discard inferno

Quote: Wizard

Thanks. However, I think I can be forgiven as BBB said aces are ALWAYS high. Always does mean always.

Nope. No forgiveness today. :)

Quote: beachbumbabs

Nope. No forgiveness today. :)

Ouch! Well, as a married man, I'm used to it.

I just wrote up a new page on Discard Inferno. SG kindly shared the math report by CrystalMath so it was pretty easy. The only thing I did was the Aces Up.

Please, everyone, have a look. As always, I welcome questions, comments, and especially corrections.

Under rules #3 it should say "the other 6 face down"

Quote: Hunterhill

Under rules #3 it should say "the other 6 face down"

Thank you.

Under rule #8, the third bullet point reads, "If the player has the higher tie.." I think it is supposed to read, "If the player has the higher hand..."

Quote: Ayecarumba

Under rule #8, the third bullet point reads, "If the player has the higher tie.." I think it is supposed to read, "If the player has the higher hand..."

Thanks, you're right.

SG also sent along a math report for a side bet called the Burn Baby Burn. It pays based on the final number of dealer cards after the discarding process. I just added an analysis of that to the end of my report.

A buddy and I have been modeling Discard Inferno, but we were unaware of the paytable for the Blind Bet that the Wizard has posted.- we had been assuming that the blind bet had a 1:1 payout on all player hands that were trips or higher. Hopefully, we can independently confirm the HE.

Quote: Wizard

...SG also sent along a math report for a side bet called the Burn Baby Burn...

Hehe... at some point a line is going to be crossed and someone is going to get their nuts sued off. What's next, "Saturday Night Fiver"?

Quote: Ayecarumba

Hehe... at some point a line is going to be crossed and someone is going to get their nuts sued off. What's next, "Saturday Night Fiver"?

Just as long as nobody makes a Drill Baby Drill bet, I won't complain.

Okay, we have simulated the Discard Inferno game using a rough (non-optimum) player strategy -and using the Blind Bet payout table that we had been previously unaware of.

We calculate a House Edge of 1.624 % and I fully expect we would get the 1.600% House Edge if we put in a more complex Basic Strategy for the player.

Basic Strategy in Calculation of HE=1.624%

Always BET 3X with 3 of a Kind and Better

For other player decisions, it depends upon whether the dealer upcard is low (2-8) or high (9-A)

vs 9-A
Bet 2X with a 33 pair or higher
Bet 1X with any K-High or higher
Fold with Q-High or lower

vs 2-8
Bet 2X with JJ-AKQ or higher
Bet 1X with any 44 pair or higher vs 3-8
Bet 1X with any 22 pair or higher vs 2
Otherwise FOLD

The above strategy for when to BET 1X vs 2-8 can be improved significantly and would probably reduce the House Edge to something very close to the value of 1.600% that is said to be in the math report.

Good stuff! May I quote this strategy on my site? If you grant permission, let me know who you would like to be known, as I always give credit where credit is due.

Quote: gordonm888

Okay, we have simulated the Discard Inferno game using a rough (non-optimum) player strategy -and using the Blind Bet payout table that we had been previously unaware of.

We calculate a House Edge of 1.624 % and I fully expect we would get the 1.600% House Edge if we put in a more complex Basic Strategy for the player.

Basic Strategy in Calculation of HE=1.624%

Always BET 3X with 3 of a Kind and Better

For other player decisions, it depends upon whether the dealer upcard is low (2-8) or high (9-A)

vs 9-A
Bet 2X with a 33 pair or higher
Bet 1X with any K-High or higher
Fold with Q-High or lower

vs 2-8
Bet 2X with JJ-AKQ or higher
Bet 1X with any 44 pair or higher vs 3-8
Bet 1X with any 22 pair or higher vs 2
Otherwise FOLD

The above strategy for when to BET 1X vs 2-8 can be improved significantly and would probably reduce the House Edge to something very close to the value of 1.600% that is said to be in the math report.

Why would 22 vs. a 2 be okay to raise, but not 33 vs. a Dealer 3?

My initial thinking would be to raise 1X vs. 2-8 if your pair is the same or higher than the Dealer's upcard (and maybe even if you have an Ace+face card and one of the other three of the dealer's upcards as a singleton).

How does a 44 vs. a dealer 8 generate more winners than losers? You will definitely face a 7 card hand in that situation.

Quote: Ayecarumba

How does a 44 vs. a dealer 8 generate more winners than losers? You will definitely face a 7 card hand in that situation.

It only needs to win 20% of the time to make it worth playing vs folding. If you fold, you are folding 2 units, so your EV must be better than -2.

Assuming a 20% chance of winning, EV=0.2*2 - 0.8*3 = -2.

Quote: Ayecarumba

Why would 22 vs. a 2 be okay to raise, but not 33 vs. a Dealer 3?

My initial thinking would be to raise 1X vs. 2-8 if your pair is the same or higher than the Dealer's upcard (and maybe even if you have an Ace+face card and one of the other three of the dealer's upcards as a singleton).

How does a 44 vs. a dealer 8 generate more winners than losers? You will definitely face a 7 card hand in that situation.

You are definitely correct on 33 vs a 3 - and I was going to change that for the strategy that I would suggest that the Wizard post. At the time of the calculation I quoted, we were just using an approximate strategy while we debugged our simulator code and we were lazy about how many rules we put in the code. The rules for 22 vs 2 and 33 vs 3, etc. can only improve your EV by a small amount because those hands are relatively infrequent. But you are definietly correct, I think it is better to hit 33 vs 3, than to fold it.

Ignoring ties, you can think of the the criteria for BET 1X as: player hand must win 20% of the time. Given a fresh deck, The dealer's 7 card hand will be No Pair/High Card about 16.8% of the time, and with an 8 upcard the player needs a pair of 4s to be able to beat the dealer at least 20% of the time..

The criteria to BET 2X is that the player must win 50% of the time (ignoring ties) because that makes the Play bet a positive EV bet.

You may quote the strategy and use my real name: Gordon Michaels. It wiould be an honor to be credited for something on the WOO site -sort of a bucket list goal for me, lol.

Per the above post, you might wish to consider changing the BET 1X threshold vs 3 to be a pair of 3s, rather than a pair of 4s. We have simulated Discard Inferno with that change in strategy over 10 million trials and get about the HE that I quoted previously and a microscopically higher HE with Fold 33 vs 3.

Quote: gordonm888

You may quote the strategy and use my real name: Gordon Michaels. It wiould be an honor to be credited for something on the WOO site -sort of a bucket list goal for me, lol.

Thank you! Your strategy is now up. The site does not have much math or strategy content that wasn't developed by me or JB so welcome to a very small club.