Old gambling card game I dont know the name of.

I was listioning to a book on audio...

and it mentioned a game- which I dont know if there is even any referance to it anymore.

The dealer deals out the cards of a 52-card tradition deck- and he has 13 spaces marked out on the table- A-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-j-q-k

The dealer wins if he deals out a card on its designated space.. if he goes all 13 spaces without it happening then the player wins. I think it was an even-money win- when the dealer looses the next player became the dealer.

Faro has that layout, but as I understand it, was not played the way you describe.

This sounds like a prop bet that a big poker player used to earn some money... maybe Daniel Negreanu? I even want to say I might have seen this discussed on WoO, but I couldn't find it right away.

The prop bet works similarly: Deal the cards from a deck face up one at a time, saying the ranks in order as you turn each card, "Ace, two, three..." and cycling around from King to Ace. If you turn up a card that matches the rank you say aloud, you lose. Get through the entire deck and you win.

If I remember correctly, the odds of making it through the whole deck are around 10-1, so if you can find a sucker that'll take even money on it, play all day... but only if you're the dealer.

Quote: Dween

... If I remember correctly, the odds of making it through the whole deck are around 10-1, so if you can find a sucker that'll take even money on it, play all day... but only if you're the dealer.

I'm either too lazy or too weak at math to calculate the true probability. My easy-but-not-at-all-reliable shortcut technique suggests it's a bit worse than 60 to 1 against getting all the way through the deck, but I don't think that is what Malaru was suggesting -- I think the game described in the original post only required getting through the first 13 cards. My same faulty technique suggests something closer to 1.8 to 1 against being successful at that.

Quote: Wizard of Odds

I was at Foxwoods the other day, watching the final two tables of the Foxwoods Poker Classic. When Vince Van Patten (one of the World Poker Tour hosts) came in to watch, he started making all kinds of prop bets with some of the poker pros who were hanging around. He was offering anyone 20 to 1 if they could flip through an entire deck of cards cycling through the ranks and saying aloud while peeling each card Ace, 2, 3, 4, and so on up to King and starting again at Ace without ever having the card they're announcing come up. Nobody made it all the way through and Vince won a few hundred dollars in about 10 minutes before everybody gave up. I know this has to be possible, but I have a suspicion Vince has quite the hustle going offering only 20 to 1 on this. What are the odds of actually getting through the whole deck? – Matt from New Britain

A simple way to estimate the probabiity of winning is to assume that every card has a 12/13 probability of not matching the stated rank. To win this bet, the victim would have to do this successfully 52 times. The probability of 52 wins is (12/13)52 = 1.56%. A fair price to pay would be 63.2 to 1. At 20 to 1 Vince had a 67.3% advantage (ouch!).

Accoring to G.M., who is a better mathematician than I am, the actual probabiliy is 1.6232727%. The reason for the difference is the outcome of each pick is positively correlated to previous picks.July 17, 2007
.

WoE: Thanks for finding the WoO answer. It seems that my shortcut was the same as that used by the Wizard -- I just said "a bit worse than 60 to 1" for the full-deck game, while he stated the more-precise "63.2 to 1." The actual answer "according to G.M." was the one I am either too lazy or too weak at math to figure out for myself.

Sense im not near the stats/math wiz some others on this site are- if you did the whole deck- and had to mention the suit as well as the value- how mcuh better is the players edge (ie- making all the way thru the deck without a match)

A thru K spades
A thru K hearts
A thru K clubs
A thru K diamonds

Id imagine this change would actually make something of an advantage of it not happening- but I dont know for sure.

The not-so-reliable shortcut that I mentioned previously suggests 1.74 to 1 against making it through the deck with those rules. Leave it to whoever G.M. is to give the true answer.

I get 2.74-to-1 not counting in the positive correlation.

Chance of not matching the rank and suit = 51 out of 52

To do this 52 times in a row = (51/52)^52 = 0.36431352

1/0.36431352 = 2.74

So, if you are getting 3-1 it might be worth a shot.

Quote: Ayecarumba

I get 2.74-to-1 not counting in the positive correlation.

Chance of not matching the rank and suit = 51 out of 52

To do this 52 times in a row = (51/52)^52 = 0.36431352

1/0.36431352 = 2.74

So, if you are getting 3-1 it might be worth a shot.

I think that should be "2.74 for 1" not "to 1". That's how I came up with 1.74 to 1. And that would make a 3 to 1 payout quite attractive. Even a 2 to 1 (3 for 1) payout.