactionary and the people in charge don't really think. They don't actually want to fix the problem; they just want to do something and tell their boss that they fixed the problem.
They heard that some people were making money hole-carding 3CP (I wonder how much money was actually made doing this -- I suspect that it was overstated. If you don't see it just about 100% of the time it is really not a very strong play, and you stick out like a sore thumb for not betting the PP) and so they rushed to find a band-aid solution without trying to solve the more general problem.
AP-ing or hole-carding 3CP was once so severe it was referred to as One-card Poker. Casinos then kept the dealer's hand in the shuffler until needed, or put a cut-card under the dealer's hand on high-mount machines, if they decided to take the hand out before players had acted. Casinos now more often leave dealer cards in the shuffler until they are needed, for game protection reasons. Eliot Jacobson certainly recommends and had advised this as a casino defense on 3CP. I've also seen casinos hand-deal UTH and NOT bring out the flop until players had raised or checked on the first round - players raise or check on seeing their own hole-cards only, should there be flop or dealer hand hole-carding risks. In these cases it has fixed the problem, as you cannot hole-card the dealer's cards if are still in the shuffler, of if not dealt until needed. you see, it's not about weathering a storm, it's about avoiding the storm or any loses or threats for implementing a trivial change that can address this.
Casino operators take the actions that they feel they need to take as far as game control and protections go, and they make the call. If they come across sour grapes or complaints about it, either at a forum like this place, or in a casino, they believe they were vindicated or on the right track, especially if hold increases. If an AP player complains or gripes about a defensive measure, especially if the hold goes up, then as far as they're concerned they got results, especially if numbers back this up.
Quote: PaigowdanAP-ing or hole-carding 3CP was once so severe it was referred to as One-card Poker. Casinos then kept the dealer's hand in the shuffler until needed, or put a cut-card under the dealer's hand on high-mount machines, if they decided to take the hand out before players had acted. Casinos now more often leave dealer cards in the shuffler until they are needed, for game protection reasons. Eliot Jacobson certainly recommends and had advised this as a casino defense on 3CP. I've also seen casinos hand-deal UTH and NOT bring out the flop until players had raised or checked on the first round - players raise or check on seeing their own hole-cards only, should there be flop or dealer hand hole-carding risks. In these cases it has fixed the problem, as you cannot hole-card the dealer's cards if are still in the shuffler, of if not dealt until needed. you see, it's not about weathering a storm, it's about avoiding the storm or any loses or threats for implementing a trivial change that can address this.
Casino operators take the actions that they feel they need to take as far as game control and protections go, and they make the call. If they come across sour grapes or complaints about it, either at a forum like this place, or in a casino, they believe they were vindicated or on the right track, especially if hold increases. If an AP player complains or gripes about a defensive measure, especially if the hold goes up, then as far as they're concerned they got results, especially if numbers back this up.
I have seen a casino leave the cards in the automatic shuffer for 3CP (3% edge if you see the bottom card) while at the next table over the MS Stud game (50% edge if you see the bottom card) did not have this protection.
With geniuses like this running the show it's not too difficult to understand why places keep getting hit.
