Look Ahead Poker
Poll
 | 14 votes (87.5%) | ||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| | 2 votes (12.5%) |
16 members have voted
Yesterday I went to the Rampart casino to check on Super Bowl props and noticed three new video poker games. The first I'll report on is Look Ahead Poker.
The thrust is that if the player pays a three coin fee, then he can see the first card to be dealt on the draw, and may accept it or burn it. I've started a page on the game (click the link), which explains the rules in more detail.
I wrote a program to analyze the game but it takes three days to cycle through all the combinations. You'll have to wait until Sunday for the results of the first game, Double Double bonus. Even then, I'm not sure my program still doesn't have bugs. A sampling of hands has shown returns that seem too high, but it may just be a small sample size problem.
So, please look at what I have so far. As always, I welcome comments, questions, and especially corrections.
The question for the poll is what do you think of the game concept?
In the exampe you provided, I assume the standard play would be to hold the aces, and draw three cards. The first would be the nine of spades, but maybe the third would have been an ace, a pair to the card drawn second, or the case nine? In any case, the payout seems worse, even though the hand improved, because the player paid 8 coins and only "won" 10, the same amount as the five coin payout. I guess winning two units is better than getting your original wager back, but how often is this situation going to come up.
I like the concept of six-card draw-2 poker, especially when I have four to a flush and a high pair, but are the paytables worth it?
I went on my gut in keeping that 9 and holding the other one. After all, in jacks or better, holding a two pair is superior to holding a pair alone.
Quote: AyecarumbaWhat I would like to know is the number of starting hands that having knowledge of the first draw will change a player's draw strategy? My initial guess is that the number is not that high compared to what basic strategy directs a player to do anyway. Is it worth it to trade an unknown drawn card to guarantee a pre-draw face card, or low pair?
I would assume that you would just use the Optimal Strategy and make whatever hold (out of six cards) that has the best EV.
Quote:In the exampe you provided, I assume the standard play would be to hold the aces, and draw three cards. The first would be the nine of spades, but maybe the third would have been an ace, a pair to the card drawn second, or the case nine? In any case, the payout seems worse, even though the hand improved, because the player paid 8 coins and only "won" 10, the same amount as the five coin payout. I guess winning two units is better than getting your original wager back, but how often is this situation going to come up.
Under Nevada law, any type of add-on bet in Video Poker must improve the overall return of the game, or keep it the same, so from an EV standpoint, the game cannot legally be worse. It also seems that the BASE PAY is 7/5 Jacks when not making the BONUS BET and turns into 9/6 Jacks if you are making it with some kind of Bonus (apparently) on the Straight-Flush. In this case, the overall game would have to have a better return than 7/5 JACKS, since that is the base game without the BONUS BET.
Quote:I like the concept of six-card draw-2 poker, especially when I have four to a flush and a high pair, but are the paytables worth it?
Since the Base Game appears to be 7/5 Jacks, I doubt if the overall return is that good, even with the Bonus bet.
Mainly the discussion was had because of possible glitches.
Quote: WizardMy analysis will not show how often the player keeps the Look Ahead card. In playing a short time I found the right decision was usually obvious.
Your hand analyzer could, though, for the most part. It would be especially easy in cases where one card would be discarded regardless.
If the game were 10/7 Double Bonus, for example, your hand analyzer could analyze the hand of A-A-9-9-10 or A-A-9-9-4 (you would discard the four and/or ten, regardless) which returns 1.765957 holding the 2P and 1.763491 just holding the Aces.
Of course, the EV of Four Aces is based on five cards known, rather than six, and the probability of drawing to Four Aces is slightly higher with 46 cards left rather than 47.
NcR(2,2)*NcR(44,1)/NcR(46,3) = 0.0028985507246376816
NcR(2,2)*NcR(45,1)/NcR(47,3) = 0.0027752081406105457
(0.0028985507246376816 * 160) - (0.0027752081406105457 * 160) = 0.01973481344 Difference
1.763491 + 0.01973481344 = 1.78322581344
1.78322581344 v. 1.765957
In this case, I think you would just hold the Pair of Aces because the value of 4OaK went up sufficiently now that you know the Nine (making 2P) is not an Ace. The Full House will be much less likely, but that fact was already considered by the Hand Analyzer on the initial analysis declaring the 2P the slightly better hold.
ZCore13
Quote: Mission146Under Nevada law, any type of add-on bet in Video Poker must improve the overall return of the game, or keep it the same,
Note to say you're wrong, but can you quote the regulation on that? I know it seems to be the case in practice but I wasn't aware it was a law.
Quote: Wizard
Yesterday I went to the Rampart casino to check on Super Bowl props and noticed three new video poker games. The first I'll report on is Look Ahead Poker.
The thrust is that if the player pays a three coin fee, then he can see the first card to be dealt on the draw, and may accept it or burn it. I've started a page on the game (click the link), which explains the rules in more detail.
I wrote a program to analyze the game but it takes three days to cycle through all the combinations. You'll have to wait until Sunday for the results of the first game, Double Double bonus. Even then, I'm not sure my program still doesn't have bugs. A sampling of hands has shown returns that seem too high, but it may just be a small sample size problem.
So, please look at what I have so far. As always, I welcome comments, questions, and especially corrections.
The question for the poll is what do you think of the game concept?
I think your description at WoO is off a little. You really don't get to accept or reject the look ahead card. If you draw any cards, that's the card you get first. You have no choice to reject it. The choice is either draw card(s) and get the look ahead card as your first draw card or stay with the hand you were dealt and don't draw any cards at all.
ZCore13
Quote: WizardNote to say you're wrong, but can you quote the regulation on that? I know it seems to be the case in practice but I wasn't aware it was a law.
I cannot, as I thought it actually had to be higher. DRich corrected me, a few months ago, and said that it can be the same OR higher, so I'm assuming he knows the precise regulation.
Quote: Zcore13
I think your description at WoO is off a little. You really don't get to accept or reject the look ahead card. If you draw any cards, that's the card you get first. You have no choice to reject it. The choice is either draw card(s) and get the look ahead card as your first draw card or stay with the hand you were dealt and don't draw any cards at all.
ZCore13
If that's the case, my post about the Aces & Nines can be completely ignored, you'd hold the Two Pair.
EDIT: Wait, why would it say, "Held," if you effectively have no choice but to hold it?
Quote: Mission146Your hand analyzer could, ...
I addressed your points on my Look Ahead page, saying:
"A reader questioned my decision to hold the two pair, suggesting that maybe holding the aces only would be better. I did the calculations and the expected value of holding the two pair is 13.04 coins, while the aces alone is 7.81.
Using my video poker hand analyzer will not give the correct numbers because after the Look Ahead card, you're drawing into a 46-card deck, not 47. "
Quote: Mission146I cannot, as I thought it actually had to be higher. DRich corrected me, a few months ago, and said that it can be the same OR higher, so I'm assuming he knows the precise regulation.
Did DRich state the regulation?
Quote: WizardDid DRich state the regulation?
Not on that occasion, I'll PM him.
Quote: Zcore13I think your description at WoO is off a little. You really don't get to accept or reject the look ahead card. If you draw any cards, that's the card you get first. You have no choice to reject it. The choice is either draw card(s) and get the look ahead card as your first draw card or stay with the hand you were dealt and don't draw any cards at all.
Are you suggesting that if you reject the Look Ahead card you don't get a draw at all and are stuck with what you were dealt? If that is what you're claiming that, then I'm afraid that one of us is mistaken, and having played the machine, I don't think it is me.
Quote: WizardI addressed your points on my Look Ahead page, saying:
"A reader questioned my decision to hold the two pair, suggesting that maybe holding the aces only would be better. I did the calculations and the expected value of holding the two pair is 13.04 coins, while the aces alone is 7.81.
Using my video poker hand analyzer will not give the correct numbers because after the Look Ahead card, you're drawing into a 46-card deck, not 47. "
I understand that, but if it were a Bonus variant of some sort, my point is that you could analyze a five card hand based on 2P and a card you would discard anyway v. the Aces and a card you would discard anyway, such as A-A-9-9-10 (discarding the four).
My example is irrelevant because Quad-Aces has a better return in the Double Bonus version of the game with the Bonus Bet, such that you would hold that anyway.
If you look at my example from Page 1, though, using the analyzer on 10/7 DB, we see that AA99 is the superior of the two holds (narrowly), but if you know the sixth card is not an Ace (because it is a 9) so much is added to the value of the 4OaK that it makes the Pair of Aces only the better hold.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/video-poker/20765-look-ahead-poker/#post427111
Quote: MoosetonThe title of this thread is confusing because it doesn't match the game shown. Look Ahead Poker goes along with what Zcore said above.(and isn't 8coins per play if my memory serves right). Super Look Ahead does have the choice to keep the 6th card or not.
You're right. Here's an IGT page that says, "...Similar to Look Ahead Poker™ except players can keep or burn the next card in the deck after the deal..."
Quote: ChesterDogQuote: MoosetonThe title of this thread is confusing because it doesn't match the game shown. Look Ahead Poker goes along with what Zcore said above.(and isn't 8coins per play if my memory serves right). Super Look Ahead does have the choice to keep the 6th card or not.
You're right. Here's an IGT page that says, "...Similar to Look Ahead Poker™ except players can keep or burn the next card in the deck after the deal..."
Thanks. I never knew there was an ordinary "Look Ahead Poker."
8. If the player chooses to decline the next card, then it will be burned and may not be given to the player on the draw.
9. In addition to the extra three coins paying for the Look Ahead feature, it also bumps up the pay table on some of the higher hands.
As for this game, I like the concept, but I don't like the fact that the paytable needed to be altered significantly up to offer a similar payback to the base paytable. Games with higher flush and straight values become trickier to play. At least none of the flushes are 7 for 1 I guess. I'm guessing if they charged 7 coins, they would have had to lower the paytable a lot though. :(
Quote: Mission146I cannot, as I thought it actually had to be higher. DRich corrected me, a few months ago, and said that it can be the same OR higher, so I'm assuming he knows the precise regulation.
He wrote this in the "Hot Roll" slot thread about a year ago:
Quote: DRichUnless something has changed, in Nevada the payout percentage is not allowed to be lower for a larger bet on the same game. Also, there can not be more than a 4% difference between the worst bet and the best bet on a game. I only bring this up because a game of mine was recently rejected because the minimum bet returned 89% and the max bet returned 94%. I ended up changing the minimum bet payback to 90% and it passed.
It's a good rule in theory...but it also makes me think that "Wheel Poker" violates that rule for some Deuces Wild games, unless it doesn't apply to bonus bets:
https://wizardofodds.com/games/video-poker/tables/wheel-poker/
I also decided to dig through IGTs media flyers if I could get a payback range on the game. Nope, didn't find that. :( But I did find the media sheet for "Hot Roll Poker" tonight, which I might get to play tomorrow at my local casino. Looks like the bonus doesn't improve the return, the "hot roll" feature returns exactly what the base game does. :( But at least they apparently have the paytable ranges to from 96.38% (9/6/4 DB) to 99.96% (APDW or 40/10/6 DDB).
Hot Roll Poker Media Sheet
Also found a media sheet for a novel VP idea, imo. "Flexchange Poker". But it's probably too involved to stay popular. Strategy is definitely unclear from first glance.
Flexchange Poker Media Sheet
Quote: tringlomane
I also decided to dig through IGTs media flyers if I could get a payback range on the game. Nope, didn't find that. :( But I did find the media sheet for "Hot Roll Poker" tonight, which I might get to play tomorrow at my local casino. Looks like the bonus doesn't improve the return, the "hot roll" feature returns exactly what the base game does. :( But at least they apparently have the paytable ranges to from 96.38% (9/6/4 DB) to 99.96% (APDW or 40/10/6 DDB).
Hot Roll Poker Media Sheet
Cool, I must have guessed how the game works right:
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/20392-atlantis-reno-online-vp-tourny/2/#post417946
EDIT: Yup, that's even what your media sheet says.
It takes my computer about 70 hours to cycle through all 1,674,391,363,444,800 combinations on a single core. This has been discussed before, but you can cut down that time by dividing the job over multiple cores. My computer has four cores, for example. I divided the task to three cores, leaving the fourth for everything else I do, which cut down the time by about a third.
Sorry, you're on your own with that.
Edit:
Quote: MoosetonI love the simplified strategy ;)
Strategy
Sorry, you're on your own with that.
Edit:Would using your strategy maker with the values of the hands set at 5/8 of each amount work?
Not sure why you would need to adjust by 5/8ths on the strategy maker. The biggest issue is the addition of the sixth card toward the strategy.
Maybe I'm missing something big. I would think using the payouts from the game's max bet paytable on JB's strategy calculator would be a good first approximation (the return numbers that come out of it won't be right, but that's not important). You still pick the highest value hand available to you from the six cards you see instead of five and paybacks are only based on your final five card hand, right? It wouldn't be perfect obviously because in the cases where you don't take the look-ahead card, returns are based on a 46-card deck stub instead of 47, but I would think that effect does little to change the basic strategy.
Quote: RSStrictly concerning the strategy, adjusting every payout by the same factor does not change the strategy whatsoever. If you multiply everything by 500, or 7, or 0.5, or 1.17639.....the strategy will be the same in each circumstance.
Right...here is the input for DDB with the super look ahead bet. I would think the true strategy would be close to this result from JB's calculator.
https://wizardofodds.com/games/video-poker/strategy/a-1-b-57-c-1-d-0-d-1-d-1-d-3-d-4-d-5-d-9-d-70-d-100-d-200-d-200-d-400-d-150-d-800/
Note, the straight flush payout is ballooned to 150 for 1. That changes the strategy more than anything else.
The difference is that in Look Ahead the player has to bet two extra coins only but is forced to keep the "Look Ahead" card. In Super Look Ahead he has to bet three extra coins but may reject the Look Ahead card.
So, I moved the old content to a new page titled Super Look Ahead and created a new page for Look Ahead Poker.
That said, I welcome your comments, questions, and especially corrections for the new page on Look Ahead Poker.
I seen what a small dottys type place was holding on a multiple multi games VP that had nothing worst than 3% (mostly ok pay tables) including 8/5 bonus poker in all denominations .5 to $5
They were all about 6%.
We need a gamblers union or something.
PS. I'm not talking about this game specifically.
Quote: Wizard
That said, I welcome your comments, questions, and especially corrections for the new page on Look Ahead Poker.
This:
Quote:Games and Pay Tables
After I already completed my analysis of six pay tables found at the Rampart Casino in Las Vegas, IGT kindly provided me a list of all games and pay tables that Super Look Ahead Poker is available in. Thankfully, my results agreed.
The returns indicated in the following tables are based on a full eight-coin bet.
Appears in the Look Ahead page and should be on the Super Look Ahead page.
I wonder if the average player of those "dottys type" machines would be on average much better players than the general public/ tourists crowd playing on the strip. I think they probably are more savvy.Quote: AxelWolfThey are getting greedy making games with average horrible buybacks and difficult strategies. I would love to see what the casino are actually holding on all these.
I seen what a small dottys type place was holding on a multiple multi games VP that had nothing worst than 3% (mostly ok pay tables) including 8/5 bonus poker in all denominations .5 to $5
They were all about 6%.
We need a gamblers union or something.
PS. I'm not talking about this game specifically.
Quote: pewI wonder if the average player of those "dottys type" machines would be on average much better players than the general public/ tourists crowd playing on the strip. I think they probably are more savvy.
My belief is that the regular local video poker players that play at places like Dotty's play about 1% below optimal while "tourists" play 2.5% worse than optimal.
Quote: DRichMy belief is that the regular local video poker players that play at places like Dotty's play about 1% below optimal while "tourists" play 2.5% worse than optimal.
I've seen "locals" hold AWxxx on deuces wild, 77Kxx on bonus poker, and AKQ unsuited on DDB, so I'm sure the casinos have nothing to worry about.
Quote: DRichI just ran some numbers on a small casino that I work with. They have 131 slot machines of which 34 are poker machines. The average hold is 1.2% greater than optimal on the poker machines.
Needs context, though. What is the average return of the VP games combined, assuming Optimal, if you happen to know.
Quote: Mission146Needs context, though. What is the average return of the VP games combined, assuming Optimal, if you happen to know.
It was 98.4% optimal and 97.2% actual.
Quote: Mission146Appears in the Look Ahead page and should be on the Super Look Ahead page.
Thanks. I led me to fixing a mistake but not that. With Super Look Ahead I analyzed it before IGT gave me anything. With Look Ahead it was the other way around.
Quote: Mooseton
Would using your strategy maker with the values of the hands set at 5/8 of each amount work?
I don't know you put that in a spoiler, but the answer is "no." The reason you can't use the strategy maker is not the 5/8 issue but the Look Ahead card. It makes it a totally different game in terms of strategy.
Quote: DRichMy belief is that the regular local video poker players that play at places like Dotty's play about 1% below optimal while "tourists" play 2.5% worse than optimal.
I tend to agree. Dotty's seems to get a lot of hard-core locals. I used to play at the one on Sahara and Rampart a lot and I got the impression they had a very loyal customer base. Also, people would sit and play for hours.
Quote: WizardI don't know you put that in a spoiler,
Sorry. I got excited because I had just learned how to use the spoilers :)
That's interesting. If those numbers are correct then I think it shows that most holds are common sense and all that practice gains a smaller although not inconsequential edge than I would have guessed.Quote: DRichMy belief is that the regular local video poker players that play at places like Dotty's play about 1% below optimal while "tourists" play 2.5% worse than optimal.
Quote: pewThat's interesting. If those numbers are correct then I think it shows that most holds are common sense and all that practice gains a smaller although not inconsequential edge than I would have guessed.
That is true. Most people understand to hold pairs when they exist and to hold high cards when you don't have a pair. In general, which high cards you hold only make a small difference so even if they are wrong it only hurts a tiny amount.
Yeah, I never hold to an inside straight but it probably doesn't matter that much ev wise. I'd rather take my chances with luck, (works for rob singer) after all it's all about the fun right?Quote: DRichThat is true. Most people understand to hold pairs when they exist and to hold high cards when you don't have a pair. In general, which high cards you hold only make a small difference so even if they are wrong it only hurts a tiny amount.
Quote: DRichIt was 98.4% optimal and 97.2% actual.
Sounds about right to me for locals. You have to make some pretty gross errors to lose much more than that. The 2 to 4% error rate that IGT used to throw out as an estimate is a thing of the past with sites like the wizardofodds, imo.
Quote: djatcI've seen "locals" hold AWxxx on deuces wild, 77Kxx on bonus poker, and AKQ unsuited on DDB, so I'm sure the casinos have nothing to worry about.
Yeah, I've seen all of that too...but not too often. Biggest mistake I see ALL the time is not holding 2 pair with Kings, Queens, Jacks in DDB. I would say more regular players in St. Louis break the two pair than don't, but it's close to 50/50. Women also seem to break more from what I've noticed. And that error costs 0.43% at 9/6, 9/5 DDB if always done and 0.29% at 8/5.
Quote: tringlomaneBiggest mistake I see ALL the time is not holding 2 pair with Kings, Queens, Jacks in DDB. I would say more regular players in St. Louis break the two pair than don't, but it's close to 50/50.
I know very few casual players that do keep the two pair in DDB. Pretty much everyone I know goes for the four of a kind.
