Seeking the outstanding critique of this forum for my game, 21Flip...

After reading many threads on different game ideas out there, and the excellent thoughts and honest opinions offered, I humbly submit "my baby" to you for your analysis.

My game is called 21Flip, and the premise is to remove the "intimidation factor" from blackjack. No one is mad at you for taking the bust card, splitting tens, or any other nonsense. 21Flip is designed to let any player, regardless of skill level, play a fun blackjack-themed game.

In 21 Flip, there is only ONE hand dealt - the dealer's. No player receives cards. Each player has an Ante betting spot, 5 "Flip" card spots, and a "Busted" sidebet/insurance. In front of the dealer, there is a hitpad for one "Up card" and 5 "Flip" cards. (You can see a sample layout at 21Flip.com - Eventually you will be able to play a demo there.)

Game play begins with each player making an ante wager. After each player has done so, the dealer then turns up one card. Players then make "Flip" wagers, in amounts EQUAL to the ante, on the number of additional cards the dealer will draw (flip) to make a standard blackjack hand of 17 or higher.

A few details:

In 21Flip, ace is ALWAYS equal to one, never eleven.

Players may wager on as many spots as they wish - 1, 2, all 5, or even none.

If the player makes a correct Flip bet, they retain the ante. If not, the ante is lost.

The paytable is as follows:
1st Flip - 1:1
2nd Flip - 3:1
3rd Flip - 5:1
4th Flip - 15:1
5th Flip - 25:1

If the dealer does not make 17 or higher after drawing/flipping all 6 cards, the ante wins 100:1. Any flip bets or busted bets lose.

The busted bet pays even money. It can be 5x the ante. It is made after the up card is exposed.


A few issues I am aware of:

Players MAY NOT bet "1st Flip" if the Up card is 6 or less, as it is mathematically impossible to win that bet. Dealers will have to be strongly trained to check for improper bets if a traditional-blackjack "bust card" is showing.

Game protection concerns exist with the attempt to "cap" an ante bet to increase the flip bet on advantageous circumstances. Players have to reach across the ante to make higher bets. However, by placing the"big payout" bets closest to the dealer, it prevents past posting AFTER the hand is completed, versus capping an Ante BEFORE the hand is drawn out.


Your thoughts and input are greatly appreciated. If you have questions, please ask away.

I read your entire post once, and am not sure about much of anything about your game. I'd recommend to post a picture of the felt, and if possible, show a tutorial on how to play. Also, I'm assuming you've done the math.... give us the house edge, variance, strategy employed for optimal play, etc.....
Good Luck!!!

I don't know how to add a picture of the layout to this forum.

This link has the image: http://imgur.com/rMIg2OO

I didn't read the entirepost but it sounds interesting.

On first look, it feels awkward to "prohibit" the 1st flip bet on 6 or less, but I could be wrong. Perhaps the dealer could simply push that bet if made when the dealer doesn't qualify (for it)? Same result, and could be mentioned it can't win when a player tries to make it, but at least it would be better customer relations.

Also re: capping/pinching, probably worth revising your layout so as not to reach over the top of your ante bet. 3rd flip is a very likely result starting with a 6 or less, which pays good odds. If I were wanting to beat your game, I could bet the ante for say, 2 red, bet the 2 flip on high cards, and on low starting cards bet the 3rd flip after dropping another chip on the ante as I reached across to bet it. Don't know that this is +EV, but it feels like it would be; with the odds pay, it would only have to win about 1/3 of those times to give the player a strong advantage.

Looking forward to seeing paytables/math/etc.

http://imgur.com/LHKO1WI

These are the odds of each spot winning, based on infinite deck analysis.

Remember that you are betting 2 units to win the payscale - the ante and the bet. If you choose to bet more than one spot, the other spots must lose - in effect, reducing the payout by that number of units.

I think your math is wrong. It looks like you're counting aces as a one only.

Otherwise, I think this idea is interesting. But it might be susceptible to card counting. It would definitely be susceptible to Phil Ivey type edge sorting.

Quote: 21Flip

http://imgur.com/LHKO1WI

These are the odds of each spot winning, based on infinite deck analysis.

Remember that you are betting 2 units to win the payscale - the ante and the bet. If you choose to bet more than one spot, the other spots must lose - in effect, reducing the payout by that number of units.

Ok, looking at that paytable, I would always bet 3 cards, and on 7 or better bet 2 cards as well, exposing 2 units (plus the ante). Ignore the rest, except maybe bet 4 cards on initial A or 2. With payouts of 3:1 and 1:1, I think I'm +EV with that strategy. And not by a little; guessing a player advantage of maybe 8%. You don't indicate the incidence of a dealer bust, so I can't figure total probability and HE from what you've posted, so I don't know for sure.

The ante never gets paid, correct? You said if they make the correct flip, they retain their ante.

What if player doesn't make a flip bet? You also said you can bet between 0-5 flips.

???


House edge?

How many decks do you expect will be in play? Will the cards be shuffled after every round?

What is the betting range on the flip bets? 0 or 1-5x ante?

Confirm that the game procedure is:
- Place antes
- Deal up card
- Allow betting round for flip/bust bets
- Deal additional cards
- Pay/Take

I think your 100:1 payout on a 6 card 16 or lower may be too high, but I understand it's to compensate for losing the other wagers placed. On a $5 ante on 6 spots, that's likely a $2800-$3000 payout.

I think that winning one wager while losing the others will be complicated and slow down the pay/take process.

I think you should count the Ace as 1 or 11, and dealer stands on Soft 17. This will allow for a natural 21. (I think a natural 21 should pay 1:1 on 1st flip and ante. I also think all 21's should pay the ante at 1:1.)

I think that you're too worried about past posting after the hand is completed vs ante capping. It should be very easy to spot anyone reaching for the betting circles between the betting round and the pay/take, vs expecting people to reach over the ante bet.

Did someone say....

Quote: DJTeddyBear

counting

Quote: DJTeddyBear

I think your math is wrong. It looks like you're counting aces as a one only.

Otherwise, I think this idea is interesting. But it might be susceptible to card counting. It would definitely be susceptible to Phil Ivey type edge sorting.

His post stated that Aces are ALWAYS 1.

Interesting idea and I would like to see it in action. I don't quite understand the betting. So do you make all of the bets after the "up" card?

I agree that it may fall prey to card counting.

Quote: falecf4

His post stated that Aces are ALWAYS 1.

Oh. I missed that. But I bet I won't be the only one. That will be quite confusing to the players - particularly since its a blackjack variant.

I think it's a pretty good concept. I'd like to see the demo when it's ready. I can see playing Blackjack without having to play against the Dealer.

House Advantage, Hit Frequency, Countability and game math would of course be needed before knowing if it's actually a viable game for the floor. Many games are fun but never make it in a real casino.


ZCore13

Countability need not be an issue. Deal the game out of a CSM or a deep-penetration shoe (I mean less than 50%). Even though this game is blackjack themed, it is a carnival game, and players in general aren't going to be upset about CSMs or bad penetration.

Please clarify how the Ante works. If you make the correct "Flip" wager, the Ante is just a push? So the Ante can only win on a Six-Card Super? Earlier you said players may bet on as many Flip wagers as they like, "even none". That would create an automatic loss on the Ante, yeah?

Regarding your rule about not allowing the First Flip bet on a six or less, why? It's an impossible bet to win, but the players should realize that. If not, the dealer can give them gentle advice as to why it's a bad idea. If by that point, a player is foolish enough or stubborn enough to make that wager anyway, let them contribute to the house advantage. Lots of games rely on player mistakes to compound the house advantage. Blackjack and Ultimate Texas Hold'em are two great examples.

Are the "1st Flip", "2nd Flip", "3rd Flip", "4th Flip" and "5th Flip" wagers all considered one "game", since only one of them can be a winning outcome? Some states have laws that limit the number of "games" you're allowed to wager on at one time. In Washington, that limit is four. (Ex: In 3CP, you can bet "Ante/Play", "Pair Plus", "6 Card Bonus", and "Progressive". "Ante/Play", although they are two wagers, are in tandem as one game.)

I agree with the concerns about the layout. Players should never be in a position where they need to put their hand over a wager. Think about games like 3CP and UTH. Subsequent wagers are all closer to the player. I'd recommend having those circles wrap around behind the Ante instead of in front of it. I appreciate your concern about past posting, but since all those wagers have to be equal to the Ante (not "equal or less than"), a past post will be easy to spot. Capping will be tougher to prove.

Right now your limit on the "Bust Bet" is 5x the ante, or the total of all wagers in play, whichever is greater. Since the most wagers the player will ever have in play is six, and I imagine most players will have way less than that, why not just say 5x the ante and leave it at that? In the interest of keeping the game as simple as possible.

I agree with the idea of having aces be one or eleven, as it seems to me that can only raise the house advantage. At least have it as an option.

I look forward to seeing further mathematical analysis of this game.

(Last edited July 27,2015) I had a typo in my original spreadsheet so l'll hide my
Single deck:

Up Card	Return	Flip Bets
ace	1.343866142	2 3 4
two	0.638305961	2 3 4
three	0.348296425	2 3
four	0.17659881	2 3
five	0.002237746	2 3
six	0.142299899	2
seven	-0.4823887	2
eight	-0.46917831	1 2
nine	-0.437839817	1 2
ten	-0.399828016	1 2
Total	-0.025931839

Pays	Probability	Return	variance
99	0.000039656	0.003925924	0.388870104
98	0.000305556	0.029944482	2.936112461
97	0.000518309	0.050275953	4.879375311
13	0.011629883	0.151188475	1.973299191
4	0.041068735	0.164274941	0.665647283
3	0.094312186	0.282936559	0.86354723
2	0.184615385	0.369230769	0.757735351
1	0.049230769	0.049230769	0.051817164
0	0.227752640	0	0.000153155
-2	0.098301219	-0.196602438	0.383074454
-3	0.238565377	-0.715696131	2.110130185
-4	0.053660286	-0.214641143	0.847468577
Total	1	-0.025931839	15.85723047

miplet,

You're showing a 0 pay for 1 flip on an 8, but I think it's supposed to pay 1:1 when it wins. (table 2)

I also don't understand your results on table 3 on an ace, as I think you would bet that similar to a 2, since it's always worth 1.

I may just not be understanding what you're doing.

Quote: beachbumbabs

miplet,

You're showing a 0 pay for 1 flip on an 8, but I think it's supposed to pay 1:1 when it wins. (table 2)

Yes, but you lose on the 2 flips bet for a net of 0.

Quote:

I also don't understand your results on table 3 on an ace, as I think you would bet that similar to a 2, since it's always worth 1.

I may just not be understanding what you're doing.

Ooops, must have made an error somewhere when doing the ace. This brings down the house edge to 2.81%

Flips	Ways	Probability	Pays	Return
1	0	0	-4	0
2	92856960	0.329411765	1	0.329411765
3	74845056	0.265514206	3	0.796542617
4	23932776	0.084901961	13	1.10372549
5	3970560	0.014085634	-4	-0.056342537
<17	1102080	0.003909649	97	0.37923595
Bust	85179768	0.302176786	-4	-1.208707142
Total	281887200	1		1.343866142

I think combining Poker and Blackjack has been tried unsuccessfully before, but this does it in a way that doesn't feel 'forced' or unnatural to me, so i like it in that regard. It's also got a good, simple decision point that i like.

Regarding the security issues for the layout, is there any way you could have the flip spots in front of the ante spot, instead of going round it? This would make it much easier to spot capping or past posting on the ante, as this spot would then be isolated.

Quote: AxelWolf

Did someone say....

