andysif
andysif
Joined: Aug 8, 2011
  • Threads: 23
  • Posts: 433
August 22nd, 2015 at 12:02:45 AM permalink
Quote: ShineyShine

Not sure what to make of this. I like the idea, but i can see quite a few problems with it.

You're mainly focusing on how it can be used as a bluffing tool, but i think you're forgetting the flip side to this. If a player raises big and actually does have the nuts, so therefore wants a call, unless the jackpot is a lot bigger than the the pot they're playing, i don't think they'll be wanting to give their hand strength away by making this bet. I guess it could be made as a 'reverse' bluff, but i'm not sure players would like that.

Also, kind of related to ME's point about A.P or vulturing. I don't know anything about that aspect of it, but if the jackpot was big enough, i could definitely envisage a scenario where a table of regs agree to flat call every hand pre-flop and check it down to the river to win the jackpot. This would impact the rake, and make for a very boring game.

Best of luck with it anyway.


whether to check, raise, bluff or bet the side bet is not the concern of the designer. it is the concern of the player. the designer makes the tool, player makes up his strategy.
ShineyShine
ShineyShine
Joined: Feb 6, 2014
  • Threads: 6
  • Posts: 187
August 22nd, 2015 at 12:15:45 AM permalink
Quote: andysif

whether to check, raise, bluff or bet the side bet is not the concern of the designer. it is the concern of the player. the designer makes the tool, player makes up his strategy.



I'm not saying it couldn't work, just brainstorming any problems players may have with it. I actually think some players would play it a lot, but i do think it would alienate others, depending on the size of the jackpot relative to the actual pot the're playing.

I think a lot would depend on the size of the jackpot as regards to the players strategy. Not sure how much this would impact the success of this side bet.
discflicker
discflicker
Joined: Jan 1, 2011
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 451
August 22nd, 2015 at 2:28:30 AM permalink
Thanks for your time and interest. I value your opinions and comments.

Quote: Zcore13

So I'm playing in a No Limit Holdem game. I either have the nut or want someone to think I have the nut. What am I going to do. Raise to $150 or place a Nut Jack bet? Seems pretty obvious the side bet won't work for no limit or high limit games.

If it's a side bet placed pre-hand, I could see it working in low limit games. Post deal, the action and idea of the side bet already exists. It's called a raise.

You need to go back to the basics. Poker Managers don't really want to see 6 options of what could work. They (we) want to see one option that does work. It's a pretty decent idea as a pre-deal side bet. Take that and run with it.
ZCore13


I DEFINITELY see your point about the high-limit games and the raise already being the weapon of choice. The fixed bet size could be scaled up according to the buy-in limits, but I agree, it would be foolish in very high-stakes games.

In Texas Hold-em, there are the ante, pre-flop, flop, turn, and river betting phases. When you say "Pre-deal" do you mean ante or do you mean pre-flop? I think you meant ante, just a blind shot in the dark, and the problem with this approach is, who wants to make the first bets when the jackpot is empty? How does the jackpot get seeded without decent payback prospect?

Why not allow this bet to be made pre-flop after the just hole cards are seen? At that point in the game, anyone can have non-exclusive nut hands, but some are far more likely than others (pocket pairs and connectors spaced no further than 5 apart are more likely to result in quads or straight-flushes, which are likely nut hands). Only suited cards in the 10 - A range are possible Royal Flush (exclusive nutters) candidates. Its a very small advantage, but again, I like the idea of acting upon a jackpot after you have information, and that is how I envisioned the jackpot being seeded... by players believing they are likely to win it, and then by allowing it to be used for bluffing/showing hand strength to add to it.

I still think it would be useful in limit games, at least allowing the bet on ante, pre-flop AND FLOP... doing so will seed the jackpot from nothing, and it can be used as a "sanctioned way" for bluffing/showing hand strength as well. In this case I believe the ratio of jackpot to table pot can be kept in a reasonable balance. And limit hold-em is WAY too boring anyways... it NEEDS NutJack side-bets, in my opinion.

As far as the 6 ways of presenting it, MathEx also has a concern as well. I have a "single version" offering (below). However, the way I have described the wager is by simple definitions and operational procedures, and allowing them to be used within a range of "Operational Parameters". My goal is to allow the casinos to use it any way they see fit. I do not believe its all that complicated.

As a casino manager who owned the product, you can try it out on a table as a "Pre-Deal side-bet"
... the procedures for the wager would become familiar to everyone there (see ** below), and then when everyone feels comfortable with it, you could try allowing the bet to be made later on in the hand, and see what happens, one phase at a time. You could try it out in other games like 5-card stud and on low-buy-in, no-limit hold-em games as well.

**As an incentive to make the wager blindly, only in the ante phase, and when the Jackpot accumulation is zero, there's a lot of obscure things that could be done, like:
Seeding it from a rake.
Seeding it from a rake until the jackpot has a "cut-off threshold", like $100 in it, and then taking no more rakes.
Allowing the bet to be made in the later phases until the jackpot has a cut-off when betting is only allowed at ante or maybe pre-flop time.
HOWEVER, the introductory game should be very simple, and all of these methods of seeding the jackpot are overly complex. If you can think of another way, please let me know.

And so, again, I recommend that the bet BE ALLOWED at least in pre-flop, and see how the public reacts to it. A low-stakes limit hold-em game might be just the thing for introducing NutJack side-bets into the world of poker.

Zcore13, how about this for ONE INTRODUCTORY GAME: Under Texas hold-em, limit, 1-2 game ante, $100 - $200 buy-in maximum. $5 NutJack bets are allowed for the ante, $10 for pre-flop, and $20 at the flop. If a player waits for the flop, he might very well already have an exclusive nutter, and it might be worthwhile to make the bet, knowing he cant lose it. Or it might be a bluff. The Ante and pre-flop bets would become more and more reasonable as more money accumulates into the jackpot. As an extra incentive to make NutJack side-bets (and seed the jackpot), I would also use the "First-Nut" rule, where the first player to make the bet in a given hand wins more, as described in the write-up.

Thanks again for you time and interest, Zcore13.
The difference between zero and the smallest possible number? It doesn't matter; once you cross that edge, it might as well be the difference between zero and 1. The difference between infinity and reality? They are mutually exclusive.
Zcore13
Zcore13
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
  • Threads: 39
  • Posts: 3522
August 27th, 2015 at 8:41:20 PM permalink
So, as I was watching one of the games in my casino the other day, I said to myself, I think I'll pretend players are playing Nutjack. I'

I then watched for the next hour while not one nut hand was achieved. The problem I found is getting the nut doesn't happen all that often. For example:

If there are 3 of the same suit on the board, the player has to have A K of that suit for the nut. An Ace high flush with anything else doesn't qualify.

If the board pairs, a full house gets you nothing. The nut is quads with an Ace Kicker (or King if the quads are Aces).

If the board has A 5 2 of Diamonds, KQ gets you nothing. The nut is 3 4 of Diamonds for a straight flush.

I think people will be turned off very quickly when nobody gets nut hands during an hour or two of play. Bad Beat jackpots used to be the big thing and draw players. Now most casinos have ended or severely reduced the funding on Bad Beat Jackpots in favor of hourly promotions.

I really thought it had a shot at first. Now after watching for it first hand, I don't think so.


ZCore13
I am an employee of a Casino. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
andysif
andysif
Joined: Aug 8, 2011
  • Threads: 23
  • Posts: 433
August 27th, 2015 at 9:46:14 PM permalink
Quote: Zcore13

So, as I was watching one of the games in my casino the other day, I said to myself, I think I'll pretend players are playing Nutjack. I'

I then watched for the next hour while not one nut hand was achieved. The problem I found is getting the nut doesn't happen all that often. For example:

If there are 3 of the same suit on the board, the player has to have A K of that suit for the nut. An Ace high flush with anything else doesn't qualify.

If the board pairs, a full house gets you nothing. The nut is quads with an Ace Kicker (or King if the quads are Aces).

If the board has A 5 2 of Diamonds, KQ gets you nothing. The nut is 3 4 of Diamonds for a straight flush.

I think people will be turned off very quickly when nobody gets nut hands during an hour or two of play. Bad Beat jackpots used to be the big thing and draw players. Now most casinos have ended or severely reduced the funding on Bad Beat Jackpots in favor of hourly promotions.

I really thought it had a shot at first. Now after watching for it first hand, I don't think so.


ZCore13


Are you sure you understand the meaning of "nuts"? In your 3 examples, you have them 2 wrong.

If there are 3 of the same suit on the board, the player has to have A K of that suit for the nut. An Ace high flush with anything else doesn't qualify.
- no, if you have the A + another card of the suit, you have the nuts. No need for AK,
When you hold A + another card, nobody can beat you (assume no pair on the board), therefore you already have the nuts.

If the board pairs, a full house gets you nothing. The nut is quads with an Ace Kicker (or King if the quads are Aces).
- no need for Ace Kicker. Again, no body can beat you if you hold the pair that match the board's pair.
charliepatrick
charliepatrick
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 2000
August 28th, 2015 at 1:36:10 AM permalink
Quote: discflicker

I came up with a side-bet...

Please forgive me for not RTFM and if I have missed an obvious description, but I was trying to get an idea of the bet by quickly reading your initial link, sadly after two minutes I gave in.

When reviewing new games at shows I deliberately ask the demonstrator NOT to describe the game but see whether the handouts give a quick and accurate description; occasionally something has been omitted or isn't as clear as they thought. Also I'm testing the ten-second rule but with the in-depth knowledge of other games.

This is meant not as criticism, but within the first few seconds I had not got any clue what your idea is. This is one of the important things when designing a game/side-bet - also a dealer should be able to describe the concepts to passing players, and once it's got their interest a pamphlet gives the intricate details.

As to your page, poker players will know what a "Nut Hand" is, so it is not important to define it within the first part. I kept reading things like "simple for players to understand" - but never got the overview of exactly what the bet was - yes it concerned "Nut-Hands", had a "Jackpot" feature, was a $10 bet - so I could imagine what it might be.

When you've got past the, what is it about, you can add towards the end some terminology, aspects of the game such as house edge, countability/AP implications, dealer procedures, security implications etc.

Also you need to finalise your suggestions for the best way to have the bet - as an example a Blackjack based side-bet/game designer might say, we recommend using 6 decks and these payouts, if you hit soft 17 or use 4 decks then some changes would be xxx; there are few countability issues but avoid 4 deck 83% penetration.
Zcore13
Zcore13
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
  • Threads: 39
  • Posts: 3522
August 28th, 2015 at 6:58:37 AM permalink
Quote: andysif

Are you sure you understand the meaning of "nuts"? In your 3 examples, you have them 2 wrong.

If there are 3 of the same suit on the board, the player has to have A K of that suit for the nut. An Ace high flush with anything else doesn't qualify.
- no, if you have the A + another card of the suit, you have the nuts. No need for AK,
When you hold A + another card, nobody can beat you (assume no pair on the board), therefore you already have the nuts.

If the board pairs, a full house gets you nothing. The nut is quads with an Ace Kicker (or King if the quads are Aces).
- no need for Ace Kicker. Again, no body can beat you if you hold the pair that match the board's pair.




You are correct on the board pairing and flush. I didnt think it all the way through. No need for an Ace kicker on quads because nobody else could have quads if you do.

Still the nut with the board paired is quads. Very rare.
The nut with 3 suited cards such as A 2 5(or any other 3 within 5 cards of eachother) is the straight flush. Very rare.

I'll watch again next week.


ZCore13
I am an employee of a Casino. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
Zcore13
Zcore13
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
  • Threads: 39
  • Posts: 3522
August 28th, 2015 at 7:11:31 AM permalink
And now that I think about it even more, if the board is paired and someone folded one of those cards pre-flop, quads are no longer the nut hand, but you might not know about it.

It's going to be too confusing.


ZCore13
I am an employee of a Casino. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 178
  • Posts: 10175
August 28th, 2015 at 7:28:50 AM permalink
Folded cards don't matter. Having the nuts is all about having something unbeatable without knowing anyone else's hand.


The only time the actual nuts can differ from absolute nuts is when you yourself are holding a blocking card.

For example, a board of K K 7 3 2 rainbow, the absolute nuts is K K, but if you're holding K 7, that becomes the actual nuts because quads are impossible and nobody can have a better full house. There is a slim chance that someone else can also have K 7 for a nut chop.



On a related note, here's a board that can have three different hands as the nuts. K Q J suited with two small cards that are not a pair. If a player holds A 10, 10 9 or A 9, of that same suit, it's the nuts: Royal, Straight Flush or Nut Flush with a blocker to the SF.
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁 Note that the same could be said for Religion. I.E. Religion is nothing more than organized superstition. 🤗
Zcore13
Zcore13
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
  • Threads: 39
  • Posts: 3522
August 28th, 2015 at 7:46:34 AM permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear

Folded cards don't matter. Having the nuts is all about having something unbeatable without knowing anyone else's hand.


The only time the actual nuts can differ from absolute nuts is when you yourself are holding a blocking card.

For example, a board of K K 7 3 2 rainbow, the absolute nuts is K K, but if you're holding K 7, that becomes the actual nuts because quads are impossible and nobody can have a better full house. There is a slim chance that someone else can also have K 7 for a nut chop.



On a related note, here's a board that can have three different hands as the nuts. K Q J suited with two small cards that are not a pair. If a player holds A 10, 10 9 or A 9, of that same suit, it's the nuts: Royal, Straight Flush or Nut Flush with a blocker to the SF.



Imagine the confusion at the table though if the board is 5 5 K Q 7. At the showdown, someone shows pocket Kings. Damn, not the nuts. Someone could have had quads. Then someone either shows or says the folded a 5.

Too much grey area. Remember, people are drinking, not everyone plays all the time, different Supervisors on different shifts. Every rule/promotion has to be put on paper and have no room for questioning.


ZCore13
I am an employee of a Casino. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.

  • Jump to: