"Bad beat" side bet for Pai Gow Poker.

Let me bounce this by you guys.
I came up, with a friend, another Pai Gow game - actually a bad beat side bet for pai Gow poker. Went pretty far with it, prelim math and a good provisional patent.

Back in May, a fellow dealer (Paul Q.) and I were walking to the break room at Fiesta Henderson, passing by the Poker room.
Paul stated a game idea. He said - "what about a bad beat bet for pai Gow poker, like for poker room poker. You know, a four of a kind loses to a straight flush."
I said "naa..in PGP, that'll happen like once in every 25K hands. That's a non-starter," and we left it at that.

But when I got home, I starting thinking..."what if a pair of aces or so (a decent hand) loses to a two pair hand (slightly better) - as the starting point - to also pay very large and upwards when quads loses to a stronger hand..." I tweaked it to hit > 5% of the time, like most bonus bets.

And that'll work.

I took out the scientific calculator, fired up excel, and worked out a side bet, and wrote a provisional patent. A few days work. A very nice little bet.
Originally, I had a quandary, because when I wrote the patent with the new specs, I had just my name on it. But then, conscience got to me, and I filed it as me and Paul as co-inventors of this little beast.

I think this'll make a fine alternative to just Pai Gow insurance as a negative bet, with a very fine and flexible payout table. If you lose a "winning" hand, you get a good payout and some gambling satisfaction.

I'll shop it around in the near future, and see what happens...any feedback guys?

How about touting a side bet as better-than-usual side bet HE, similar or equal to main HE, or [God forbid?] better than main HE? The Casino would never go for it? Too few gamblers would even care?

To answer the question, players seem to like it in poker, so I think you would have instant recognition for what it is and players would like it. Go for it!

Yes, pretty much true....the bet would "hold" poorly if it goes under 3%% or less HE, and gamblers wouldn't notice or care if it's still within a reasonable range. Side bets with a multiple payout table in the 2:1 to 100:1+ range should have a house edge of about 5% to 7% or so.

I think it would have appeal, it's an interesting and "saving" bet, in the Pai Gow Insurance sense. Your hand is a "no loss" if it is of a certain strength level.

It might be complicated for the dealers; if it is of a certain level AND it loses to a stronger hand THEN use the payout table.

The table would look like:

Bad Beat Loss:
Pair Aces..............: x:1
two pairs together : y:1
two pairs split.......: z:1
trips.....................: a:1
straight................: b:1
flush....................: c:1
full house (all)......: d:1
Quads and up.......: e:1

I wouldn't have a "straight flush or better loss" level; that's kind of like having a seven card straight flush natural on a bonus bet, it's more show than real math and game occurances.

It's still being tweaked, hence the variables in the payout table.
I have to consider:
a) Hit ratio: the new bet needs to payout at least every so often, to act "like a side bet" and not like a progressive. I can adjust the one pair starting point if needed. Ideally a table-based bonus bet should 'hit' at least once in eight hands or so.
b) Simplicity and straightforwardness, so that it's easy to learn, play, and deal. I cannot specify that "the two-card side of this level and a five-card of that level" along with the other criteria; I plan to keep it basically a "hand type." I may consolidate two pairs split/unsplit as just "two pairs present."
c) And within a house edge range of 5%-7%.

My first thought is that you could sell the side bet to the casino by pointing out that some players with their eyes on the prize might play their hands suboptimally--for instance, misplaying two pair, or not splitting a full house. That would be evil--a side bet that increases the chances of the player losing the main bet! Bwahahahahaaaaaaa.

Also, would the "bad beat" mean you have to lose the hand? You could have a flush with AK in front, and the dealer could have a higher flush with AJ in front, and you would push the bet, even though your flush had "lost". Would you still get the bonus?

I like this idea a lot. The insurance bet always seemed too pessimistic to me (I don't *want* to have a 9 high pai gow), and this is a good way to basically bet the negative side of a hand.

Also, gotta say, last weekend I pushed on a 6666x/99 hand on your EZ PGP game (dealer's q-high). Damn you, Dan Lubin!! :-P

Quote: odiousgambit

...or [God forbid?]...

I think that answers that question.

Quote: odiousgambit

How about ... better than main HE? The Casino would never go for it? Too few gamblers would even care?

Even if the casino would go for it (which they won't), the average player would not realize, or even believe, that a side bet pays better than the basic game.

Quote: odiousgambit

...players seem to like it in poker...

The operative word here is 'seem'.

Poker players love being involved when it hits. But if you really start to analyze it, it sucks. When you start to over-think your hand and play it differently because of the possibility of the bad beat ... there's no way to sugar coat it ... it just fucks up the game.

I was in a hand where I had pocket Jacks. The flop was Jh, Th, 6x. A couple bets and calls making the pot about $65. I go all-in for over $250. One guy who only had $15 left called, everyone else folds to the guy on my right. He thinks about it FOREVER. He ends up showing me the hand as he's still thinking about it, trying to get a reaction. He had Kh, Qh. He had the second nut flush draw, open ended straight, and straight-flush and Royal draws. He finally folded.

Because of the other all-in player, we saw the cards to come. He would have hit a flush and beat me. But if he would have hit a straight-flush, and if I would have picked up the last Jack, I would be a dead man, because I got him to fold a bad-beat hand.

If I would have thought about it, and played it hoping to hit the bad beat, I would have lost to the flush.

See how it can fuck up the game?




That said, Dan's Pai-Gow Bad-Beat is a different animal. I like the concept.


Dan -

Can you push the basic bet and win the Bad-Beat, or do you have to lose both?

I like the idea. I'd make it jackpot style, with a progressive jackpot that hits around $100,000.

Unfortunately, it is hard for the little guy to sell games with big pay tables. If a player hits it while the game is still green, the guy who approved it will have his ass on the line. Why take the chance?

The bad beat bet wins when the player loses on a strong hand that normally should not have lost.

The thing about the bet is that people won't play the hand differently, because a rare hit should not affect best play, and because playing the strong element is often overlapping as the best play. (I mean, you would not play a straight as a pai gow type hand.)

With two pairs and a straight or flush, where two pairs is the best hand setting (it isn't always, in spite of most house ways), then the bet is considered as it is played, because a loss on the main bet hand setting is a factor in the bet's winning or losing. People will not be able to set a straight hand with two low pairs as two low pairs, and claim that the straight had lost. The poker elements that had lost is what is counted.

The hand 6544322 is an example, which is best played as 42/65432 instead of two WEAK pairs. If played as 22/44632 and it lost, it would pay as two split pairs losing, not as a straight, because the straight did not lose, it was the two pairs.

Only with the "push your luck" BJ tie bet do people play their hands differently, hitting stiffs against a dealer's bust card on the chance that both hands will become pat (good), and tied.

By the way rdw4potus, where do you play EZ Pai Gow? San Diego? Henderson? at an Ameristar casino? Would love to know.

Quote: Wizard

I like the idea. I'd make it jackpot style, with a progressive jackpot that hits around $100,000.

Unfortunately, it is hard for the little guy to sell games with big pay tables. If a player hits it while the game is still green, the guy who approved it will have his ass on the line. Why take the chance?

Mike, Thank you for the opinion, it means a lot.

I would love a progressive built around it, but see it as a table spot.
The progressive does risk a brutal beating at the Hands of Murphy's Law. The first night that EZ Pai Gow went live at the Fiesta, it gave up Five Aces for $2,500. That looked bad, but was totally survive-able.

Quote: Paigowdan

By the way rdw4potus, where do you play EZ Pai Gow? San Diego? Henderson? at an Ameristar casino? Would love to know.

I gave it a whirl at the Fiesta Henderson when I was there last week. I didn't realize that was the casino where you worked, or I'd have tried to find you. It sucked pushing on quads with a pair up, especially when the dealer had a q-high pai gow. I've had that happen before when the dealer split two pair (I had 4444/22 that time), but this stung a little more.

I think EZ PGP is a great idea. It seems to do what the house would want it to - speed up the rate of play, keep more higher-denomination chips in the players hands, and (slightly) raise the HE.

Quote: Paigowdan

Mike, Thank you for the opinion, it means a lot.

I would love a progressive built around it, but see it as a table spot.
The progressive does risk a brutal beating at the Hands of Murphy's Law. The first night that EZ Pai Gow went live at the Fiesta, it gave up Five Aces for $2,500. That looked bad, but was totally survive-able.

How much would the progressive need to be? Maybe it could be added to an existing progressive game? I'd be more likely to play the $1 on a progressive game paying 75/100/500/5%/10%/100% for quads, SF, RF, cracked quads, 5A, 7card SF. I don't know how unlikely cracked-quads really is, but would replacing the full-house payment with a 5% payment for cracked-quads be about right? (if it also paid if they were split)

The progressive for the Pai Gow bad beat bet would be hard to configure....it would be interesting.

The progressive for the Pai Gow bad beat bet would be hard to configure....it would be interesting.

Some Pai Gow hands would never loose: Five aces (because of the aces on top), the 7card SF, and the Royal, because they are not only so rare, they'd need a rarer hand to beat them. I don't think a 7c SF has ever lost to a higher 7c SF.

Now, split Four of a kind is actually quite weak; it forms two pairs, essentially, and if they are low, then any higher two split pair, split full house, or three-pair hand beats it.
Three pair is not a part of the bet, but might be, and would fit into a progressive:

Bad Beat Progressive: (illustration, not accurate)
Three pairs....................: 50:1
straight.........................: 60:1
Flush............................: 100:1
unsplit full house............: 20%
unsplit Quads or better...: 100%

Actually, three pairs might be tougher to lose, because it always has a pair up, while a straight seldom does. To be researched.

Note the unsplit full house. Players always seem to split up full houses, but if you have a full house with pairs 5's or less and an AK/AQ for the top, keep the FH together and play the AK for the top. Because this is rare, unsplit full houses are as rare as quads.

Unsplit quads loosing is rare, as it occurs every 500 hands, so to be beat by a stronger hand, it would be 500^2 or once in every 25,000 hands.
This is about as often as the AKQ of spades winning the Three-card progressive, so I feel it's spot-on.

One concern I have is with players whose 5-card side is straight or better and it loses, but their 2-card side prevents the loss, and their looking at the prize "that got away" because of the stronger two-card side. Should the progressive be based on the five-card side only?, as

Bad beat progressive: high hand (illustration, not accurate)
straight................: 50:1
flush....................: 100:1
unsplit full house...: 20%
quads or better.....: 100%

Actually my original idea would to have it as a progressive jackpot. This would give the house a higher hold. You would have to lose the hand with one of the top hands in order to collect the progressive jackpot. with other hands paying out a smaller percentage of that jackpot, with maybe a maximum of 10 percent of the jackpot.

Very good idea!

Pretty simple and I cannot find any negative feedback about this side bet.
Did you check this side bet still available?!?!
This will work!

If I do this. I will start with trips or better beaten by better hand. just for higher pay out.

3 pairs beat or something higher could be little bit complicated....i guess.

And try to avoid non-split concept and highest possible hand vs dealers highest possible hand bad beat thing.......grrr.. this is more confusing...

Anywayz... Good Idea Dan. See u at G2E.

Thanks, Greg.
We got some interest today from a game distributor on it. They see it purely as a progressive, and not as another Pai Gow table game or bet; Mike was right.

This does make sense, because as a table bonus type bet, it'll have to start at a very low level (A pair of Jack's or Aces losing as a bad beat), in order to have a decent hit frequency. From there, they'll be too many bets on a cluttered layout. And besides, there are enough Pai Gow tables out there (SMI's Fortune, Galaxy's Emperor's, DEQ's EZ Pai Gow [yeaa!], Pai Gow Thrill, Pai Gow Mania, Pai Gow Bi-Polar, Pai Gow Geisha, Pai Gow Bar Girl, etc.)

Another new Pai Gow table cannot be crammed in, but a good one can displace others out, but this side bet can't do that as a new "table," - and it won't be added as a fourth or fifth side bet now........
But a good progressive can go atop ANY Pai Gow table that's out there!

It IS a bit complicated, true...REALLY true.
The bet is based on a strong hand losing, but many strong hands can be broken up into a slightly weaker but WAY better balanced hands, such as the full house 5552276, played as 22/55576. This will lose to a higher full house split, or to a straight or flush with a pair of 3's or better, not that uncommon. Quad 7's with no ace will be played as split pair 7's, and lose to 10' & 8's, just an ordinary hand. Yet if you have 55522AK, you play AK/55522, keeping the full house together (as the AK is about as strong as a pair of 2's, but the full house is considerably stronger than trips on the 5-card side!) Also, 7777A92 is best played as A9/77772, even KQ/77772! (DON'T break up a monster four of a kind if you got a decent top, unless four K's or something!) What happens quite often in PGP is that people needlessly break up monsterously strong hands to play a luke-warm two pair hand, 77/77A92.

So....the requirements for a bad beat are:
1. A Strong hand on the five-card side (a straight or better)
2. That was not expected to lose as a combined hand.
That's it. Simple, straightforward rules that anyone can grasp, with monster progressive payouts on a hit.

We CAN make it simpler, where if ONLY the 5-card side is beaten, and the hand pushes instead of loses, the bets wins, regardless of the two card side. (I covered all this in the provisional). This will simplyfy it, but greatly reduce the pay table, - really dilute it, as pushes are extremely common with these strong five-card hands, as opponents with weak hands will put up strong two-card sides, having a larger pool to draw the two-card side from. (The hand 6544322 is bet played as a straight for the push: 42/65432, though some disagree.)

With the full-hand loss rules (which is really the definition of a bad beat), we have to calc the frequencies of the two-card sides combined with the five-card sides.
Here we come up with probabilities of the two-card side win based on the two cards left over from a five-card side of a straight or better - all using up five cards on that side, so only a static two-card pool for the two-card side - easy enough.

But when I started at a pair of Aces or better losing, to develope a "high hit-frequency" bet that started at a low win level, it was MESSY! I had:
1. Average Strength of two card side for one pair (Aces), a five-card pool for the best two-card hand;
2. Average strength of the two-card side for two pairs unsplit, - a three card pool to compose the best two-card side;
3. Two pairs split, where I had to use the average strength of the lower pair.
4. Trips, where I had a four card pool to compose the two-card side.
5. unsplit full houses, and straights or better, - use the average strength of two remaining cards (including considering full houses with an EXTRA pair!);
6. Split full houses, using the average strength of a pair in the range of 2's to Aces (8's), at 89.87%, according to Mike's probabilities in his PGP appendix.

This was nuts. Mike has the speadsheets in his PGP appendix - a great help, but an awkward spreadsheet. (Charles Mousseau - HELP!)

Since both the dealer and the player would need to field five-card montser hands on their respective high sides, they would then be equal in getting either a stronger or weaker two-card side between them, but where the dealer wins copies at 0.3927% of the time. (0.5236%*.75; there are 191 2-card combinations equally between the two, minus one of the four matching sets out in the other's hand. Essentially, this is the same rate as getting two pairs in exactly four cards. I might be wrong...please check, I'm a little foggy...) So the five-card side loss rate is multiplied by the two-card side loss rate of 50.39%. (Otherwise in PGP, hands copy much more frequently, because the pool isn't two-cards, it averages close to five cards, for a 1 in 40, or 2.5% copy rate, weighted towards AK,AQ,AJ,KQ, and KJ. THOSE two-cards sides copies at about 5.3% of the time, using Wongs "Optimal Strategy for Pai Gow Poker" appendices. (I have a two-pair splitting strategy that uses adjusted tables for those two-card sides...)

Anyway, the progressive table will be based on having any monster five-card side hands where the combined hand loses.
Players will NOT "adjust their hand settings" to win the progressive, because if they did, they'd push instead of win so many winning hands, they would lose more, and the house would win more, if they tried. However, they may FINALLY play correctly the hands like A9/77773, and AK/55533, etc!

I didn't take the time to finalize prelim math until now because I hadn't gotten a bite from a distributor, and I was working on other things. But I only asked Dan D. and Russell C. at SMI about it, and they passed at this point. SMI passes on a number of winners here and there, I feel, but they got their hands full with other items and their own stuff. Earlier documents were written to describe approximate ranges; we'll zero in exactly now.

Dan. I am keep thinking about your side bet ( I dont know why LOL), and I get more confuse and confuse ;(
To get a perfect house edge and possibility of how player play their hand depend the progressive jackpot amount and so on...
This is only a side bet. However, it could be more than 20k calculation for GLI... :)

The most important part of this side bet is SIMPLIFY.
I am sure you know what to do with it and this is my opinion.

John and I were discuss about this just because we have to kill time while we having coffee. :D

"Adjust their hand setting" possibility is the main issue of our conversation. Even simple math will be enough to explain the player WILL set their hands correctly, but it's possible that they will get shock when they actually can get a real good payouts if they play differently depends on their main bet amount and progressive amount. It could be only $5 difference, however players will get frustrated and those frustration could be same as BlackJack's Lucky Lady happen when they don't bet on it.

Frustration could be usable as psychological way of gaming. So it's better to get involve in some way but. the psychological point of view of Pai-Gow Poker game, Player already have those frustration when they set the hands which makes the game more interesting. This keep telling me SIMPLIFY the side bet. We think the side bet should not effect the main game for any reason. To avoid the tiny possibility of changing play of actual Pai-Gow, simplify is the only answer of the matter. Which means try to set the side bet with only high hands or all hi and low hands together which is I recommend. This will reduce the actual concept of the side bet you were thinking about, but it will simplify the bet.
Such as flush or better beats by dealer's higher hand gets 8 to 1, and quad beaten by higher gets 100 to 1, straight flush gets 10% straight flush without joker gets 100% so on.. the side bet will be located beside the bouns bet.

Well... this will reduce too much juice from the actual idea which is not my point Dan.
I will share if I pop up any idea that could help you.

'Wish' you the best!

Dan,

First - Good idea for the progressive. Definitely just go with the 5 card hand losing to dealer's five card hand. I think I would start being paid out when 3 of a kind gets beat, which might not happen enough for the desired frequency, BUT is fairly simple:

I'm sure this math doesn't work, but an example:

5 Card hand loses pay table
---------------------------------
3 of a kind beat: 10:1
Straight beat: 15:1
Flush beat 25:1
Full House beat 100:1
Quads beat: 10%
Straight flush beat: 100%


Also, I played EZ Pai Gow at Ameristar St. Charles about a month ago. Saw that the black/red bets were gone, made me sad. Was down $250 and not happy. Hit a 9 high pai gow for $200, made me happier.

Reading over the thread again, maybe Quads or Better beat should be 100%.... Full house 10%?

Finsrule,
True, the jackpot will have to be Quads or better losing; a straight flush losing is considerably rarer. And Quads would make it "look more possible."

The big questions is "do we pay on only the five-card side losing" or do we pay if the full hand loses.
I'm begining to think now if the five-card side only loses. - what if you had a guy with a straight flush lose to a higher straight flush - and his two-card side just edges him out - for a zero dollar gain instead of the jackpot. He'd be screaming!

Quote: Paigowdan

Finsrule,
True, the jackpot will have to be Quads or better losing; a straight flush losing is considerably rarer. And Quads would make it "look more possible."

The big questions is "do we pay on only the five-card side losing" or do we pay if the full hand loses.
I'm begining to think now if the five-card side only loses. - what if you had a guy with a straight flush lose to a higher straight flush - and his two-card side just edges him out - for a zero dollar gain instead of the jackpot. He'd be screaming!

I brought this up very early in the thread, but no one addressed it. In PGP, you can lose the five card hand, but you won't necessarily lose the bet. So you'd better have a pretty clear definition of what "lose with four of a kind" means. Also, do you win the jackpot only if you don't break up the hand? Something like QQQQ432 would be played by most players as two pair--so the existence of the jackpot might make a player set his hand suboptimally. Something to consider.

Yes,
I remember. There's a lot to consider, and we have to consider everything.
The hands are defined as not broken up, unless a specific table entry has "split Full house" or "split two pairs" losing, where the full hand has to lose on this "split-up" strong hand; - otherwise all other hands are just intact five-card sides losing, which is less complicated to play and implement.
In some table payout versions we do have the separate "split full houses" and split two pairs (which is also what a split up quad hand produces), to start the payout table at a higher "hit" range, more suitable for a table side bet. But I am shying away from that version now.

And Players won't/shouldn't play their hands any differently from best play (unless they're idiots), because the payout table concerns bad beats on monster hands, which are rare occurances. Would you keep four queens together without having at least an ace top, - to try to hit a bad beat that occurs in 1 in 25,000 hands? Or would you split them, and win win the main bet anyway, which is your real shot? And you can win the Bad beat, if the payout table your using is the full "side-bet" table starting at two pairs.

It'll be simpler and wiser to make it a progressive, starting with trips or a straight losing to a better three of a kind or straight. THIS is a good starting point, because it does seem to occur frequently enough so that the progressive bet seems fair, and not a siren call. Starting at trips or a straight is for the progressive, and starting at two pairs (split and unsplit) would be the start point for a table-based side-bet spot.

Generally concerning the bet, the in-person feedback I got was:
1. Don't make the bet be dependent on a full hand loss, unless it applies to only split entries (two pairs split, and full houses split) if a table-spot side bet.
2. The full payout table "side bet" version is a lot messier and complicated than a simple five-card side loss progressive...so...
3. Keep it VERY simple: make it a five-card progressive bet of trips or a straight as the starting point, and don't have it depend on a full hand loss, just that strong element getting beaten on the five-card side. This would prevent dissatisfaction whenever a five-card monster side loss occurs while the hand pushes. The bettor denied the huge payout would then be screaming, and the bet would seem to be horribly unfair, and get a bad reputation. Scrap the full hand loss consideration: it seems unfair, and is too complicated, and would piss off players who "get a bad beat ON the bad beat!" This I do not want! So....

Five card side loses with:
Trips.....................a:1 - includes split-up full houses! :)
Straight.................b:1
Flush.....................c:1
Unsplit full house....d:1 - AK/99922 & KK/777JJ, for example.
Quads and higher...e:1 - maybe to add SF losing as top jackpot - does occur occasionally.

Please note that Five aces is not a table entry in this progressive bet because:
1. the hand KK/AAAAA down to 32/AAAAA would never lose on the five-card side, nor would it ever be reasonably played as such. (Well, five aces with a pair of K's or Q's can be kept together, if it occurs, but we are FAR more likely to see 7-card natural straight flushes than AAAAAKK.)
2. If split - which is how the hand always should be played anyway, it can still win as trip aces losing to a straight, or aces over x's losing as an unsplit full house, so it is still in the game anyway, if set correctly. (Even with an extra pair of Q's or K's, playing split would produce Aces-over-kings Full house with a pair of aces up!)
3. One would assume that if the Bad Beat progressive is bet, then so is the Dynasty/Fortune/Emperor's Bonus anyway, where five aces - regardless of how played - would make a player very happy.

I still think it needs to be just on the five-card side losing.

Is there any way to add a 2 card bad beat hand to it? For example, if JJ or better gets beaten? It might make it too complicated, you know more about that than I do.

Fins,
I agree that that a five-card loss on a straight or better would be the best version. I'll do all versions for the math and documents (table side bet starting at a midling hand, the full hand losing, and a progressive five-card side losing).

I also had the two-card side covered in the provisional patent, but I don't think a "two-carder" side surprise loss would become a product.

Hopefully, I'll have it done in a week.

Dan- don't you think that you have to make this bet similar to nthe regular pai gow side bet in that 'the cards do the talking', meaning you dont have to play a flush to get paid for a flush, it just has to be 'reconstructable'. If you are going to force players to misset their hands to POSSIBLY be eligible for a 'bad beat payout' then it will be a failure. Also, as rare as a royal flush is , say, it becomes even rarer for the house to actually play it as such. So, your quads or straight flush is even LESS likely to be beaten by such a more powerful hand. I think your concept is OK, but I do not see it ever being simple or attractive enough to ever be commercially viable. But--- good luck.

Quote: SOOPOO

Dan- don't you think that you have to make this bet similar to nthe regular pai gow side bet in that 'the cards do the talking', meaning you dont have to play a flush to get paid for a flush, it just has to be 'reconstructable'. If you are going to force players to misset their hands to POSSIBLY be eligible for a 'bad beat payout' then it will be a failure. Also, as rare as a royal flush is , say, it becomes even rarer for the house to actually play it as such. So, your quads or straight flush is even LESS likely to be beaten by such a more powerful hand. I think your concept is OK, but I do not see it ever being simple or attractive enough to ever be commercially viable. But--- good luck.

I agree. I think the hands have to be able to be played optimally. And reconstructed hands should still get paid. I understand Dan's point about 88xxx/88 losing to 1010xxx/99 and how that's not that rare. BUT, I don't think that's necessarily what would pay the bet since the dealer does not also have a big hand. What if the focus was shifted slightly from "my monster gor crushed!" to "I had a monster, but the dealer had a bigger monster!" So 88xxx/88 losing to 1010xxx/99 is just sad, but 88xxx/88 losing to 99xxx/99 gets paid. I think that 88xxx/xx would also be paid if the hand pushed (like against 9999x/AK). The point would just be that the dealer's best 5 card hand was higher than the player's best 5 card hand.

Soopoo,
No, not really.
1. Most of the strong hands are played as such: most straights & flushes are played as such, and if played as a two pair hand for a win, then that's the better decision. I stated earlier that hands would be played naturally, because winning the main bet with a correctly-played hand is key; for players to give up a sure win for a one-in-a-million hit is a misplay.
2. Many times the best play is keeping the strong element intact. You'd play a straight or flush with an AK or AQ instead of two pairs, as that's the better play, as common as the "two pair rule" myth is as ther better play (it often isn't). Same with a hand like 55522AQ, it's AQ/55522.
3. Many times breaking up a strong hand keeps you in the bad beat bet. breaking up a full house gives trips on the five-card side, an entry in the bad beat bet.

You say 'many times'. The person playing a rare side bet is hoping for that rare time.... I stand by my comment that if you have two separate bets, and cannot play your hand to maximize both, you will not play the side bet. It will not sell.

I disagree:
The "Push your Luck" side bet sold very well - and players routinely play their hands in artificial ways to try to win the side bet, usually busting their hands.
The tie occurs about once in every 11 hands, so it's often enough to risk misplaying a hand. The bad beat bet has much rarer odds, insignificant for altering the play on the main hand.
I consider this aspect a non-issue, and state that It Will Sell.

I think rdw has a sense of the bet.

A five card side monster gets a surprise loss to an even higher hand on that side, it gets paid.
If it was split up to win the main bet, it gets paid there, in comparison to a tiny chance of winning a larger payout, that comes with a huge chance of blowing the main win.

And, If a player can try to play in "an artificial" fashion to increase his odds on a progressive, that is not necessarily a bad thing or a negative; it's simply a rare player's option.

edit 10/31: comparing just the presence of the player's strong element against the the dealer's strongest element (e.g., 99/88765 vs 77/33xxx with a flush) takes the "bad beat" out of the bad beat bet; it becomes a "best bonus versus best bonus" bet - while the hands' result, facing off against each other, can be too unrelated. A straight played as two pairs can beat a dealer's flush played as two lower pairs, where the winner of the hand also wins the "bad beat." It ceases being a pure bad beat bet, and becomes another bonus bet with a twist.

Quote: SOOPOO

You say 'many times'. The person playing a rare side bet is hoping for that rare time.... I stand by my comment that if you have two separate bets, and cannot play your hand to maximize both, you will not play the side bet. It will not sell.

1. I said "many times" it's better to not to break out a strong element like a flush or better. In no was I implying that it was a high-frequency hit type of bet.
2. Players do not have to maximize both bets, they need to maximize their main bet's chance of winning, through a "best play" hand setting for the main bet win. If they win the Bad beat bet too, then fine, if not, then also fine.

We can agree to disagree- good luck. I am willing to bet 1 seafood buffet at the Rio that it doesn't sell.

Quote: Paigowdan

1. I said "many times" it's better to not to break out a strong element like a flush or better. In no was I implying that it was a high-frequency hit type of bet.
2. Players do not have to maximize both bets, they need to maximize their main bet's chance of winning, through a "best play" hand setting for the main bet win. If they win the Bad beat bet too, then fine, if not, then also fine.

I think that the moment a player was torn between setting his hand optimally, and setting it for the possibility of winning the jackpot, and whatever decision he made turned out badly, that player would stomp out of the casino, never to return. At the very least, he would never play the side bet again.

You don't want to make your casino customers THINK--the vast majority come to the casino precisely to avoid doing that.

Maybe so, MKL.....

This bet is surprisingly awkward to configure, - in a sense to produce a version that is completely lacking in "customer or casino piss-off" tendencies.

This bet is a real challenge:
1. If I start at two pairs losing (to include the split-up quads), to be inclusive of monster hands that are split up, then a player's quads can lose to a measley two-pair hand, AND the payouts are severly watered-down....producing an unhappy customer ("Ug! My quads lose - and I get paid as a two-pair loss! This bet sucks!")
2. If I use a player's bonus hand presence in 7-cards to a dealer's bonus in seven cards, then it can be a bonus bet comparison without a bead beat feature, where a straight with two pairs, played as two pairs, outright beats a flush played as two pairs - and wins as a bad beat. The result? An Irate Casino customer! "The player WINS the hand and the bad beat! How can that be!!"
3. If I make the full hand loss a criterion of the bet, then a player with a 5-card SF that loses to Royal on that side might not win - because he had a slightly stronger two-card side. The result? An absolutely IRATE customer!
4. If I make the five-card side "monster hand" loss as the consideration, then the player has to weigh the main bet's best play setting, versus the bonus bet "try" setting. At this point this looks like the best comprise, and yes, the word "comprimise" rears it's ugly head, - a bad omen for a bet design. But..
a) This is the most simple and straightforward of them all.
b) It may force players to field better five-card sides, producing a "touch" extra strategy decisions for the player. This is not a death-knell for a bet, as the "Push your Luck" BJ side bet produces a lot of strategy conflict on boarderline hands and is very popular (12 vs. a dealer's 3, 16 vs. a dealers 7+, etc...it produces more hits-and-busts, but also more tie bet winnings.)
c) Quite often, the player is better off playing a better five-card side with a decent top, and will now make better plays on occasion.
* KQ7777x is best played as KQ/7777x, and NOT as 77/77KQx;
* 55533AK is best played as AK/55533, against most house ways;
* AQKKKKx is best played as AQ/KKKKx, and
* AxKKKKx is best played as AK/KKKxx - a 3 & 1 split of Quads - all of which are exceptionally good plays, and all of which produce "Bad beat active" hand settings, too.
* Even the straight with two pairs "6544322" is better played as 42/65432 than as 44/22653, which is a vulnerable hand setting of very weak two pairs. Our house way demands that this be played as 65/44223, to which I answer the floormen, "Why play a lousy two pair with NO top, when you can play a straight with the same shitty top!"
* And AA22345 is better played as A2/A2345 than 22/AA345 - the ace is almost as strong as deuces on top, but the five-card straight is way stronger than just a one pair five-card side, even if aces.

d) In cases where a player "blows" a hand setting, playing QQJ10998 as Q9/QJ1098 instead of 99/QQJ108 to try for the bad beat, the house picks up the main bet through a "push versus a player's win," (not a bad outcome for the casino customer of the product). Player still wins the Dynasty/Fortune/Emperor's bet.

e) It'll give Mike some work to do if the product hits the light of the casino floor, as to where do you draw the line to alter your strategy. (AA22345 as a straight?, KQ-10-10-10-10-x played as quads, etc.) ;)

I now think the little bit of added strategy conflict is not a negative, using the five-card monster side criterion.

I have a really simple idea.

Make the bad beat be for the TWO-CARD hand.

If you lose with any pair (AND THAT MEANS LOSING THE TWO-CARD HAND, not necessarily the whole hand), then you get paid even money. If you lose with Jacks in front, you get paid more, then Queens, etc. up to the worst bad beat of all, losing with AA in front (I've had this happen at least half a dozen times, losing the whole hand each time, and at the time, I felt like I deserved the Purple Heart, or at least a blankie).

Obviously, the bet would have to be tweaked for actual probabilities, but this variation seems simple, unanbiguous, and easy to understand. Plus, its top outcome--losing with AA in front--is rare enough that the casino could offer a substantial jackpot. It's reminiscent of one of those Hold'Em carnival table games where you get paid 1000-1 on the side bet if both the player and the dealer have AA. Of course, it's a little easier to get that outcome in PGP, with five Aces in the deck.

MKL,
I looked at that....and it's in the running. It would provide for a very flexible payout table.
The carnival game with the AA vs. AA hole card top payout is "Texas Hold 'em Bonus," invented by Paul Omohundro. That game is one of the best and most straightforward versions of Casino-banked Texas Hold 'em. It lost some ground to "Ultimate Texas Hold 'em" from SMI.

The concern with the two card side "pair's loss" is that would have a stronger effect on strategy conflict than with the consideration of the five-card side. Every two pair hand, group of quads, and full house would be influenced: hands like AK73322, AQ55533, A1088884. In Pai Gow Poker, it is generally better for strength to gravitate to the five-card side (assuming that a decent top can be fielded!) than towards the two-card side. A flush with an AK top is (marginally) superior than two pairs KK/AAxxx, although played as two pairs is not really a misplay. But 22/33AKx is a gross misplay.

I will later meet with "Mr. Rob" and say, "These are the options for the Bad Beat bet...." It's all up for consideration; he will review and debate, and ponder and wonder and appraise and evaluate, etc..then make the call, "that's the version!"

Quote: Paigowdan

MKL,
The concern with the two card side "pair's loss" is that would have a stronger effect on strategy conflict than with the consideration of the five-card side. Every two pair hand, group of quads, and full house would be influenced: hands like AK73322, AQ55533, A1088884. In Pai Gow Poker, it is generally better for strength to gravitate to the five-card side (assuming that a decent top can be fielded!) than towards the two-card side. A flush with an AK top is (marginally) superior than two pairs KK/AAxxx, although played as two pairs is not really a misplay. But 22/33AKx is a gross misplay.

What if it was basically the inverse of the insurance bet? Losing with 99 on top pays 1:1, and the payouts ramp up from there to a progressive for AA losses. That would address the issue of mis-set LL, ML, HL, and MM hands while also keeping the payout criteria simple.

Dan- rdw's iteration is simple, does not require strategy errors with extremely rare exceptions (9999882) (you of course would put up 88 if there was no side bet), but I still don't see it as having 'legs'.

About having "legs" or predicting the future market performance of new game ideas:

One of the things about designing and releasing a casino game or side bet,
is that we do not know what will work or not work with the general playing public until there's at 12+ tables out, placed in different areas or casinos.
I mean it is truly a crap shoot (no pun intended) until legions of casino players make their call with their hard earned money. We are truely clueless until the game is out and running with a good sample.

Games that were thought to do horribly, and did for a little while, then go on to have amazing life cycles and legs (Three Card Poker).

Games that were looked at as the next Blackjack just evaporate and fade away (Deuces Wild, Mini-Pai Gow)

A game inventor has to shape, evaluate, and re-evaluate the product based on his criteria, while open to "repair order" ideas.

Comments like, "the hit frequency on the table side bet is too low - maybe it's better as a progressive," or "the rules for drawing a card are too restricting - why only one card?" or "I can see this problem with game protection through the yyy procedure," or "the game is countable though the xxx mechanism," etc. are all useful.

Comments like "it's good," "it's bad, "it has legs," "it doesn't have legs," "it will sell," "it won't sell" may be either nice or otherwise discouraging, but are less usefull, because "positive/negative" opinions about a work in progress are not fully meaningful until a final spec is delivered and the game relased and played.

Comments related to potential "design repair orders" and specific play characteristics are very useful.

What a game designer does is:
1. Shake out a game idea at home and in private, until it basically takes shape as a playing game idea with game rules and hand-level cutoff points that can reasonably be implemented.
2. Write a provisional patent that describes the game idea (with playing rules) and all the ways the bet can exist: e.g., for Pai Gow Poker a) bad beat bet where an element loses to a stronger element, and b) where it can exist in the two-card side, the five-card side, the result of the full hand played (both sides), or exist in the original 7-cards dealt without regard to how it is played or set; for a table side bet implemented with a table betting spot, or a progressive side bet implimented electronically; and describing the dealing and play procedures for these scenarios. All in conjunction with a patent attorney, ideally. Full math does not have to be done, although reasonable ranges, game rules, and pre-determined cutoff points for hand strength levels, etc., must be specificed without limiting yourself.
3. Then, under these provisional patent parameters, produce several versions, and fine tune each.
4. Pitch, or present, these versions - with their pros and cons - to knowlegable people for any unforseen procedural errors, desirability qualities, or symantic errors with a "Guys - Help! Whaddaya think?" (and the game inventor's corner is a very fine place for this.)
5. Pitch, or present, these now finely-tuned versions, with their pros and cons, to a distributor, to see if one or more versions gets a green light. A REAL crap shoot.
If yes....
6. Obtain math reports on the version(s) to be used. Show that patent has been filed and that an attorney is waiting (or is in the process) of making it a Utility patent.
7. Sign an agreement, submiting ALL technical documents, and expect to recieve about 20% of anything it produces as revenue.

Anyway, I got some very fine feedback, and I had given the same, and will later offer the same in this area, in return.
I now got some work to do, and will submit it to a distributor in more detail.

Dan- thanks for the details on how you go about making your idea try to work out. I know it won't be for me... but if I ever see it in Vegas I will bet on it happily and think of your hard work in making it happen. I, by nature, am not entreprenurial, and am fascinated by the ingenuity ot those like you, who are. Once again, good luck...