Gialmere
Gialmere
  • Threads: 45
  • Posts: 2973
Joined: Nov 26, 2018
Thanked by
MrCasinoGames
August 8th, 2019 at 5:34:38 PM permalink


A new game called "Twisted 21" has just started a field trial at the Rio. It's from a small company called 21 Stud Gaming but there are no rules listed on their website. They also have a game called "Twisted 21 Stud" from several years ago but again, their website offers no particulars.

Anyways, if one of you Vegas locals happens to be near the Rio, could you pick up a rack card of "Twisted 21" and maybe get a picture of the layout? It would be appreciated.
Last edited by: Gialmere on Aug 8, 2019
Have you tried 22 tonight? I said 22.
Switch
Switch
  • Threads: 12
  • Posts: 934
Joined: Apr 29, 2010
August 8th, 2019 at 7:04:48 PM permalink
From what I see in the video, '21 Stud' could be renamed '2-card War'.
Gialmere
Gialmere
  • Threads: 45
  • Posts: 2973
Joined: Nov 26, 2018
August 8th, 2019 at 8:09:28 PM permalink
Quote: Switch

From what I see in the video, '21 Stud' could be renamed '2-card War'.


Yeah, there seems to be a mini trend of designers trying to create more passive version of blackjack. Note the Wizard's recent thread on the "21 Bet" (which could be called blackarat).
Last edited by: Gialmere on Aug 9, 2019
Have you tried 22 tonight? I said 22.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
Thanked by
Gialmere
August 8th, 2019 at 9:00:11 PM permalink
I just played it earlier this evening. I'll at least write up the rules tomorrow morning. Meanwhile, briefly, it's blackjack, but both player and dealer are limited to a five-card hand. Blackjack pays 6-5. Player not allowed to split. I don't see that they give the player anything in exchange for taking away splitting. There is a side bet, but I will have to analyze it comment on the value.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 8th, 2019 at 9:05:42 PM permalink
I just watched the video and that is to a different game.

As an admin, I would like permission to remove the video, to avoid confusing people.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
Gialmere
Gialmere
  • Threads: 45
  • Posts: 2973
Joined: Nov 26, 2018
August 8th, 2019 at 9:15:41 PM permalink
Done. Looking forward to your comments.
Have you tried 22 tonight? I said 22.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
Thanked by
MrCasinoGames
August 9th, 2019 at 4:52:05 AM permalink
Here are the rules at least, as I understand them. Note the two rules I'm unsure about.

Twisted 21

Here is some initial analysis. Not counting the Twisted Stud Bonus, the house edge on the Stud Bonus side bet is 8.90%.

I get the probability of a Twisted Stud Bonus at 0.009105181, if aces are always counted as one. Given a Twisted Stud pays 20 to 1, that would push the return way over 100%. So, I'm thinking maybe aces count as 11 for purposes of a Twisted Stud, unless it would cause the hand to go over 21 points, as in blackjack.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 9th, 2019 at 4:59:55 AM permalink
If aces count as 11, as long as not causing the total to go over 21, I get the probability of Twisted Stud to be 0.008428. Either way it would seem to indicate a player advantage. Hmmmm.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
DogHand
DogHand
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 1611
Joined: Sep 24, 2011
Thanked by
gordonm888
August 9th, 2019 at 6:01:45 AM permalink
Wiz,

The payouts on your Twisted 21 page are incorrect: 500:1 for Jacks or Better?

Dog Hand
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 9th, 2019 at 7:45:38 AM permalink
Quote: DogHand

The payouts on your Twisted 21 page are incorrect: 500:1 for Jacks or Better?



Oops. Just fixed it.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
michael99000
michael99000
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 2113
Joined: Jul 10, 2010
August 9th, 2019 at 8:38:34 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

Oops. Just fixed it.



Minor typo , I think ..

In step 8, change “put” to point.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 9th, 2019 at 9:14:31 AM permalink
This is very tentative, but for the base game I'm getting a house edge of 3.27%, using a modified blackjack program I have.

No considering the rule against splitting or the five-card limit to both player and dealer, my house edge calculator gets 1.40%. My list of rule variations says not being allowed to split costs 0.57%. That would bring up to 1.97%. So that 3.27% may not be right. It's possible the five card limit hurts the player more than the dealer, as it doesn't affect the dealer if the player already busted.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
gordonm888
Administrator
gordonm888
  • Threads: 60
  • Posts: 5128
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
August 9th, 2019 at 10:40:46 AM permalink
My instincts are that something is wrong on the Twisted Stud probabilities for the stud bonus bet - perhaps you are not limiting the five card hands to 16 and below?
So many better men, a few of them friends, are dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things live on, and so do I.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 9th, 2019 at 11:36:32 AM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

My instincts are that something is wrong on the Twisted Stud probabilities for the stud bonus bet - perhaps you are not limiting the five card hands to 16 and below?



So you're saying the player has to get the poker value AND 16 points or less? How would a royal flush be possible then?
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
Thanked by
Gialmere
August 9th, 2019 at 11:50:19 AM permalink
Here is the rule card, for what it's worth. It doesn't do a good job of clearing up the ambiguous rules.

"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
gordonm888
Administrator
gordonm888
  • Threads: 60
  • Posts: 5128
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
August 9th, 2019 at 12:01:58 PM permalink
The rules you've posted say that the Stud BONUS wager pays if "your five card hand is a pair of jacks or better OR the sum of the Player's cards is 16 or less" - the latter criteria is the "Twisted Stud" hand.

My reaction is that it seems unlikely to me that a 5 card hand summing up to 16 or less will occur at a frequency of 0.8 -0.9%, which is the probability you mention for the Twisted Stud hand in your earlier post.

BTW, your payoff table in the WOO article still has a glitch. The payoff values for a Twisted Stud and a Flush are reversed.
So many better men, a few of them friends, are dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things live on, and so do I.
michael99000
michael99000
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 2113
Joined: Jul 10, 2010
August 9th, 2019 at 12:05:18 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

This is very tentative, but for the base game I'm getting a house edge of 3.27%, using a modified blackjack program I have.

No considering the rule against splitting or the five-card limit to both player and dealer, my house edge calculator gets 1.40%. My list of rule variations says not being allowed to split costs 0.57%. That would bring up to 1.97%. So that 3.27% may not be right. It's possible the five card limit hurts the player more than the dealer, as it doesn't affect the dealer if the player already busted.



So if I have a hand like A2345 or JJ222 , how do they determine which of the payouts I get? They’d both qualify for twisted stud and a poker hand payout . In one case the poker hand payout is higher, and in the other the twisted stud payout is higher
CrystalMath
CrystalMath
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 1911
Joined: May 10, 2011
August 9th, 2019 at 1:05:30 PM permalink
Quote: michael99000

Quote: Wizard

This is very tentative, but for the base game I'm getting a house edge of 3.27%, using a modified blackjack program I have.

No considering the rule against splitting or the five-card limit to both player and dealer, my house edge calculator gets 1.40%. My list of rule variations says not being allowed to split costs 0.57%. That would bring up to 1.97%. So that 3.27% may not be right. It's possible the five card limit hurts the player more than the dealer, as it doesn't affect the dealer if the player already busted.



So if I have a hand like A2345 or JJ222 , how do they determine which of the payouts I get? They’d both qualify for twisted stud and a poker hand payout . In one case the poker hand payout is higher, and in the other the twisted stud payout is higher



I would assume that you only receive the better pay, not both. If I designed the game, that's what I would do.
I heart Crystal Math.
ChesterDog
ChesterDog
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 1571
Joined: Jul 26, 2010
August 9th, 2019 at 1:06:22 PM permalink
Quote: michael99000

...So if I have a hand like A2345 or JJ222 , how do they determine which of the payouts I get? They’d both qualify for twisted stud and a poker hand payout . In one case the poker hand payout is higher, and in the other the twisted stud payout is higher



I'm sure the payout will be dealer dependent and pit person dependent. Sometimes, the player will be paid for both jacks or better and the twisted stud bonus, and other times only for the higher payout.

Logically, the player should be paid only the higher payout. For example, AAA22 (total of 7) should be paid 75 to 1 for the full house and not 75 + 20. And a flush of A2346 (total of 16) should be paid 20 for the twisted stud bonus and not 15 for the flush or 20+15 for both flush and twisted stud bonus.

Many players will say to the dealer, "You only paid me for the full house. The other dealer pays for both."

Of course, maybe both should be paid. In that case, some dealers and pit people will only pay the higher payout.

Another important question, as the Wizard pointed out, is may aces be counted as one? For example, would AAA23 be called a total of 8 or 18?
Last edited by: ChesterDog on Aug 9, 2019
CrystalMath
CrystalMath
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 1911
Joined: May 10, 2011
August 9th, 2019 at 1:21:00 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

This is very tentative, but for the base game I'm getting a house edge of 3.27%, using a modified blackjack program I have.

No considering the rule against splitting or the five-card limit to both player and dealer, my house edge calculator gets 1.40%. My list of rule variations says not being allowed to split costs 0.57%. That would bring up to 1.97%. So that 3.27% may not be right. It's possible the five card limit hurts the player more than the dealer, as it doesn't affect the dealer if the player already busted.



I get a house edge of 1.939%. Of course, no guarantees this is right either, but it is quite close to your estimate with the rule variations.
I heart Crystal Math.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 9th, 2019 at 1:22:18 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

This is very tentative, but for the base game I'm getting a house edge of 3.27%, using a modified blackjack program I have.



I found an error having to do with the fact that dealer can stop of fewer than 17 points. The 3.27% is incorrect. I'm working on correcting it.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 9th, 2019 at 1:25:21 PM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

The rules you've posted say that the Stud BONUS wager pays if "your five card hand is a pair of jacks or better OR the sum of the Player's cards is 16 or less" - the latter criteria is the "Twisted Stud" hand.



I stand by that. Note it's "or" not "and."

Quote:

My reaction is that it seems unlikely to me that a 5 card hand summing up to 16 or less will occur at a frequency of 0.8 -0.9%, which is the probability you mention for the Twisted Stud hand in your earlier post.



Why do you think that?

Quote:

BTW, your payoff table in the WOO article still has a glitch. The payoff values for a Twisted Stud and a Flush are reversed.



Thanks for the correction there.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 9th, 2019 at 1:29:31 PM permalink
Quote: michael99000

So if I have a hand like A2345 or JJ222 , how do they determine which of the payouts I get? They’d both qualify for twisted stud and a poker hand payout . In one case the poker hand payout is higher, and in the other the twisted stud payout is higher



I'm not sure about the A2345. It would get at least 6. The player would get 26 if the ace counted as 1 and the player got paid for both the straight and Twisted Stud. It would get paid 20 if the ace counted as 1 and the player got paid for the higher of the straight and the Twisted Stud. If the ace counted as 11 it would get paid 6 for sure. This is one where I need clarification on the rules.

JJ222 would get paid 75 for sure, because of the full house. There are 26 points in the hand, which is way over 16, so no Twisted Stud there.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
michael99000
michael99000
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 2113
Joined: Jul 10, 2010
August 9th, 2019 at 2:43:18 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard



JJ222 would get paid 75 for sure, because of the full house. There are 26 points in the hand, which is way over 16, so no Twisted Stud there.



You are right.

I meant to say a hand of 33222, which is a full house that qualifies as a twisted stud.

In which case I’m sure only the full house gets paid

I cannot think of any game or side bet with a tiered payout like this , where the player gets paid for all of the winning hands his cards can produce. Has there been any ?
charliepatrick
charliepatrick
  • Threads: 39
  • Posts: 2967
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
August 9th, 2019 at 3:14:12 PM permalink
I'm assuming that Aces can count as 1 and you don't need a Pair of Jacks or better when scoring 16 or under to win; thus a hand such as 33A45 would win. As I get it over book, I must have misunderstood something. However if the top prizes were 500 etc. and you needed a qualifying poker hand then it would make sense.
HandSuper PermsOther PermsPaysContribution
Super 16
21 708
20
455 868
Royal Flush
4
1 000
4 004
Straight Flush
36
500
18 036
Quads
624
200
125 424
Full House
3 744
75
284 544
Flush
4
5 104
15
81 664
Straight
1 020
9 180
6
64 260
Trips
3 392
51 520
4
257 600
Two Pairs
4 752
118 800
3
475 200
Pair of Jacks thru Kings
253 440
2
760 320
Pair of Aces
4 608
79 872
2
239 616
Pair of Twos
3 840
80 640
Pair of Threes
1 920
82 560
Pair of Fours
768
83 712
Pair of Fives
384
84 096
Pair of Sixes thru Tens
422 400
Nothing
1 020
1 301 520
21 708
2 577 252
0.835 257%
2 598 960
2 766 536

Note: I don't count Super hands, eg 33322, where the payout for the base hand is higher.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 9th, 2019 at 3:49:00 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

I found an error having to do with the fact that dealer can stop of fewer than 17 points. The 3.27% is incorrect. I'm working on correcting it.



After fixing that bug (not to say there aren't more), I'm getting 3.21%. Any other opinions?
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
Gialmere
Gialmere
  • Threads: 45
  • Posts: 2973
Joined: Nov 26, 2018
August 9th, 2019 at 3:50:36 PM permalink
Quote: michael99000

I cannot think of any game or side bet with a tiered payout like this , where the player gets paid for all of the winning hands his cards can produce. Has there been any ?


Yes. The current version of Lunar Poker...

Quote: WOO

If a player's winning hand also contains a second poker combination, then the player will be paid for both combinations, even if the second combination doesn't beat the dealer's hand. For the second combination to qualify, it must contain at least one card which wasn't included in the first winning combination.


...although for most combinations the player is using 6 cards.
Have you tried 22 tonight? I said 22.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 9th, 2019 at 3:53:38 PM permalink
Quote: michael99000

I meant to say a hand of 33222, which is a full house that qualifies as a twisted stud.

In which case I’m sure only the full house gets paid

I cannot think of any game or side bet with a tiered payout like this , where the player gets paid for all of the winning hands his cards can produce. Has there been any ?



Good point. The supervisor and dealer threw around the word "bonus" right and left. I interpret a "bonus" to mean an extra win. Like the Ante bonus in Three Card Poker -- you get it regardless of the rest of the hand outcome.

You're probably right. In which case I would say that "Stud Bonus" is a terrible name for a side bet, because it isn't a "bonus."
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 9th, 2019 at 3:55:14 PM permalink
Quote: charliepatrick


Note: I don't count Super hands, eg 33322, where the payout for the base hand is higher.



What's your table if you do count them?
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 9th, 2019 at 4:19:47 PM permalink
I've analyzed an infinite-deck version of the base game two ways. Here are the results of the house edge:

Spreadsheet: 2.66%
Looping program: 3.24%

So there is an error somewhere. I tend to trust the spreadsheet number more.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 9th, 2019 at 4:36:13 PM permalink
Here are my dealer probabilities in the base game with 999 decks, assuming no blackjack. The dealer up card is along the first row. I post this table because I think starting with the dealer probabilities is a good place to look for agreement.

Total 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ace
Bust 0.345089 0.369178 0.392362 0.414774 0.437694 0.261368 0.244208 0.228113 0.229672 0.189154
1 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
2 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
3 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
4 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
5 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
6 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
7 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
8 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
9 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
10 0.000035 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
11 0.000140 0.000035 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
12 0.001050 0.000490 0.000175 0.000035 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.001011
13 0.002030 0.001190 0.000630 0.000280 0.000105 0.000035 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.001769
14 0.003325 0.002170 0.001330 0.000735 0.000385 0.000175 0.000070 0.000035 0.000000 0.003286
15 0.005390 0.003465 0.002310 0.001435 0.000875 0.000455 0.000245 0.000140 0.000038 0.005460
16 0.008156 0.005531 0.003606 0.002415 0.001610 0.000910 0.000560 0.000350 0.000152 0.008190
17 0.128532 0.125274 0.121740 0.117957 0.114598 0.368443 0.128499 0.119956 0.120698 0.081727
18 0.134832 0.130878 0.126630 0.122511 0.114595 0.137671 0.359270 0.119938 0.120697 0.205127
19 0.129585 0.125974 0.122089 0.117957 0.114598 0.078498 0.128498 0.350730 0.120698 0.205128
20 0.123946 0.120727 0.117188 0.113398 0.110045 0.078499 0.069324 0.119956 0.370681 0.205131
21 0.117891 0.115088 0.111940 0.108503 0.105494 0.073945 0.069326 0.060783 0.037364 0.094015
Total 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 9th, 2019 at 5:31:54 PM permalink
I found a bug in my C++ program. After fixing it, I agree with myself with infinite decks. Changing the number of decks to one, I get a house edge of 2.89% in the base game. Interestingly, the house edge increases as the number of decks decreases.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
CrystalMath
CrystalMath
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 1911
Joined: May 10, 2011
August 9th, 2019 at 9:07:34 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

Here are my dealer probabilities in the base game with 999 decks, assuming no blackjack. The dealer up card is along the first row. I post this table because I think starting with the dealer probabilities is a good place to look for agreement.



I am in 100% agreement with this table.
I heart Crystal Math.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
Thanked by
CrystalMath
August 9th, 2019 at 9:15:04 PM permalink
Quote: CrystalMath

I am in 100% agreement with this table.



Thank you.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
CrystalMath
CrystalMath
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 1911
Joined: May 10, 2011
August 9th, 2019 at 9:25:21 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

I've analyzed an infinite-deck version of the base game two ways. Here are the results of the house edge:

Spreadsheet: 2.66%
Looping program: 3.24%

So there is an error somewhere. I tend to trust the spreadsheet number more.



I get 2.656% with 1000 decks, which looks right in line with your spreadsheet.

I am now at 1.925% with 1 deck. I had an error accounting for the dealer peek, assuming a score of 17 or better.
I heart Crystal Math.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 10th, 2019 at 6:39:58 AM permalink
Quote: CrystalMath

I am now at 1.925% with 1 deck. I had an error accounting for the dealer peek, assuming a score of 17 or better.



Thanks. I will look at my program again, as I get a higher number for one deck. I tend to think you're right.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
Thanked by
CrystalMath
August 10th, 2019 at 9:41:40 AM permalink
Quote: CrystalMath

I am now at 1.925% with 1 deck.



I found a bug where I wasn't removing the initial three cards from the deck array. After correcting for that, we agree.

Thank you!
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
Thanked by
MrCasinoGames
August 10th, 2019 at 1:26:28 PM permalink
As to the Stud Bonus side bet, I learned that a Twisted Stud is ranked as the LOWEST paying hand. For example, AA234 would pay as a high pair, not a Twisted Stud with 13 points. With that understanding, I redid my analysis and get a house edge of 2.49% on the side bet. My Twisted 21 page I believe to now have the correct rules and analysis.

I thank all who helped with this page, either doing math or helping determine the actual rules.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
charliepatrick
charliepatrick
  • Threads: 39
  • Posts: 2967
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
Thanked by
MrCasinoGames
August 10th, 2019 at 1:40:30 PM permalink
Personally I think they would be better off having the "Twisted Stud" paying 10 to 1 as I would be very annoyed to have AA234 while someone else has A2346 and gets paid more.

btw the figures I posted a few days ago were based on a quick look,
Table 1: I have updated the figures for the new rules and agree with wizard's.
Table 2: What would happen if any hand is paid for "Twisted Stud" if that's a better pay out and was 10 to 1.
HandThese rulesOther PermsPaysContribution
Super 16
7 932
7 932
20
166 572
Royal Flush
4
1 000
4 004
Straight Flush
36
500
18 036
Quads
624
200
125 424
Full House
3 744
75
284 544
Flush
5 108
15
81 728
Straight
10 200
6
71 400
Trips
54 912
4
274 560
Two Pairs
123 552
3
494 208
Pair of Jacks thru Kings
253 440
2
760 320
Pair of Aces
84 480
2
253 440
Pair of Twos
3 840
80 640
Pair of Threes
1 920
82 560
Pair of Fours
768
83 712
Pair of Fives
384
84 096
Pair of Sixes thru Tens
422 400
Nothing
1 020
1 301 520
7 932
2 591 028
0.305 199%
2 598 960
2 534 236
97.509 619%


...and these are what it would be if "Twisted Stud" were to pay 10 to 1.
HandThese rulesOther PermsPaysContribution
Super 16
23 256
23 256
10
255 816
Royal Flush
4
1 000
4 004
Straight Flush
36
500
18 036
Quads
624
200
125 424
Full House
3 744
75
284 544
Flush
5 108
15
81 728
Straight
1 020
9 180
6
64 260
Trips
3 264
51 648
4
258 240
Two Pairs
4 896
118 656
3
474 624
Pair of Jacks thru Kings
253 440
2
760 320
Pair of Aces
6 144
78 336
2
235 008
Pair of Twos
3 840
80 640
Pair of Threes
1 920
82 560
Pair of Fours
768
83 712
Pair of Fives
384
84 096
Pair of Sixes thru Tens
422 400
Nothing
1 020
1 301 520
23 256
2 575 704
0.894 819%
2 598 960
2 562 004
98.578 047%
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22294
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
Thanked by
ForagerRS
August 10th, 2019 at 1:52:11 PM permalink
That rule change was implemented within hours of this discussion. Coincidence? You decide.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 10th, 2019 at 1:57:54 PM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

That rule change was implemented within hours of this discussion. Coincidence? You decide.



To quote Bugs Bunny, I think it's a coinkydink (sp?)
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22294
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
August 10th, 2019 at 2:34:04 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

To quote Bugs Bunny, I think it's a coinkydink (sp?)

Said the guy who thought luscious sweets obscure Pine Street reference was all just a big coincidence.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
August 10th, 2019 at 5:07:17 PM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

Said the guy who thought luscious sweets obscure Pine Street reference was all just a big coincidence.



I said might have been. That one was filed under "reasonable doubt."
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22294
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
August 10th, 2019 at 5:18:45 PM permalink
Quote: Wizard

I said might have been. That one was filed under "reasonable doubt."

Key word is REASONABLE
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22294
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
August 10th, 2019 at 6:03:14 PM permalink
FYI. From the customer stand point this is one of the best new table game ideas I have seen in a very long time. It's actually pretty fun to play and everybody seems to love it. Everybody's rooting for everyone else at the table.
The poppies were actually lined up to play it. People are arguing over who was next. People were actually crowding in front of you just so they could get a look at the game. Again these people are ploppies not AP's. One guy hit a 200 to 1, 4 of a kind for 1k.

While I was waiting for a seat I noticed one guy texting with his wife or girlfriend and she was super pissed off he wouldn't leave the game. Her, "I HAD ENOUGH!"

If your recreational player that doesn't mind giving up a little EV, I definitely would play this game if you're looking for something fun to play.

Any information about who made it or the company?
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
skyscanner
skyscanner
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 5
Joined: Aug 12, 2019
August 12th, 2019 at 4:20:49 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

As to the Stud Bonus side bet, I learned that a Twisted Stud is ranked as the LOWEST paying hand. For example, AA234 would pay as a high pair, not a Twisted Stud with 13 points. With that understanding, I redid my analysis and get a house edge of 2.49% on the side bet. My Twisted 21 page I believe to now have the correct rules and analysis.

I thank all who helped with this page, either doing math or helping determine the actual rules.



I played this game tonight. I had A4 then hit A then 3. At this time my BJ hand was worh 19 and I should have stopped, but then the dealer mislead me that if the 5th card were a 7 or less, I would win 20:1 on the side bet. So I turned the 5th card and it was a 3, rendering my blackjack hand a 12, against the dealer's 19. The dealer then handed me 100$ in chips for my 5$ side bet, but then a player at the table argued that he was wrong to award me 20:1 when he should have only awarded me a 3:1 for the 2 pair. The supervisor got involved, he said that I should get 3:1 but, at my insistence that the dealer had msinformed me about the rules, my blackjack hand stands at 19 (he cancelled turning the 5th card).

Anyways, the 20:1 stud bet is only awarded if there is no other lower paid combination (JoB, 2 pair, 3 of a kind, straight, flush). Also, all 5 cards must be turned for the player to receive it. With a four card 12 against the dealer's 6 you should stand, but if you think the 5th card is a 4 or less, you must hit. It depends on how much you bet on your 21 hand versus the stud bet. There were players who just paid the 10$ minimum for the blackjack and wagered way more for the poker hand.
skyscanner
skyscanner
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 5
Joined: Aug 12, 2019
August 12th, 2019 at 4:23:38 AM permalink
Also, I find it inconsistent that the aces forming the Super 16 are counted as 1, but then they are counted as being better then the pair of Jacks which are worth 10 each.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
Thanked by
skyscanner
August 12th, 2019 at 4:36:50 AM permalink
Quote: skyscanner

I played this game tonight. I had A4 then hit A then 3. At this time my BJ hand was worh 19 and I should have stopped, but then the dealer mislead me that if the 5th card were a 7 or less, I would win 20:1 on the side bet. So I turned the 5th card and it was a 3, rendering my blackjack hand a 12, against the dealer's 19. The dealer then handed me 100$ in chips for my 5$ side bet, but then a player at the table argued that he was wrong to award me 20:1 when he should have only awarded me a 3:1 for the 2 pair. The supervisor got involved, he said that I should get 3:1 but, at my insistence that the dealer had msinformed me about the rules, my blackjack hand stands at 19 (he cancelled turning the 5th card).

Anyways, the 20:1 stud bet is only awarded if there is no other lower paid combination (JoB, 2 pair, 3 of a kind, straight, flush). Also, all 5 cards must be turned for the player to receive it. With a four card 12 against the dealer's 6 you should stand, but if you think the 5th card is a 4 or less, you must hit. It depends on how much you bet on your 21 hand versus the stud bet. There were players who just paid the 10$ minimum for the blackjack and wagered way more for the poker hand.



When I played on Thursday and others played on Friday, the player didn't have to hit into all five cards for the Stud Bonus hand to count, the player got use all of them for the poker hand all the time. Either this is a new rule, the dealers were dealing it incorrectly before, or they were dealing it incorrectly to you.

Whatever the case, I would have been angry in your shoes for two reasons:

1. Bad advice from the dealer caused you to lose the blackjack hand.
2. That other player should have kept his mouth shut. I can see correcting a perceived error to help another player, but not to hurt him.

In your shoes, I think I would have complained to Gaming to get the 20 to 1 payout.
Last edited by: Wizard on Aug 12, 2019
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1496
  • Posts: 26626
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
Thanked by
skyscanner
August 12th, 2019 at 4:38:09 AM permalink
Quote: skyscanner

Also, I find it inconsistent that the aces forming the Super 16 are counted as 1, but then they are counted as being better then the pair of Jacks which are worth 10 each.



So do I. Not the best example of good game design, but it does seem to get played well, I give the game that.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
  • Threads: 207
  • Posts: 11008
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
Thanked by
skyscanner
August 12th, 2019 at 6:44:01 AM permalink
Quote: Wizard

Here is the rule card, for what it's worth. It doesn't do a good job of clearing up the ambiguous rules.



Having finally had a chance to read everything, here's my take.

1 - To say the card is "Ambiguous" is being kind. I hold no punches. The rules card sucks. It not only give no indication what a Twisted Stud is, it seems to imply that in the BJ play, you don't pick which card(s) to hit, but must pick how many cards to hit. It seemingly implies that after hitting one card, you could not hit again.

2 - All five cards count towards the Twisted Stud hand, regardless of being used for the BJ hand. First, the Stud Bonus section states, "If your five card hand is ..." Also, consider the alternative. If only shown cards counted, you would never hit your BJ hand. If you've got 16 or less, you'd sacrifice that hand (or hope the dealer busts), just to take the 20-1 payout. If it's 17 or more, basic strategy says to stand.

3 - Aces must count as 1, otherwise, there would be only one very specific hand that qualified for the Twisted Stud payout: 22345=16. Even with aces counting as 1, there aren't a lot of hands that make the Twisted Stud hand.

4 - Players may like the game, but I can see the dealers hating it due to all the additional movements required deal into specific spots for each player, then to turn cards to hit, and then to turn over unhit cards. And I'm sure there will occasionally be confusion and floor intervention required when a player claims the wrong card was flipped over.
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ ————————————————————————————————————— Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
  • Jump to: