michael99000
Joined: Jul 10, 2010
• Posts: 2112
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
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
• Posts: 23301
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.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
gordonm888
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
• Posts: 3189
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
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
• Posts: 23301
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?
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
• Posts: 23301
Thanks for this post from:
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.

It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
gordonm888
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
• Posts: 3189
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
Joined: Jul 10, 2010
• Posts: 2112
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
Joined: May 10, 2011
• Posts: 1893
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
Joined: Jul 26, 2010
• Posts: 964
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
Joined: May 10, 2011
• Posts: 1893
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.