Super Three Card

I just noticed a new game called Super Three Card at the Rampart casino today. It is listed neither as field trial game nor on the Galaxy Gaming web site, which owns it. It was closed at the time, but I grabbed a tiny rule card and wrote down the pay tables.

Here are scans of both sides of the rule card.



It is basically a cross between Three Card Poker and Ultimate Texas Hold 'Em.

Here is the pay table for the Odds bet, which is the equivalent to the Blind bet in Ultimate Texas Hold 'Em (a very negative EV mandated side bet).

Mini Royal: 100 to 1
Suited three of a kind: 50 to 1
Straight flush: 15 to 1
Three of a kind: 5 to 1
Straight: 3 to 1
Suited pair: 2 to 1
Flush: 1 to 1
Jacks or better: 1 to 1

The Big Hand Bonus I think works like the Trips bet in Ultimate Texas Hold 'Em, a bet based on the player hand only. Here is the Rampart pay table.

Three suited aces: 500 to 1
Mini Royal: 150 to 1
Suited three of a kind: 100 to 1
Straight flush: 50 to 1
Three of a kind: 30 to 1
Straight: 6 to 1
Suited pair: 4 to 1
Flush: 3 to 1

There is also a progressive $1 "red light" side bet. The jackpot was at $5173.56 at the time was there this morning (Jan 30, 2018).

Three suited aces or Mini Royal: Jackpot
Suited three of a kind: $125
Straight flush: $25
Three of a kind: $20
Straight: $6
Flush: $2

The big questions I have on the rules are the number of decks (it's clearly more than two if a suited three of a kind is possible) and whether the singleton has to be in the same suit as a "suited pair."

Once I get more information, I'll update these rules.

The question for the poll is would you play Super Three Card?

Unless they changed it from G2E, the mini royal gets shafted in the progressive.

https://mobile.twitter.com/GalaxyGamingLV/status/1050075001393635328

Quote: tringlomane

Unless they changed it from G2E, the mini royal gets shafted in the progressive.

Thanks. The Rampart pay table is a bit different.

God I love new games. They're the best thing about this site. I even enjoy examining crappy new games (see Wheel of Fun), like a movie buff who's acquired a taste for low budget horror films.

This game, however, seems pretty good. Good enough to where I hope someone crunches the numbers over how to play your two up-cards against the dealer's one. On the other hand, I've found that games and side bets by Galaxy usually tilt towards the house too much for my tastes.

Our friends at Galaxy Gaming were kind enough to let me see their math report. I still plan to analyze it, but here is a preview based on the BMM math.

For the Rampart pay table with six decks, the house edge is 2.57% and the element of risk is 0.93%.

The Rampart Big Hand Bonus house edge with six decks is 7.46%.

The report does not mention the Progressive bet. That is probably something they carried over from another game.

Quote: Wizard

Our friends at Galaxy Gaming were kind enough to let me see their math report. I still plan to analyze it, but here is a preview based on the BMM math.

For the Rampart pay table with six decks, the house edge is 2.57% and the element of risk is 0.93%.

The Rampart Big Hand Bonus house edge with six decks is 7.46%.

The report does not mention the Progressive bet. That is probably something they carried over from another game.

Their progressive system is standalone and has it's own math. Casino can make some choices, but it's usually about a 20% or 25% hold.


ZCore13

I have the start of a Super Three Card page. So far it just has the rules.

I have taken my Super Three Card page about as far as I can, based on the BMM report kindly shared with me by Galaxy.

As always, I welcome all comments and questions.

I'm guessing that a strategy section will be added later if the game takes hold. Any offhand advise for now? Such as play a Q/7 or better but fold if the dealer's upcard beats your non-paired high card (assuming no possible straight, flush or straight flush)?

Quote: Gialmere

I'm guessing that a strategy section will be added later if the game takes hold. Any offhand advise for now? Such as play a Q/7 or better but fold if the dealer's upcard beats your non-paired high card (assuming no possible straight, flush or straight flush)?

Yes, I'll write up a strategy if the game talks hold. Most new games never get far. Your hypothetical situation is a tough call, I don't know what to say there.

Do you remember if this game at the Rampart was dealt from a continuous shuffler? I think you would need a continuous shuffle after every deal. That's almost an inherent feature of poker variant games involving 6-8 decks. If you dealt from a six-deck shoe to a cut card at some penetration, that would be wild.

Quote: gordonm888

Do you remember if this game at the Rampart was dealt from a continuous shuffler? I think you would need a continuous shuffle after every deal. That's almost an inherent feature of poker variant games involving 6-8 decks. If you dealt from a six-deck shoe to a cut card at some penetration, that would be wild.

Texas shootout (by Galaxy Gaming) was a 6 deck Texas Holdem game dealt from a shoe while six other decks shuffled. Same as Blackjack.


ZCore13

Hi, I've been looking at this and after using the table you gave on page 1 have now moved onto the known as Pay Table 1 ( https://wizardofodds.com/games/super-three-card/ ).

I've also run a simulation, playing everything but looking for the types of hands that should fold and get very similar figures to those I've calculated. I'll probably look at a brute force method and see what this shows.

/COL]	House Edge	Fold %
Calculated - Pay Table 1	5.532%	25.486%
Simulation - Pay Table 1	5.548%	25.414%
Calculated - Pay Table 3	5.761%	26.124%
Simulation - Pay Table 3	5.777%	26.217%

I've possibly got the same misunderstanding (probably one of the rules somewhere) in both the calculation and simulation.

As an aside it gives a strategy of playing all suited cards, folding unsuited A7, K7, Q7 or lower against A K Q through to playing any possible straight draw or 9x against a 2. fwiw one interesing boundary case it gave was playing 10 6 vs 8 where you folded unless the suit of the 6 matched dealer's.

PS I'm guessing I'm misreading "Suited Pair" as Pair with Flush rather than two identical cards (matched pair, but not trips) and any other card. It probably means you play more unsuited connected cards (e.g. KQ vs A) and so reduces the fold rate a small bit.

Thanks for the work CP. It's interesting to see the basic Three Card Poker strategy getting modified based on the three cards showing. Hmm... you're house edge numbers are roughly twice those of the Wizard.

The numbers were due to my misunderstanding of "Suited Pair". I've run some simulations whereby a Suited Pair beats a flush and got closer to those numbers (HE=2.536%) but I'm still trying to get some figures (and a more detailed strategy) using a calculation.

Quote: Gialmere

I'm guessing that a strategy section will be added later if the game takes hold. Any offhand advise for now? Such as play a Q/7 or better but fold if the dealer's upcard beats your non-paired high card (assuming no possible straight, flush or straight flush)?

I have a new "hand evaluator" under development for 3 Card Fury. It is still being checked out and this early version is very labor-intensive to do a calculation. It may have errors in it. Anyway, I performed a small number of calculations to scope raising a Q/7 (unsuited).


Qs/7h v Jc_____ EV = -0.9093

Qs/7h v Qc____ EV = -1.4137

Js/8h v Tc____ EV = -1.11488

Js/8h v 2c____ EV = -0.93619

The criterion for raise or making the Play bet is to have an EV< -1.0.

I suspect the criteria for Raise on player hands that are unsuited, unpaired and No Straight Draw is:

Raise with
J/X: when Dealer's card is <X
Q/X: when dealer's card is < Q (i.e., 2-J)
K/X: when dealer's card is < K
A/X: when dealer's card is < A, also A/J vs A

Always Fold a hand that is 10/X or lower, and any other unsuited, unconnected, unpaired hand not shown above.
************************************************
There may be some exceptions that I haven't analyzed/thought of.

I now agree exactly with the Wizard's House Edge and Fold percentage. Here is the strategy (please accept any typographical errors as I've copied the details across).

	Fold unsuited	easy straight draws	hard straight draws
A	A7 or less	Some easy (QJ, JT, T9 but not KQ or 87 thru 32)	A3 A2
K	K6 or less	Most easy (QJ thru 43; but not 32)	none
Q	Q7 or less	ALL easy	none
J	J7 or less	ALL easy	none
10	T7 or less	ALL easy	97
9	96 or less	ALL easy	87 75 64
8	96 or less	ALL easy	ALL possible
7	96 or less	ALL easy	ALL possible
6	96 or less	ALL easy	ALL possible
5	95 or less	ALL easy	ALL possible
4	95 or less	ALL easy	ALL possible
3	92 or less	ALL easy	ALL possible
2	85 or less	ALL easy	ALL possible

Note: Play any straight draw which is not folded as per column one, e.g. play 98 vs 9.
Note: This is against pay table 1, against pay table 3 you also fold some flush draws (e.g. K4 vs A).

Quote: gordonm888

I have a new "hand evaluator" under development for 3 Card Fury. It is still being checked out and this early version is very labor-intensive to do a calculation. It may have errors in it. Anyway, I performed a small number of calculations to scope raising a Q/7 (unsuited).


Qs/7h v Jc_____ EV = -0.9093

Qs/7h v Qc____ EV = -1.4137

Js/8h v Tc____ EV = -1.11488

Js/8h v 2c____ EV = -0.93619

The criterion for raise or making the Play bet is to have an EV< -1.0.

I suspect the criteria for Raise on player hands that are unsuited, unpaired and No Straight Draw is:

Raise with
J/X: when Dealer's card is <X
Q/X: when dealer's card is < Q (i.e., 2-J)
K/X: when dealer's card is < K
A/X: when dealer's card is < A, also A/J vs A

Always Fold a hand that is 10/X or lower, and any other unsuited, unconnected, unpaired hand not shown above.
************************************************
There may be some exceptions that I haven't analyzed/thought of.

Wow! Thank You G8! I'm not one of the mathletes here so I'm just amazed at how one of the simplest casino game strategies (raise with Q-6-4 or better, the end) can become so complicated (in a fascinating way) by simply turning one player card down and one dealer card up.

Quote: charliepatrick

I now agree exactly with the Wizard's House Edge and Fold percentage. Here is the strategy (please accept any typographical errors as I've copied the details across).

	Fold unsuited	[]easy straight draws	hard straight draws
A	A7 or less	Some easy (QJ, JT, T9 but not KQ or 87 thru 32)	A3 A2
K	K6 or less	Most easy (QJ thru 43; but not 32)	none
Q	Q7 or less	ALL easy	none
J	J7 or less	ALL easy	none
10	T7 or less	ALL easy	97
9	96 or less	ALL easy	87 75 64
8	96 or less	ALL easy	ALL possible
7	96 or less	ALL easy	ALL possible
6	96 or less	ALL easy	ALL possible
5	95 or less	ALL easy	ALL possible
4	95 or less	ALL easy	ALL possible
3	92 or less	ALL easy	ALL possible
2	85 or less	ALL easy	ALL possible

Note: Play any straight draw which is not folded as per column one, e.g. play 98 vs 9.
Note: This is against pay table 1, against pay table 3 you also fold some flush draws (e.g. K4 vs A).

Wow! Same response as above but this time thank you CP! Some of the quirks on the chart are fascinating. I love this stuff!

Quote: gordonm888

...Js/8h v Tc____ EV = -1.11488....

One of the big differences in this game is that if your third card is an identical one to one you already have then you make a Suited Pair. This beats a normal flush and affects many drawing decisions.
In the case you give
Jh 8d vs Ts I got the EV = -0.652032.
Js 8h vs Ts I got the EV = -0.650020.
Jh 8s vs Ts I got the EV = -0.647632.

(My latest simulation had an EV of -0.6448 for any unsuited J8 vs T, still got a HE=2.534% Fold=22.868% running 1 Bn hands.)

Quote: charliepatrick

One of the big differences in this game is that if your third card is an identical one to one you already have then you make a Suited Pair. This beats a normal flush and affects many drawing decisions.
In the case you give
Jh 8d vs Ts I got the EV = -0.652032.
Js 8h vs Ts I got the EV = -0.650020.
Jh 8s vs Ts I got the EV = -0.647632.

(My latest simulation had an EV of -0.6448 for any unsuited J8 vs T, still got a HE=2.534% Fold=22.868% running 1 Bn hands.)

You are correct that I did not consider that a suited pair will beat a flush or a higher unsuited pair. That is because the Wizard's WOO page says:

2. Three-card poker hands are ranked as follows:
Royal flush (suited A-K-Q)
Suited three of a kind
Straight flush
Three of a kind (unsuited)
Straight
Flush
Pair
Ace high or less
***************************
Thus, even though I credited a suited pair as having a payout of 2 on the Odds Bet if it wins, I did not evaluate, for example, a suited 2/2 pair as beating an unsuited 7/7 pair or a three card flush hand. I assume you are correct if your numbers match up with the Wizard's. This means that the poker-hand rankings on the Wizard's WOO page is in error.

Also, nowhere on the game demo does it indicate that a suited pair will win vs a normal flush or higher unsuited pair but lose against a straight. Charlie, can you give me a reference for that rule/poker hand ranking?

Quote: gordonm888

...Also, nowhere on the game demo does it indicate that a suited pair will win vs a normal flush or higher unsuited pair but lose against a straight. Charlie, can you give me a reference for that rule/poker hand ranking?

The only clue is that on https://wizardofodds.com/games/super-three-card/ in all the paytables the "Suited Pair" or "player wins with Suited Pair" comes above the line about flushes and also pays out a bigger Odds bonus than a flush in PayTables 2 and 3. I don't know how it affects the game if it still pays the bonus but loses to a flush but guess you wouldn't get so many combinations in Wizard's analysis (I've done it a different way so don't get a breakdown by winning hand value).

Quote: gordonm888

I have a new "hand evaluator" under development for 3 Card Fury.

You mean Super Three Card, but I’m glad my game has stuck in your head :)

Quote: charliepatrick

The only clue is that on https://wizardofodds.com/games/super-three-card/ in all the paytables the "Suited Pair" or "player wins with Suited Pair" comes above the line about flushes and also pays out a bigger Odds bonus than a flush in PayTables 2 and 3. I don't know how it affects the game if it still pays the bonus but loses to a flush but guess you wouldn't get so many combinations in Wizard's analysis (I've done it a different way so don't get a breakdown by winning hand value).

Of course, okay. Thanks for pointing that out. That certainly improves the win % of hands with suited pairs.

If this game is indeed dealt from a shoe to a penetration determined by a cut card, the House Edge would be significantly greater than shown. The player has a lot of equity in the prospect of making high pairs and suited pairs and those hands will become less frequent with penetration -especially suited pairs!

Quote: mrsuit31

You mean Super Three Card, but I’m glad my game has stuck in your head :)

LOL, I am getting these new 3-card games confused. I do think 3 Card Fury is an unusually good game, good luck with it!

Quote: gordonm888

LOL, I am getting these new 3-card games confused. I do think 3 Card Fury is an unusually good game, good luck with it!

Thank you sir!

Quote: gordonm888

Do you remember if this game at the Rampart was dealt from a continuous shuffler? I think you would need a continuous shuffle after every deal. That's almost an inherent feature of poker variant games involving 6-8 decks. If you dealt from a six-deck shoe to a cut card at some penetration, that would be wild.

I still have never seen it open and it's not listed on Gaming's web site. Very odd.

Quote: Wizard

I still have never seen it open and it's not listed on Gaming's web site. Very odd.

It’s apparently an old game they acquired. It was seemingly formally owned by big bet gaming and was approved a few years ago in 2015.

NGCB SUPER THREE CARD RULES OF PLAY

If you search the approved games rules (not on the pdf, but on the alphabetical link choices) you will see the approval date and find the approval letter I linked to above.

This is part of the UNLV portfolio acquisition.

Quote: mrsuit31

It’s apparently an old game they acquired. It was seemingly formally owned by big bet gaming and was approved a few years ago in 2015.

Good detective work there, thank you.

Quote: gordonm888

Of course, okay. Thanks for pointing that out. That certainly improves the win % of hands with suited pairs.

If this game is indeed dealt from a shoe to a penetration determined by a cut card, the House Edge would be significantly greater than shown. The player has a lot of equity in the prospect of making high pairs and suited pairs and those hands will become less frequent with penetration -especially suited pairs!

Just wanted to chime in and say that this game has made it to Tunica. A friend and I played a 12+ hour session of it on the first night of the table being open. The floor was teaching the dealers how to deal it and essentially the players and dealers were learning it at the same time. Suited pairs beating a flush and generally identifying suited pairs tripped everyone up.

The version that the Gold Strike has is non-progressive and is using 6 decks dealt out of a regular shoe just like blackjack. Since I didn't see this forum thread until after I got back, we couldn't find a strategy for the game so we made up one anecdotally using a mixed strategy derived from Mississippi stud and Ultimate Texas Hold 'Em. We also tracked the count of remaining Aces and Kings in the shoe because all we were trying to do was make a high card hand that on average beat the dealers random hand. Actually getting a pair or better was just a plus.

Overall I like the game and I would like to think that if some type of high/low system was implemented, the game could be beatable.