You are correct in that this game is HIGHLY susceptible to counting from a shoe. I am looking to hire someone to perform an analysis of where the shoe would have to be cut to prevent one from gaining the advantage to often.

However, with that in mind, this game is designed to be dealt single deck and out of one2six machine.

Quote: ShineyShine

Regarding the security issues for the layout, is there any way you could have the flip spots in front of the ante spot, instead of going round it? This would make it much easier to spot capping or past posting on the ante, as this spot would then be isolated.

Actually, Shiney, a GREAT deal of thought was put into this issue.

Here is the thing: Capping the Ante is not really an issue UNLESS a counter has a good count, and wants to cheat. Capping the ante while posting the "Flip" bets doesn't really do any good otherwise.

If I change the spots to be closer to the player, though, now past-posting AFTER the hand is hit out becomes a concern. Sliding the past-post up to the circle is EASIER because there is no Ante in the way.

Obviously, this is a game protection issue, which exist in ANY game. It has to be trained into dealers to watch the layout when the hand concludes. Any hands reaching out should be a huge red flag - both for the "Flip" bets AND the "Busted" bet.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Oh. I missed that. But I bet I won't be the only one. That will be quite confusing to the players - particularly since its a blackjack variant.

If you zoom in on the layout, you will see the three key rules.

Aces always equal one.
All Flip bets must be EQUAL to the Ante.
Any winning flip bet RETAINS the Ante.

Quote: RS

The ante never gets paid, correct? You said if they make the correct flip, they retain their ante.

What if player doesn't make a flip bet? You also said you can bet between 0-5 flips.

???


House edge?

If the player doesn't make a flip bet, the only way to win is with a Super Six - all cards flipped, and a total of 16 or less.

This pays 100:1.

The Ante serves as a control bet. It prevents the player from gaining a massive advantage against the house by seeing the Up card, then deciding HOW MUCH to bet. They do get to decided WHERE to bet, but the amount is controlled by the Ante, made prior.

I COULD pay the ante 1:1 on any win, but in order to do so, I would have to significantly reduce payouts.

Instead, the Ante has a "built in" function as a bonus.... Get the Super Six, you do lose your Flips and Busted, but who cares? Your $5 ante just spiked a $500 payout.

Quote: 21Flip

Actually, Shiney, a GREAT deal of thought was put into this issue.

Here is the thing: Capping the Ante is not really an issue UNLESS a counter has a good count, and wants to cheat. Capping the ante while posting the "Flip" bets doesn't really do any good otherwise.

If I change the spots to be closer to the player, though, now past-posting AFTER the hand is hit out becomes a concern. Sliding the past-post up to the circle is EASIER because there is no Ante in the way.

Obviously, this is a game protection issue, which exist in ANY game. It has to be trained into dealers to watch the layout when the hand concludes. Any hands reaching out should be a huge red flag - both for the "Flip" bets AND the "Busted" bet.

I'm sure theres a lot of thought gone into it. I assumed the flip bets went round the ante bet so as to fit more betting spots on the table.

When i said have the flip spots in front of the ante spot, i meant closer to the dealer. So if you're looking at it from the players side, you'd have the ante spot on its own, then in front of that, the 5 flip spots.

Quote: Deucekies

Regarding your rule about not allowing the First Flip bet on a six or less, why? It's an impossible bet to win, but the players should realize that. If not, the dealer can give them gentle advice as to why it's a bad idea. If by that point, a player is foolish enough or stubborn enough to make that wager anyway, let them contribute to the house advantage. Lots of games rely on player mistakes to compound the house advantage. Blackjack and Ultimate Texas Hold'em are two great examples.

Most jurisdictions will not approve a bet that has no chance to win. It is also, in my opinion, unethical to offer such a bet.

Quote: 21Flip

Most jurisdictions will not approve a bet that has no chance to win. It is also, in my opinion, unethical to offer such a bet.

Yeah i think that's fine to not allow that, the same way players are not allowed to hit 21.

Quote: ShineyShine

I'm sure theres a lot of thought gone into it. I assumed the flip bets went round the ante bet so as to fit more betting spots on the table.

When i said have the flip spots in front of the ante spot, i meant closer to the dealer. So if you're looking at it from the players side, you'd have the ante spot on its own, then in front of that, the 5 flip spots.

Ah. I misunderstood what you meant by "front".

It was thought about, doing it in a pyramid shape. But, you are correct with the reason - space. The closer you get to the dealer, the less space. So, in order to fit 6 spots, especially in a pyramid, you had to jam them in.

From an aesthetics and ease-of-use standpoint, the circular shape worked best.

My graphics designer and myself actually spent several hours trying a large multitude of options, but in the end, with all factors considered, the layout as sampled seemed to have the strongest balance of all the elements.

Quote: Dieter

How many decks do you expect will be in play? Will the cards be shuffled after every round?

What is the betting range on the flip bets? 0 or 1-5x ante?

Confirm that the game procedure is:
- Place antes
- Deal up card
- Allow betting round for flip/bust bets
- Deal additional cards
- Pay/Take

I think your 100:1 payout on a 6 card 16 or lower may be too high, but I understand it's to compensate for losing the other wagers placed. On a $5 ante on 6 spots, that's likely a $2800-$3000 payout.

I think that winning one wager while losing the others will be complicated and slow down the pay/take process.

I think you should count the Ace as 1 or 11, and dealer stands on Soft 17. This will allow for a natural 21. (I think a natural 21 should pay 1:1 on 1st flip and ante. I also think all 21's should pay the ante at 1:1.)

I think that you're too worried about past posting after the hand is completed vs ante capping. It should be very easy to spot anyone reaching for the betting circles between the betting round and the pay/take, vs expecting people to reach over the ante bet.

The game is primarily designed for single deck, like poker games, or a one2six CSM running 6 decks. A shoe CAN be used, but I have not had an advantage play analysis performed yet, and do not know how deep the cut would have to be. IF it can be cut at 3 of 6 decks, you would still get more hands per shoe than a blackjack game, because a max of 6 cards are dealt each round, versus 14-30 on a hand of traditional BJ.

The betting range is 0 to 5 bets, conditionally. If the Up card is 6 or less, you can not bet the 1st Flip (1:1), as it can not win. If you make 0 Flip bets, the only way to win is the Super Six.

Your procedure is correct.

The 100:1 is ONLY on the Ante. A $5 bet will only pay $500. All Flip bets would lose, as well as would the Busted bet.

It does slow the pay and take a little bit. However, much like a Baccarat table with Dragon bets, you can train the dealer to leave winners, and pick up everything else. Additionally, in comparison with traditional blackjack, the slight increase in pay/take time is significantly compensated for by the removal of the hit/stand sequence. Also, no splits, doubles, etc.

Ante capping is a concern, I agree. However, I think that there are more cheats than there are advantage player cheats. What I mean by that is: I think that it is more likely for an uneducated cheater to slide up a bet to a high payout winner, than for a cheat to know to cap a strong up card. Caps require a skilled move, where a past-post is simply done by having your partner distract the dealer momentarily. I accept that I could be wrong on this, and am open to thoughts of why. Feel free to convince me. :-)

Quote: Dieter

I think you should count the Ace as 1 or 11, and dealer stands on Soft 17. This will allow for a natural 21. (I think a natural 21 should pay 1:1 on 1st flip and ante. I also think all 21's should pay the ante at 1:1.

Unfortunately, my advantage is to small to do this, without chopping payouts elsewhere.

Potentially, this rule change could be made later, as an alternative method of play.


My patent is written to cover both methods of rules - both paying and not paying the Ante as part of the course of game play.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Oh. I missed that. But I bet I won't be the only one. That will be quite confusing to the players - particularly since its a blackjack variant.

Now, now, Teddy, don't go insulting my baby calling it a blackjack variant. :-)

It is a "blackjack-themed carnival game".

In a blackjack variant, things get MORE complicated, with a "twist" to the rules of standard blackjack.

Variants also leave the player in an adversarial position to the dealer; 21Flip lets you play WITH the dealer.

Semantics, I know, but a very important one, in my opinion - this game is EASIER to learn than blackjack, not MORE complicated.

Quote: miplet

For single deck, I'm getting a 13.02% 2.81%house edge. so either the game has too high of a house edge or not meant for single deck, I don't understand the rules, or have a brano and/or typo somewhere.
Here is my paytable for a 2 up card which you would bet on 2 ,3, and 4 flips. It's the 2nd best up card for the player.

Flips	Ways	Probability	Pays	Return
1	0	0	-4	0
2	85385088	0.3052504234	1	0.3052504234
3	67364160	0.2408258731	3	0.7224776192
4	18685320	0.06679974191	13	0.8683966449
5	2926416	0.0104618938	-4	-0.04184757522
<17	797280	0.002850264177	97	0.2764756252
Bust	104563176	0.3738118036	-4	-1.495247215
Total	279721440			0.6355055229

And 8 is the best up card for the house. Bet on 1 and 2 flips.

Flips	Ways	Probability	Pays	Return
1	108378240	0.3874506009	0	0
2	76054272	0.2718928946	2	0.5437857892
3	19257216	0.06884426163	-3	-0.2065327849
4	2570712	0.009190257279	-3	-0.02757077184
5	181704	0.0006495891055	-3	-0.001948767317
<17	14880	0.00005319577934	98	0.005213186376
Bust	73264416	0.2619192008	-3	-0.7857576023
Total	279721440			-0.4728109508

All up cards

Up Card	Flips	Return
Ace	2, 3, 4	1.385241346
2	2, 3, 4	0.6355055229
3	2, 3	0.3355080111
4	2, 3	0.1624810168
5	2, 3	-0.009340687572
6	2	0.1201739845
7	2	-0.4706385038
8	1, 2	-0.4728109508
9	1, 2	-0.4412298178
10	1, 2	-0.4025341281

This is one of the reasons the "Busted" bet is so strong in this game. Traditional "bust" cards are the best way to win big payouts, but they also encourage players to hedge with a "Busted" bet. And as we all know, there is no such thing as a bust card.

I would expect that very few players will play by optimal strategy intuitively. Most will apply traditional blackjack logic, and make improper betting combinations.

21Flip, if all the Flip bets are considered one game, I don't think you'd run afoul of any law saying all bets must be winnable. If it does, you can include that as a codicil when submitting to those jurisdictions. For example:

"New Jersey gambling code 231-1459267 prohibits any wager with no possibility of winning. As such, this bet is not allowed on a 1-6 up card"

As far as ethics go, it's up to the casino whether they want to be ethical or not.

Quote: Deucekies

21Flip, if all the Flip bets are considered one game, I don't think you'd run afoul of any law saying all bets must be winnable. If it does, you can include that as a codicil when submitting to those jurisdictions. For example:

"New Jersey gambling code 231-1459267 prohibits any wager with no possibility of winning. As such, this bet is not allowed on a 1-6 up card"

As far as ethics go, it's up to the casino whether they want to be ethical or not.

I understand your point.

My counterpoint: This is my name attached to this game. I will not allow a property to use my game in an unethical manner. Period. I would rather watch it fail than to let an operator compromise the integrity of my game. Any game that Green Felt Gaming owns or distributes will be played in an ethical manner, with clear odds, rules, and structure. That is not negotiable.

Quote: 21Flip

I understand your point.

My counterpoint: This is my name attached to this game. I will not allow a property to use my game in an unethical manner. Period. I would rather watch it fail than to let an operator compromise the integrity of my game. Any game that Green Felt Gaming owns or distributes will be played in an ethical manner, with clear odds, rules, and structure. That is not negotiable.

Good answer.

Fair enough. Green Felt is your own distribution company? In that case, it's up to you. If you were trying to license it out to Galaxy or Shufflemaster, that'd be a different story.

Don't get me wrong. I definitely think that's admirable that you want to put ethics first. I'll never fault you for that.

Quote: Deucekies

Fair enough. Green Felt is your own distribution company? In that case, it's up to you. If you were trying to license it out to Galaxy or Shufflemaster, that'd be a different story.

Don't get me wrong. I definitely think that's admirable that you want to put ethics first. I'll never fault you for that.

I intend to push it myself, full time, until either it flops or a major distributor is willing to make it worth my time to listen to their proposal. I don't have a goal of taking a tiny fraction - I had rather do the work myself.

Quote: 21Flip

I intend to push it myself, full time, until either it flops or a major distributor is willing to make it worth my time to listen to their proposal. I don't have a goal of taking a tiny fraction - I had rather do the work myself.

I find that commendable, and I wish you all the luck in the world.

For what it's worth, I like this game. It passes the acid test for what a good casino game needs to be: simple, easy to explain, and exciting payouts. The possibility of a table-wide 100:1 payout is a little intimidating if I'm the house, but I guess other games have possible table payouts way in excess of that, so it's not a big deal.

Best of luck with this!

I've been wrapping my head around this game and the thing that keeps popping up in my head is, it's too complicated. Make it simpler.

Do you really need SEVEN betting circles?

Also, the ante sucks. It's not an ante, it's a forced high house edge jackpot bet.

When I think about the 7 betting circles with the varying payouts, I can't help but think of the Big Six. A variety of bets, but not everyone bets the highest payout option. Think about that, and then re-think the ante concept.

Yeah, I realize that by showing the first card can be a big advantage, and the ante therefore controls the max bet. But there has to be a better way.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Also, the ante sucks. It's not an ante, it's a forced high house edge jackpot bet.

So is the Blind in UTH.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

.... there has to be a better way.

I would agree with you. Problem is, I haven't found it, and I have been thinking about it for a long time.

I DID think about paying the ante, by lowering the payouts - but, it has to look something like 1,1,2,5,10. (I don't remember the exact amounts; it's been a while.)


As far as 5 Flips, I could lower it, but, again, two challenges: Lower payouts AND increased chance of <17 final hand.

One option was to pay all the bets with a <17.

It honestly just didn't "play right" that way. It felt like no chance to hit the big payout, because they didn't exist.


Lastly, the Five Flips allows for some side bets. I won't disclose them here, but you don't really have to be a rocket scientist to figure out what they are.

Right now the Ante wins 100:1 on a Super Six, pushes on a successful flip bet, and loses on a dealer bust or an unsuccessful flip bet.

Is there another contingency that can happen where the Ante could be paid?

I assume you've considered the idea of making the Ace one or eleven and have a reason for not doing that. If you did though, you could maybe pay the ante on a blackjack?

Quote: Deucekies

Right now the Ante wins 100:1 on a Super Six, pushes on a successful flip bet, and loses on a dealer bust or an unsuccessful flip bet.

Is there another contingency that can happen where the Ante could be paid?

I assume you've considered the idea of making the Ace one or eleven and have a reason for not doing that. If you did though, you could maybe pay the ante on a blackjack?

If you shift the ace to the 1/11 format, it effectively makes it a high card instead of a low. Therefore, you push the odds to the lower payouts, with more frequency of those hands.

Basically, it takes the "suspense" factor that much lower. Instead of betting 2,3,4,5 spot for a big payout, and the best chance to hit that 100:1 bonus.... you are grinding a 1:1 "1st Flip" and a 1:1 ante payout.

It makes the Ace a boring card.

10 values are the "boring" cards, about 30% of the hands will be "grinders". Bet the 1, or the 1,2, and snooze.

The OH YEA factor comes in on A,2,3... your chance to hit it big!

Changing that all around for a 1:1 ante payout - eh...

It's a fun carnival game - not a poker grinder.