100xOdds
100xOdds 
  • Threads: 661
  • Posts: 4540
Joined: Feb 5, 2012
January 29th, 2015 at 1:55:03 AM permalink
At my casino, the best Deuces Wild game is 1-2-3-4-4-9-15-25-200-800 (98.9%).

JB's strategy for my game: https://wizardofodds.com/games/video-poker/strategy/a-1-b-44-c-1-d-0-d-1-d-2-d-3-d-4-d-4-d-9-d-15-d-25-d-200-d-800/

Wiz's FPDW strategy: https://wizardofodds.com/games/video-poker/strategy/deuces-wild/full-pay/simple/

Yes, I know they are 2 different pay tables but for both fpdw and my game, 5oaK and the Wild Royal have the same pays (15 + 25, respectively).

JB's strat for 3 deuces says keep 5oak over 3 deuces.
Wiz's strat says discard 5oaK and just keep the 3 deuces.


But if 5oaK/Wild Royal are the same pays then why is there a discrepancy for 5oaK?
Craps is paradise (Pair of dice). Lets hear it for the SpeedCount Mathletes :)
JB
Administrator
JB
  • Threads: 334
  • Posts: 2089
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
January 29th, 2015 at 4:30:52 AM permalink
Straight Flush pays the same too. The discrepancy is how much you are paid when you don't make a Straight Flush, Five of a Kind, Wild Royal, or Four Deuces - in other words, when you have Four of a Kind. In FPDW, Four of a Kind pays 5-for-1; in the other pay table it pays 4-for-1. In FPDW, Four of a Kind pays enough to collectively make up the difference for all of the times that you only end up with Four of a Kind, whereas in the other paytable, it doesn't.

(But if you are dealt 2-2-2 with a pair of 10s, Js, Qs, Ks, Aces, you should hold the Five of a Kind even in FPDW, because the probability of ending up with a Wild Royal after the draw is reduced enough to make holding Five of a Kind the better play. So only discard the pair in FPDW if it is 3s through 9s.)
100xOdds
100xOdds 
  • Threads: 661
  • Posts: 4540
Joined: Feb 5, 2012
January 29th, 2015 at 6:37:30 AM permalink
Quote: JB

Straight Flush pays the same too. The discrepancy is how much you are paid when you don't make a Straight Flush, Five of a Kind, Wild Royal, or Four Deuces - in other words, when you have Four of a Kind. In FPDW, Four of a Kind pays 5-for-1; in the other pay table it pays 4-for-1. In FPDW, Four of a Kind pays enough to collectively make up the difference for all of the times that you only end up with Four of a Kind, whereas in the other paytable, it doesn't.

(But if you are dealt 2-2-2 with a pair of 10s, Js, Qs, Ks, Aces, you should hold the Five of a Kind even in FPDW, because the probability of ending up with a Wild Royal after the draw is reduced enough to make holding Five of a Kind the better play. So only discard the pair in FPDW if it is 3s through 9s.)



ahh.. 4oaK payouts are the deciding factor.
THX!
Craps is paradise (Pair of dice). Lets hear it for the SpeedCount Mathletes :)
pokerface
pokerface
  • Threads: 12
  • Posts: 514
Joined: May 9, 2010
January 29th, 2015 at 8:04:09 AM permalink
Quote: 100xOdds

ahh.. 4oaK payouts are the deciding factor.
THX!


They are always, in all VP games.
winning streaks come and go, losing streak never ends.
Bigfshead
Bigfshead
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 62
Joined: Oct 31, 2014
January 29th, 2015 at 2:58:07 PM permalink
Quote: pokerface

They are always, in all VP games.



How can you say that? DB and DDB have the same 4oak payouts in their 50 for full house versions and 45 or less full house version. Yet in either game, paying 45 or less for the full house is a negative expectation game!
pokerface
pokerface
  • Threads: 12
  • Posts: 514
Joined: May 9, 2010
January 29th, 2015 at 7:46:38 PM permalink
Quote: Bigfshead

How can you say that? DB and DDB have the same 4oak payouts in their 50 for full house versions and 45 or less full house version. Yet in either game, paying 45 or less for the full house is a negative expectation game!


50 v. 45 in full house just 1% change in EV, who cares!
winning streaks come and go, losing streak never ends.
Bigfshead
Bigfshead
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 62
Joined: Oct 31, 2014
January 30th, 2015 at 12:04:32 AM permalink
Quote: pokerface

They are always, in all VP games.



You're making a statement as fact, when it's so far from reality, and then trying to justify?
  • Jump to: