Thread Rating:

Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
October 30th, 2010 at 9:25:44 PM permalink
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.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 103
  • Posts: 6016
October 31st, 2010 at 4:35:51 AM permalink
We can agree to disagree- good luck. I am willing to bet 1 seafood buffet at the Rio that it doesn't sell.
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
October 31st, 2010 at 10:25:35 AM permalink
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.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
October 31st, 2010 at 3:33:23 PM permalink
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.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
October 31st, 2010 at 3:42:46 PM permalink
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.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
October 31st, 2010 at 4:17:04 PM permalink
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!"
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
rdw4potus
rdw4potus
Joined: Mar 11, 2010
  • Threads: 80
  • Posts: 6945
November 1st, 2010 at 7:01:51 AM permalink
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.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 103
  • Posts: 6016
November 1st, 2010 at 7:58:53 AM permalink
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'.
Paigowdan
Paigowdan
Joined: Apr 28, 2010
  • Threads: 115
  • Posts: 5692
November 1st, 2010 at 3:27:53 PM permalink
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.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 103
  • Posts: 6016
November 1st, 2010 at 5:42:57 PM permalink
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...

  • Jump to: