Ibeatyouraces
Ibeatyouraces
Joined: Jan 12, 2010
  • Threads: 68
  • Posts: 11933
August 28th, 2015 at 7:52:34 AM permalink
KK would be the second nuts.
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
Zcore13
Zcore13
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
  • Threads: 39
  • Posts: 3522
August 28th, 2015 at 7:58:10 AM permalink
Quote: Ibeatyouraces

KK would be the second nuts.



Agreed. But what if someone at the showdown shows they have a 5. Now all of a sudden the table is arguing that quads was no longer the best possible hand, as nobody could have gotten quads with a 5 in someone's hand.


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 8:45:48 AM permalink
Poker players know that the nuts is all about having an unbeatable hand, without knowing what anyone else holds or folded.

The only exception would be if there was a prematurely exposed card before the showdown. But that would have to be written in, or specifically excluded, from this side bet's rules.
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. 🤗
discflicker
discflicker
Joined: Jan 1, 2011
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 451
August 28th, 2015 at 1:09:52 PM permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear

Poker players know that the nuts is all about having an unbeatable hand, without knowing what anyone else holds or folded.

The only exception would be if there was a prematurely exposed card before the showdown. But that would have to be written in, or specifically excluded, from this side bet's rules.



Well, this proposal certainly has everyone thinking about all the possibilities... kind of like thinking up good strategies for the various outcomes of a craps roll.

THANK YOU, DJTeddyBear for your comments and your interest; I never considered the possibility of card exposure, and I will write this into the rules right now!!

Thanks to everyone on this thread for your valuable comments!

Marty, 28-Aug-2015
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.
discflicker
discflicker
Joined: Jan 1, 2011
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 451
August 28th, 2015 at 1:35:11 PM permalink
Quote: charliepatrick

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.

My apologies, I am an IDIOT when it comes to expressing myself, as most of the WoV posters who've struggled though my documentation over the years already know. I just can't resist embellishing my work with stupid tangents, CAPS, BOLD, and ignorant "humor" like that gal going over Niagara falls. When I "try harder", I wind up with even more "talk soup".

Quote:

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'm not so sure about that, even some of our experts here on WoV are having disagreements about what it means.

I think that Zcore13 maybe thought that nutters require both of your hole cards to be played. But DJTeddyBear does understand it, and he even pointed out when it would become ambiguous... when a card gets exposed, and THANKS AGAIN for catching that, DJ!
Quote:


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.


Thanks for your interest, charleypatrick, I will take your suggestions and try coming up with a "Quick flyer description". I will also add the "suggested game" that I made for Zcore13. Thanks!!
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.
discflicker
discflicker
Joined: Jan 1, 2011
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 451
August 29th, 2015 at 1:13:26 AM permalink
Quote: Zcore13

Agreed. But what if someone at the showdown shows they have a 5. Now all of a sudden the table is arguing that quads was no longer the best possible hand, as nobody could have gotten quads with a 5 in someone's hand.


ZCore13


DJTeddyBear has a solid definition of nut hands, and I agree. The only issue is if a card is accidentally exposed, and so I have updated my document and added the following section:

Special situation… handling accidental card exposures:

As pointed out by DJTeadyBear on the WoV forum, if a card(s) is (are) accidentally exposed over the course of a hand, this can affect whether a hand is considered “the nuts” or not. In these special situations:

1) Once a card is accidentally exposed, players are no longer allowed to make NutJack side-bets.

2) If any NutJack side-bets have already made before accidental exposure, then the cards that become exposed are not allowed to be considered for determination of the hand’s status as an actual nut hand.

In other words, we act like it never happened.

(Thanks again DJTeddyBear)


I have also added the following quick description at the start of the document, per suggestions from charleypatrick

Quick description:

In a live game of no-limit Texas-hold-em poker, players can make a side-bet that the hand they’re playing is “unbeatable”… “the nuts”. They can make the side-bet either at ante for $5, or after they see their hole cards at pre-flop for $10, or after they see the flop for $25. If they don’t have “the nuts” at the showdown, the money is accumulated into the “NutJack Jackpot” (i.e., a plastic box on the table). If they do have “the nuts”, they win the jackpot.

NutJack side-bet wagers are unique for two reasons:

1) Players holding nut hands can totally control the jackpot… they can wait until they see the flop (when they already know they have an unbeatable hand) and then bet on it to win an accumulated jackpot.

2) At the pre-flop or the flop (or even later, in some versions of NutJack), the act of making the side-bet may be used as “a sanctioned way” of showing hand strength, or as a bluff. Thus, NutJack side-bets can affect the action of the live game itself.

(thanks again, charleypatrick)


Finally, as suggested by MathExtreamist, Zcoore13, AND charleypatrick, I added a prioritized list of of suggested variations and here are #1 and #2:

1) “WoV NutJack for limit Texas Hold-em”

“First-Nut NutJack”, $5 bet at ante, $10 at pre-flop, all bets using a $1 commission, paid up-front, or a 10% commission upon jackpot payout.

This variation would be better for casinos that can’t pool money into jackpots from multiple tables. These jackpots would have little accumulation, however, the NutJack side-bet will be effective in the live-game strategy.

2) “WoV NutJack for no-limit Texas Hold-em”

“All-In, First-Nut NutJack”, $5 bet at ante, $10 at pre-flop, $25 at the flop, all bets using a $1 commission, paid up-front, or a 10% commission upon jackpot payout.

This variation would also be better for casinos that can’t pool money into jackpots from multiple tables. These jackpots would have little accumulation, however, the NutJack side-bet will be MOST effective in the live-game strategy.


Thank you everyone for your very positive suggestions and interest.
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.
charliepatrick
charliepatrick
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 2000
August 29th, 2015 at 3:22:29 AM permalink
Quote: discflicker

...Quick description:...that the hand they’re playing is “unbeatable”… “the nuts”...

Technically "they're playing" is wrong since they may have the nuts at that point (e.g. A-high flush) but lose it due to later cards. I think you mean at showdown or equivalent.

Also I think there's a major issue with "Nuts" as opposed to being "Unbeatable" - see argument below.


As an aside it might be helpful if you were creating a pamphlet to explain the highest hands for various five-card boards.

(i) Three or more suited cards that are connected - highest possible straight flush.
(ii) Pairs, Trips or Quads - if the highest rank is a Pair or Trips, then the highest ranked Quads; otherwise highest Quads with an Ace kicker (or AAAAK).
(iii) Three of more suited cards, no straight flush possible, no Pairs on board - flush including the highest suited card(s) not on board.
(iv) Three or more connected cards (no possible flush), highest straight possible.
(v) None of above - Trips of the highest card (i.e. hole cards are a pair matching highest ranked card on board).


The "nut-hand" is the highest possible five-card poker hand using the five cards from the board with any two other cards from a fresh deck. For instance if the board had 10s 9s 8s 5c 3d, the best hand possible could be if you had Qs Js. However if you actually had Js 7s, while your hand is unbeatable, it may be argued you do not have the "nut" hole cards.

More likely to be a problem though is when there is a flush (under (iii)). Do you have the "nuts" with just the suited Ace (and another if needed) or do you actually need the highest two cards? This one could definitely cause a problem since most poker players will automatically consider their hands as "nuts" with the Ace-flush.


I actually think it's better to use the term unbeatable with the possible provisos (i) exceeds the board (ii) the hand could be equalled, but not beat, by another player (holding any other two-card combinations remaining from a fresh deck). I should probably add, that where cards are accidentally exposed, either by other players or the dealer, this shall not affect the determination of the bet (otherwise it's in everyone's interest to throw their cards in face up): so in the instance shown if the board had Trip 5s (and no pair), the Nut requirement is still to have a 5 even if it is known that a 5 has been thrown in.
discflicker
discflicker
Joined: Jan 1, 2011
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 451
August 29th, 2015 at 7:01:02 PM permalink
Quote: charliepatrick

Technically "they're playing" is wrong since they may have the nuts at that point (e.g. A-high flush) but lose it due to later cards. I think you mean at showdown or equivalent


I clarify that in the following sentences in my document.

Quote: charliepatrick


As an aside it might be helpful if you were creating a pamphlet to explain the highest hands for various five-card boards.


Upon showdown there is no ambiguity. What does matter is this:

At Ante, the player has a 0.98% chance of hitting an unbeatable hand... it's a total craps shot.

After the pre-flop, players have up to a 4.35% chance of hitting an unbeatable hand... see this table, it turns out, suited A - 10 has the best chance, even better than A - A (if I'm reading it correctly). Knowledge of his hand's expected probability of hitting the nuts is why the bet cost 2x more at pre-flop than at ante.

But certainly, at ante and pre-flop, nothing is certain. However, once the flop is seen, THEN if players have both suited hole cards in the 10 - A range, then can KNOW they have the winner (if they're luck enough to flop the Royal flush, that is, I've seen that once in my lifetime), or at least the potential for it (if the board has at least one of the other 10 - A range cards of his suite). If the board doesn't have at least one card in the range of 10 - A, then, hitting the Royal is impossible.

IN ANY CASE, players are able to accurately determine the likelihood of hitting a nut hand by waiting until they see at the flop. For example, if anyone flops a straight, there's a good chance it will be the nuts at showdown. If they flop a flush, it's even better, etc. Again, knowledge of a hand's expected probability of hitting the nuts is why the NutJack side-bet cost (2 1/2) x more at flop than at pre-flop.

The point is: the flop can allow the player to fully control the pot, so if a player waits for the flop to make the bet, then, yes, he might have a sure nut hand, but other players might have already made the FIRST NutJack bet, so he can't claim "FIRST PLAYER" status if he waits...recall, the FIRST player to make a NutJack side-bet wins more in a showdown that results in a shared - win, and now I need to make a slight, but important change to the rules...

RUN-OUT OPTION: If everyone folds to a player that has already made a NutJack bet
, NOW HE IS GIVEN THE OPTION OF RUNNING OUT THE HAND, OR NOT, IF HE HAS THE ABSOLUTE NUT (depending upon the layout, AT THE TIME, which might be flop, or turn), THEN HE SHOULD CHOOSE THIS OPTION BECAUSE HE WINS THE JACKPOT PLUS THE ENQUEUING REGION BETS (THE IN-PROCESS NUTJACK SIDE-BETS). IF HE CHOOSES TO NOT RUN OUT THE HAND, NOW, HE WINS THE ENQUEUING REGION. THIS OPTION MAKES IT WAY BETTER NOW, BECAUSE PLAYERS CAN REALLY BLUFF WITH IT, AND THE BETS ARE NOW MORE ENCOURAGED, BECAUSE NOW, NUT HAND OR NOT, THE PLAYER HAS A NEW POTENTIAL WAY TO WIN AND MAY NOT HAVE TO EVEN SHOW HIS HAND!

The down side is: If he chooses to run out the hand while he's sitting non a PROBABLE NUT (i.e., he has a straight on the turn), then choosing to run out the hand might make his hand no longer a nut hand; in this case, he does NOT win the jackpot OR the enqueuing region bets!! So, in effect, he can lose what he already had locked up (the enqueuing region money) if he makes the choice to run out the deck, and the board nullifies his nut hand. In this case, the money in the enqueuing region goes into the Jackpot accumulation.

That makes it even better!!!
It encourages the bet to be made and it accumulates the Jackpot even more than if this option wasn't available, and it adds excitement and risk to the game.

I will now include this "Run-out option" in all of the recommended variations, except for the "Free--NutJack, because that game doesn't allow players to make the bet in the first place, its always in play like "Royal Flush of the day".

If the casino allows the bet to be made on the turn, THEN these other combinations that you list start to become considerations:
Quote: charliepatrick



(i) Three or more suited cards that are connected - highest possible straight flush.
(ii) Pairs, Trips or Quads - if the highest rank is a Pair or Trips, then the highest ranked Quads; otherwise highest Quads with an Ace kicker (or AAAAK).
(iii) Three of more suited cards, no straight flush possible, no Pairs on board - flush including the highest suited card(s) not on board.
(iv) Three or more connected cards (no possible flush), highest straight possible.
(v) None of above - Trips of the highest card (i.e. hole cards are a pair matching highest ranked card on board).


The NutJack bet is really simple, but it adds a lot of flexibility and excitement into the game, especially limit hold-em; The NutJack side-bet alone makes it play more like no-limit hold-em!

Quote: charliepatrick


The "nut-hand" is the highest possible five-card poker hand using the five cards from the board with any two other cards from a fresh deck. For instance if the board had 10s 9s 8s 5c 3d, the best hand possible could be if you had Qs Js. However if you actually had Js 7s, while your hand is unbeatable, it may be argued you do not have the "nut" hole cards.

More likely to be a problem though is when there is a flush (under (iii)). Do you have the "nuts" with just the suited Ace (and another if needed) or do you actually need the highest two cards? This one could definitely cause a problem since most poker players will automatically consider their hands as "nuts" with the Ace-flush.


As stated above, there is no ambiguity in determining if a hand is unbeatable at the showdown.

Quote: charliepatrick


I actually think it's better to use the term unbeatable with the possible provisos (i) exceeds the board (ii) the hand could be equaled, but not beat, by another player (holding any other two-card combinations remaining from a fresh deck).


The only definition that needs to be made is "Exclusive-Nut Hand" and "Shared-Nut-Hand", this depends on the outcome at showdown, and it is defined in my document; exclusive means only ONE hand is the nuts, shared means that more than one player share it, i.e., when 4 players each have an ace among their hole cards and the board has quads. In "First-Nut NutJack", the jackpot is divvied among the winners, but the player with "FIRST-PLAYER" status wins the enqueuing region money, as explained in my document. Again, "FIRST-NUT NutJack" encourages players to make the bet for this reason, and that accumulates the jackpot more. Without this, I doubt players would make NutJack side-bets if the jackpot was empty.. it SEEDS it (hopefully).

Quote: charliepatrick


I should probably add, that where cards are accidentally exposed, either by other players or the dealer, this shall not affect the determination of the bet (otherwise it's in everyone's interest to throw their cards in face up): so in the instance shown if the board had Trip 5s (and no pair), the Nut requirement is still to have a 5 even if it is known that a 5 has been thrown in.



I have already addressed this new issue, see my newly added "Special case" rule, above... I agree with you, however if a card is accidental exposed then I'm not allowing any more NutJack bets to be placed in that hand, because once seen, a player can use the information to help determine if hand he holds is unbeatable.

Now, if a player makes a NutJack bet, we don't need to worry about him exposing cards on-purpose in order to lock other players out of "FIRST-PLAYER" status, because he'll have folded his hand in the act of exposure, at least in classical rules of hand action... if casinos allow players to show their hole cards, in play, while NutJack bets are still allowed to be made, I think this is a conflict of interest and shouldn't be allowed, but who knows, maybe THAT can be a part of the NutJack side-bet strategy as well!


Thanks again for all of your interest and for your positive recommendations. I really appreciate it.

Marty, 29-Aug-2015
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.
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 178
  • Posts: 10175
August 30th, 2015 at 11:57:53 AM permalink
Wow. A LOT of typing since my last visit here.



First, as has been said several times, "Nuts" = "Unbeatable". And it might be different based upon perspective.

For example, with a board of 10s 9s 8s 5d 2h, there are two nuts hands: Qs Js or Js 7s. The average observer would only think of the first one. 7s 6s is a straight flush, but beatable by Qs Js. Similarly, if you're holding Qs 7s, or Js 6s, there is NO nut hand possible (a secondary payout to the NutJack might be for a Nut Blocker). Some people, holding As Xs will claim to have the "Nuts", but that is only upon showdown, and seeing the other cards. When considering only their own hand and board, they don't have it.

People will often say they have the "Nut Flush" meaning the Ace high flush. But they'll say it even if there is a straight flush possibility, or a paired board. Or even with a three of a kind on the board.

Although less common, people will sometimes say they have the "Nut Straight", and similarly, say it even if the board has a pair, trips, or three to a flush. Hell, even if there's four to a flush AND a pair!



Although I brought it up, I must advise that the rules dictate that prematurely exposed cards are ignored. To do otherwise would require a new set of rules, and procedures. For example, if you include cards exposed during a deal (or a boxed burn card), you'd then need some mechanism to track that card. Or keep it exposed for the duration of the hand.

If you include ANY type of exposed cards, then you're inviting players to 'accidentally' fold face up if they have a buddy with a nut hand once those cards are excluded. Yeah, rare, but....

A few months back, I was involved in a hand where the Kh was exposed and replaced during the hand. I had Jh 6h in the big blind. No raise, the flop was Ah Qh x. At that moment I knew I was drawing to the 'nut flush'. But by the time the heart hit on the river with no paired board, I forgot that the Kh was dead, and proceeded cautiously, despite having the nuts. If there was something to remind me that the Kh was dead, I probably would have bet a little stronger.



Last piece of advice: As shown by the differing opinions in this thread, identifying nut hands is tricky. In the pub poker league where I deal, a few months back we had a promotion where anyone with the nuts got a $1 scratch off lottery ticket. While we had several people shove pre-flop with AA, and WERE given the ticket when nobody called, there were several discussions on the showdown whether or not a hand was the nuts. That's the kinds of issues this bet is going to generate.
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. 🤗
discflicker
discflicker
Joined: Jan 1, 2011
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 451
August 31st, 2015 at 6:19:57 AM permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear

Wow. A LOT of typing since my last visit here.
If you include ANY type of exposed cards, then you're inviting players to 'accidentally' fold face up if they have a buddy with a nut hand once those cards are excluded. Yeah, rare, but....


I wasn't going to track them, and I agree they should have no bearing on determination of Nuttage. But I was going to not allow the bet once a card is exposed, because I thought it would've helped the player better determine his chances. I guess its really the same issue for the live game. In the live game they don't stop betting if a card gets exposed, so maybe my idea of not allowing NutJack side bets after a card is exposed is a bad idea. I'm open to suggestions and comments.

Quote: DJTeddyBear


Last piece of advice: As shown by the differing opinions in this thread, identifying nut hands is tricky. In the pub poker league where I deal, a few months back we had a promotion where anyone with the nuts got a $1 scratch off lottery ticket. While we had several people shove pre-flop with AA, and WERE given the ticket when nobody called, there were several discussions on the showdown whether or not a hand was the nuts. That's the kinds of issues this bet is going to generate.


Thanks again for your time.

If NutJack side-bet jackpots are allowed to be won before the hand is run-out, this makes it a lot easier to hit nut hands and win the jackpot!! Like, if a player gets pocket AA, he can make the NutJack side-bet, and then go all in and hope everyone else folds to him. If that happens, and IF THE HAND IS EVALUATED FOR BEING "THE NUTS" AS A TWO-CARD HAND, then he would win the enqueuing area bets and the NutJack jackpot, ON THE SPOT, and the dealer wouldn't need to run out the hand.

I like this, DJTeddyBear! I like it a lot!!!

So now I need to consider a whole new set of possibilities.... I need to think about evaluating 2-card, 5-card and 6-card hands for NutJack side-bets, and clarify the rules about when the hand is ready for NutJack determination.

The down side is: can dealers be trained to recognize nut hands in 2-card, 5-card, 6-card and 7-card scenarios? I think its a piece of cake.

First off, this only happens when everyone else folds to a single player, so that should make it straight-fo4rward... if more than 1 player are in contention, the hand must be run-out as usual.

If everyone else folds to a player who has already made the NutJack side-bet, then I can make a slight modification to the "Run-Out Option" where the player can chose to either keep his cards hidden and take the enqueuing region money (as before) or "Run the hand out, NutJack-style": The lone players cards are turned up, and if he has the nut for whatever number of cards are in play, then he wins the enqueuing region money and the jackpot. If not, the dealer keeps dealing the board out, one phase at a time... along the way, same rules are in effect. If he fails to obtain the nut on the river, he does NOT win the jackpot OR the money in the enqueuing region.

Now the bet is really tasty... if you can just edge out the other players from the table, now you have a way better chance at hitting the nut, and you can still use it as a bluff, and not have to expose your hole cards. This is the bets of all worlds. This might make the bet so attractive, I won't need seed the jackpot as discussed in the game variations.

I will write this up, and I think I will take a poll to ask how difficult it would be to deal the game like this.

Thanks for pointing this possibility out to me, DJ, I honestly didn't even consider it, and it might make this a super-cool part of the game.
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.

  • Jump to: