I invented a new VP called "Double Double Penalty Poker"
So in semi joking protest, I invented a new VP called "Double Double Penalty Poker". You get penalised if you hit anything 4 of a kind or higher.
Based on a bet of 5 coins
Royal Flush---------------------------- 5
Straight Flush------------------------- 5
Four Aces with any 2,3,4--------------5
Four 2s, 3s, 4s with any A,2,3,4------- 5
Four Aces----------------------------- 5
Four 2s, 3s, 4s ----------------------- 5
Four 5s thru Ks----------------------- 5
Full House---------------------------- 60
Flush---------------------------------- 40
Straight------------------------------- 25
Three of a Kind----------------------- 15
Two Pair ----------------------------- 10
Jacks or Better ----------------------- 5
All Other------------------------------ 0
The RTP is 99.6%. Variance is only 3.38 compared to the 41.98 of double double bonus poker. I personally hate variance so I think I'd play this version of penalty poker over the bonus poker any day.
Except maybe with Aps
Without a chance for a big payoff I can't see anyone playing it.
I realize it was in jest.
I'm not going to lie, I'd play that all day long if it would earn points at the normal level! Honestly, it really wouldn't be all that different from VBJ if the VBJ returned at the same percentage.
While we're on the subject, and I also play with stuff like this sometimes because we seem to share an unusual concept of, 'Fun,' I've decided to juice up your Royal a little and improve the Trips:
Royal: 500
SF: 5
Quads: 5
FH: 40
Flush: 30
Straight: 25
Trips: 20
2P: 10
JoB: 5
All Other: 0
RTP: 99.7090%
Variance: 2.58
I wonder if people would hold all five on dealt trips intuitively. Even on my paytable with the reduced FH, the correct decision is to hold any dealt trips along with one of the other two cards as opposed to keeping all five. I might think that people would intuitively keep all five (scared of hitting the quad), or alternatively, would throw away both of the other two cards and keep just the trips not really accounting for how much less likely that makes the FH and how much more likely it makes quads.
Quote: HunterhillI think your game would be a total failure.
Except maybe with Aps
Without a chance for a big payoff I can't see anyone playing it.
I realize it was in jest.
I disagree, VBJ still exists on machines. I agree that it was probably in jest, but why play VBJ and not play this?
Quote: Mission146I disagree, VBJ still exists on machines. I agree that it was probably in jest, but why play VBJ and not play this?
Well let me rephrase, I don't think too many vp players would play it.
Quote: HunterhillWell let me rephrase, I don't think too many vp players would play it.
Fair enough, but file me in the, "Not too many," group! Especially if you bulk up the Royal a little bit to make it at least worth something. Isn't that really the one thing that VBJ is missing?
Most VBJ you can't split to four total hands, but what if Split-Split-Split Double-Double-Double-Double and win all won, like, 200x your original bet instead of it being individual hands if you won all of them? It would certainly considerably change the strategy, but don't you think the potential for that one huge payout would make the game more entertaining?
Quote: Mission146I disagree, VBJ still exists on machines. I agree that it was probably in jest, but why play VBJ and not play this?
Because most people think they are getting paid 2-1 on BJ, not 2 for 1( even money).
Took me a while to figure it out.
Quote: billryanBecause most people think they are getting paid 2-1 on BJ, not 2 for 1( even money).
Took me a while to figure it out.
I definitely agree with that, but a few people sometimes play it just to play it. A few people like it over VP on the bartops, I think the reason why is because of how low the Variance is, even at a $1.25 bet, we both know it's nothing to drop $100 in an hour at VP on a decent game. 800 hands an hour, $1,000 coin-in, you ran at 90% to lose $100. I think that if someone is primarily looking to drink, and doesn't want to deliberately slow play, you're not going to see them drop $100 on VBJ in an hour too frequently, especially not with a comparable bet of $0.50/hand. (I say that is comparable because of splits/doubles). Even at $1/hand, you'd have to go 100 base bets to the bad in an hour, that's not going to happen very often at all.
$40 in the machine and the machine gives me two 8s vs a dealer 6. I split and get a three. double, pull something to 18 or 19.Next hand, get a 2, go to double but need more money. I feed it and draw to twenty. Just then I realize I have $160 on the hand. I'm strictly a red chipper and here I have $160 on the line. Dealer turns over a ten, followed by a small card to push my one hand but take my $80 on the other hand. Crisis avoided, until I hit the repeat last bet button and find myself betting $40.
I get a ten vs dealers 7. I'm wise to its wily ways and don't double down and get a seven. Just as I'm thinking a good chance to push, he shows an Ace and
sucks down my $40. I still have about $60 in the machine so I cash out, load two tubs with quarters and have to deal with a bartender who thinks a $60 payout is tip worthy.
Stuff happens.
It has been a while since I looked so, I'm not sure what they have now but they used to have all kinds of crazy VP games.
Why is that?Quote: Mission146... would throw away both of the other two cards and keep just the trips not really accounting for how much less likely that makes the FH and how much more likely it makes quads.
I get that tossing both improves the odds of quads, but does it also decrease the odds of the FH?
If quads are achieved, a FH is impossible. And tossing both, doubles the chance of quads. Etc.
RF 4000
SF 2000
4k 110
FH 30
Fl 25
St 20
3k 15
2p 10
Job 5
I was really surprised by how much the lower pays had to be lowered to make the SF work.
Quote: rsactuaryOn a bit of a tangent, I have always been surprised that a version of VP that really paid off on straight flushes hasn't come about. That's one thing I hear a lot when people get one... it's not worth the value for how rare they are... so I came up with a JoB variant that pays 99.7%. Variance 49.77
RF 4000
SF 2000
4k 110
FH 30
Fl 25
St 20
3k 15
2p 10
Job 5
I was really surprised by how much the lower pays had to be lowered to make the SF work.
Sadly I don't think this pay table would work. Reason is most casinos want to be able to go cheap and reduce the RTP to like 95-98% instead of full pay. with a 6/5 on Fh/fl there's no room to decrease it further.
The only way to do this is to set 2 pairs to 1, like in most versions of "bonus" pokers, that way it can compensate for SF's higher payout while allowing casinos to keep lowering the FH/Fl to beyond greedy levels
RF: 4000
SF: 80
4k: 75
FH: 30
FL: 25
ST: 20
3k: 20
2P: 10
JoB: 5
Quote: DJTeddyBearBrain fart. Never mind. I figured it out.
If quads are achieved, a FH is impossible. And tossing both, doubles the chance of quads. Etc.
That too, but you're also throwing away a card you already have. What I mean is, if you keep one card, then you're 3/47 to hit the boat, but if you throw away both side cards and get one of the six remaining of the two ranks you threw away back, now you're only 2/46 to get another of those.
Meantime, if you hit one of the other ten ranks, you're still only 3/46 to match it.
Here are the FH's tossing both:
(4/47 * 3/46 *10) + (3/47 * 2/46 *2) = .06105458
Vs.
3/47 = .063829787
So, you're keeping something that you still have three more of in the deck as opposed to not only getting the quads, but also that 6/47 chance you'll hit something that will only leave you with two more in the deck as you draw the last card. As you can see, both:
3/47 * 2/46 * 2
AND
6/47 * 2/46
Equal:
.00555041628
Quote: rsactuaryOn a bit of a tangent, I have always been surprised that a version of VP that really paid off on straight flushes hasn't come about. That's one thing I hear a lot when people get one... it's not worth the value for how rare they are... so I came up with a JoB variant that pays 99.7%. Variance 49.77
RF 4000
SF 2000
4k 110
FH 30
Fl 25
St 20
3k 15
2p 10
Job 5
I was really surprised by how much the lower pays had to be lowered to make the SF work.
The latest game kings have a version of this game, but it's rarely offered by casinos that have the latest game kings.
It's called "Straight Flush Deluxe" and full pay looks like this.
RF 4000
SF 2000
4K 250
FH 50
FL 30
ST 20
3K 15
2P 5
JB 5
Return = 99.12%. Variance 50.5
Strategy:
https://wizardofodds.com/games/video-poker/strategy/a-1-b-74-c-1-d-0-d-1-d-1-d-3-d-4-d-6-d-10-d-50-d-400-d-800/
I tried quarter 10/6 briefly at Majestic Star in Indiana on game kings that offers nearly every game generally as long as it is below 99.5%. It also does offer 9/6 Triple Triple Bonus which is 99.75%. Both games ate my money pretty quick.
The main reason to not offer games like Straight Flush Deluxe is that strategy is a PITA!
THAT was the part I was missing.
And apparently, my brain fart was only a minor revelation. Your explanation REALLY tells the story.
Thanks
Quote: tringlomaneThe latest game kings have a version of this game, but it's rarely offered by casinos that have the latest game kings.
It's called "Straight Flush Deluxe" and full pay looks like this.
RF 4000
SF 2000
4K 250
FH 50
FL 30
ST 20
3K 15
2P 5
JB 5
Return = 99.12%. Variance 50.5
Strategy:
https://wizardofodds.com/games/video-poker/strategy/a-1-b-74-c-1-d-0-d-1-d-1-d-3-d-4-d-6-d-10-d-50-d-400-d-800/
I tried quarter 10/6 briefly at Majestic Star in Indiana on game kings that offers nearly every game generally as long as it is below 99.5%. It also does offer 9/6 Triple Triple Bonus which is 99.75%. Both games ate my money pretty quick.
The main reason to not offer games like Straight Flush Deluxe is that strategy is a PITA!
I thought of going with the two pair of 5, but that really decreased the RTP and was trying to keep it a JoB variant. Fun to do this kind of stuff though.
That's a good story, the Reverse Martingale works until it doesn't! You see what I mean, though, some people play it just to play it. Sometimes, you'll also see someone who went nearly El Busto at a physical BJ table pop a $20 into one of the machines to try to run it up to $50 or $100, whatever minimum amount they would buy back in for.
RSActuary,
In addition to the other game that has already been mentioned, Joker Poker (Kings) also kind of fits the bill. At 50-FOR-1, the SF on that game is usually worth pretty close to 3% of the return, which is more than the Natural Royal even when the RFnJ pays 940-FOR-1. Obviously, that's the same return in terms of coin, but the combination of one wild card and strategy changes makes that hand much more likely.
Certain JP (2P) games also pay 100-FOR-1 on the SF, that game is a nightmare, though! It'll eat you alive. Also, the Natural Royal often pays 100-FOR-1 as well on those games.
Quote: malgoriumHaha, I had some fun playing around with pay tables, and I came up with this 99.75% paytable, which I would personally play the heck out of. It's not very exciting, but your money would last a long time:
RF: 4000
SF: 80
4k: 75
FH: 30
FL: 25
ST: 20
3k: 20
2P: 10
JoB: 5
I'd play it.
Quote: NeutrinoSadly I don't think this pay table would work. Reason is most casinos want to be able to go cheap and reduce the RTP to like 95-98% instead of full pay. with a 6/5 on Fh/fl there's no room to decrease it further.
The only way to do this is to set 2 pairs to 1, like in most versions of "bonus" pokers, that way it can compensate for SF's higher payout while allowing casinos to keep lowering the FH/Fl to beyond greedy levels
I wouldn't say, 'Only,' way. You could go 5-4-3-3-2-1 or 5-4-4-3-2-1, plenty of stuff to play with.
Quote: tringlomane
Strategy:
https://wizardofodds.com/games/video-poker/strategy/a-1-b-74-c-1-d-0-d-1-d-1-d-3-d-4-d-6-d-10-d-50-d-400-d-800/
The main reason to not offer games like Straight Flush Deluxe is that strategy is a PITA!
Good lord! Low end (six high) SF double gaps over two consecutive to a Royal!?
2h3h6hJdQd---Hold 2-3-6
2h4h6hJdQd---Hold 2-4-6
Yeah, no thanks!
Actually, that's over any 2-to-a-RF, then! There's no way I would ever conceive of doing that without looking at a strategy chart.
