Poll

1 vote (6.25%)
7 votes (43.75%)
6 votes (37.5%)
2 votes (12.5%)
3 votes (18.75%)
1 vote (6.25%)
1 vote (6.25%)
2 votes (12.5%)
2 votes (12.5%)

16 members have voted

Romes
Romes
Joined: Jul 22, 2014
  • Threads: 27
  • Posts: 5477
Thanks for this post from:
Minty
December 9th, 2016 at 2:33:27 PM permalink
(long post from romes)..
Quote: miplet

18% player advantage...

Sounds about right. What's wrong with that??? lol

Hey I said I didn't check the math. I was just giving an example where it broke the categories down a bit more so it "felt" to the player like they hit bigger hands more often.

Quote: mrsuit31

No wonder why Romes wanted that.... SMH. Also, Romes, the bonus payouts went up a pretty solid amount on the lower ends. The base game, there isn't really much I was able to do with the lower end, when removing the Money$uit. At least not without dropping the top pays down to virtually nothing.

Thank you Mip. Feel free to chime in with that optimal strategy at any time lol...

I figured your hands were slightly tied by the math of the game and having to pay out "bigger" payouts on the top end. Just a suggestion to look in to if you felt it was an okay idea.

Quote: mrsuit31

Romes, here is the detailed breakdown of the events probability for the base game for you. Courtesy of the fine work of miplet. This is on the game math tab on the site in greater detail....


17------------- 5.22855%
18-23----------24.995847%
24-27----------4.28922%
28 & 29-------1.39921%
30------------- 0.55111%
Trips---------- 0.76498%
31------------- 0.35017%
Mini-Royal---- 0.07240%

Hmmm, I'll have to take a look at this later and see what i can come up with, but is there an easy way to break out more categories to decifer thier hit frequencies from that?

i.e.
17 -------------------5.22855%
18-19----------------x%
20-22----------------x%
23-25----------------x%
26-29----------------x%
30-------------------.55111%
Trips-----------------.76498%
31--------------------.35017%

Should be easy enough to play with the pay table and "other" return value to see what the house edge would come out to be then.
Playing it correctly means you've already won.
mrsuit31
mrsuit31
Joined: May 29, 2010
  • Threads: 82
  • Posts: 1319
December 9th, 2016 at 3:25:54 PM permalink
Quote: Romes

(long post from romes)..
Sounds about right. What's wrong with that??? lol

Hey I said I didn't check the math. I was just giving an example where it broke the categories down a bit more so it "felt" to the player like they hit bigger hands more often.

I figured your hands were slightly tied by the math of the game and having to pay out "bigger" payouts on the top end. Just a suggestion to look in to if you felt it was an okay idea.

Hmmm, I'll have to take a look at this later and see what i can come up with, but is there an easy way to break out more categories to decifer thier hit frequencies from that?

i.e.
17 -------------------5.22855%
18-19----------------x%
20-22----------------x%
23-25----------------x%
26-29----------------x%
30-------------------.55111%
Trips-----------------.76498%
31--------------------.35017%

Should be easy enough to play with the pay table and "other" return value to see what the house edge would come out to be then.



Yup I can find out in second any breakdown you want. I have spent countless hours experimenting with the tables over the years. These were the ones that played best. One thing to keep in mind is that when you have the smaller ranges as you propose, the percentages per event drop significantly for each. So your idea of having each range of one or two values won't really "feel" much different at all. It just gives the dealers 100 times more work increasing the number of pays to be familiar with.

But I can easily get that stuff for you.

P.S. That definitely doesn't qualify as a long post of yours... it's a majority of quotes. Just sayin :p
.
mrsuit31
mrsuit31
Joined: May 29, 2010
  • Threads: 82
  • Posts: 1319
Thanks for this post from:
charliepatrick
December 9th, 2016 at 3:40:03 PM permalink
Quote: charliepatrick

Thanks. Personally I'd prefer the Ante to pay for a winning 17, but can understand if the maths prevents that happening.

As an aside I know other games where the payouts for various results have to be set so it's correct strategy that the player "Goes For It".



Sorry for missing this post earlier Charlie. The math doesn't allow it as it's designed (obviously I don't need to explain anything math related to you as you have significantly superior knowledge on that subject than I do), however I feel that dealers would absolutely hate me for including a half pay like that when it's nowhere else in the game. This version is all about simplicity, while of course not going to far down the simplistic path...
.
beachbumbabs
Administrator
beachbumbabs
Joined: May 21, 2013
  • Threads: 99
  • Posts: 14227
Thanks for this post from:
mrsuit31
December 9th, 2016 at 5:12:31 PM permalink
Brent Brent brent.

So sorry. I'm an idiot sometimes.

Fwiw, Classic 31 is better imo.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
mrsuit31
mrsuit31
Joined: May 29, 2010
  • Threads: 82
  • Posts: 1319
December 9th, 2016 at 6:50:24 PM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

Brent Brent brent.

So sorry. I'm an idiot sometimes.

Fwiw, Classic 31 is better imo.



Lol, its not a big deal. Been waiting to give you hard time about it for a little while now. Its just extra funny on certain social media platforms that have my name written right above the misspelling.... lol

Fair enough on the name. It seems the majority of people on here and those I have talked to are slightly more partial to classic 31. That said. I like the logo as it is now regardless of the name, so in the end it really doesn't matter all that much in the grand scheme I guess...
.
charliepatrick
charliepatrick
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
  • Threads: 31
  • Posts: 2057
Thanks for this post from:
mrsuit31
December 10th, 2016 at 10:29:30 AM permalink
Thanks for the various figures - I agree with the percentages but come up with a slightly different strategy than the simple one proposed. Note that I haven't done the maths two ways to confirm the figures.
(i) Trips
(ii) Pair and any matching suited card except
6 6 2
5 5 4-2
4 4 5-2
3 3 6-2
2 2 8-3
(iii) Pairs without any matching suit
8s+
p(7s) and 8+
p(6s) and Ten+
p(5s)-p(2s) and Ace
(iv) Three suited cards that total 17 or more
(v) Three different suits
A and 8+
X 9 6+, X 8 7 or X 8 6
9 8 7
(vi) Two different suits
Play any 16+
Play 15 with a 6+
Play 13+ with a 7+
Play 11+ or 64 or 73 with an 8+
Play Ace with two cards totalling 8+

Fold all others (32.824%)

HE = 2.828%
IndyJeffrey
IndyJeffrey
Joined: Feb 10, 2013
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 260
Thanks for this post from:
mrsuit31
December 10th, 2016 at 11:16:47 AM permalink
I like both games. That said, I don't love either of them. I feel like I am folding way more than playing. That's not fun - I want action. That said, maybe I was playing wrong or unlucky.
mrsuit31
mrsuit31
Joined: May 29, 2010
  • Threads: 82
  • Posts: 1319
December 10th, 2016 at 1:05:58 PM permalink
Quote: charliepatrick

Thanks for the various figures - I agree with the percentages but come up with a slightly different strategy than the simple one proposed. Note that I haven't done the maths two ways to confirm the figures.
(i) Trips
(ii) Pair and any matching suited card except
6 6 2
5 5 4-2
4 4 5-2
3 3 6-2
2 2 8-3
(iii) Pairs without any matching suit
8s+
p(7s) and 8+
p(6s) and Ten+
p(5s)-p(2s) and Ace
(iv) Three suited cards that total 17 or more
(v) Three different suits
A and 8+
X 9 6+, X 8 7 or X 8 6
9 8 7
(vi) Two different suits
Play any 16+
Play 15 with a 6+
Play 13+ with a 7+
Play 11+ or 64 or 73 with an 8+
Play Ace with two cards totalling 8+

Fold all others (32.824%)

HE = 2.828%



I believe that is the proper HA Charlie. I just rounded up for the two decimal figure.

The basic strategy isn't optimal at all. I know Miplet is working on the new one for me to update on the website. I didn't want to overwhelm anyone with a crazy optimal strategy on the website for a number of obvious reasons.

That said, I personally play looser than the basic strategy on the site, but I am by no means an ap.

Most of all, thank you for being involved in this convo about the games and for taking the time to do the analysis you have been sharing. Very much appreciated on all fronts.

I'm going to PM you in a few minutes with something you may be interested in looking at, when I get back to my computer.
.
mrsuit31
mrsuit31
Joined: May 29, 2010
  • Threads: 82
  • Posts: 1319
December 10th, 2016 at 1:09:37 PM permalink
Quote: IndyJeffrey

I like both games. That said, I don't love either of them. I feel like I am folding way more than playing. That's not fun - I want action. That said, maybe I was playing wrong or unlucky.



Thank you Indyjeff. I think you may have been playing wrong or simply getting crappy cards (which happened in a horrible way at my last demo).

The math is broken down under the game math tab for the game. The fold rate is just under 35%, therefore the play rate is just above 65%. That said, when the cards are poopie, there isn't much you can do.

The original version of the game from wayyyy back when used to have a very high fold rate, which led to a number of changes leading up to these two recent versions.

Give the demo a spin again if you wouldn't mind and let me know if anything changes card wise.
.
charliepatrick
charliepatrick
Joined: Jun 17, 2011
  • Threads: 31
  • Posts: 2057
December 10th, 2016 at 1:37:09 PM permalink
Quote: Romes

...17 -------------------5.22855%....
Should be easy enough to play with the pay table and "other" return value to see what the house edge would come out to be then.

For instance if you used a simple pay table including full pay for 17, then you would fold less (28.796%) (you now play marginal hands such as p(7s)) and P(17) goes up (5.661%).
Simple payout : House Edge 1.964%
17-29 : Pays 1/1
30-31 : Pays 5/1
Trips : Pays 8/1
Alternative payout structure: House Edge 1.942%
17-24 : Pays 1/1
25-30 : Pays 2/1
31 : Pays 5/1
Trips : Pays 8/1
editAdded alternative idea
Last edited by: charliepatrick on Dec 10, 2016

  • Jump to: