New Poker Side Bet: 7 Card Bonus
April 10th, 2011 at 5:23:53 PM
permalink
I have a patent pending for a poker game variation. I envision this as a side/bonus bet, as I just don't think it would ever catch on as a full blown game. Basically, the patent is a 7 card hand rank.
Background: When playing poker, it seemed like every now and then someone would comment when they had made a 6 or 7 card straight, or had 3 pair, or some other "exotic" poker hand. And in some situations you would think, that it ought to be worth something if you had achived a 6 or 7 card straight or flush, not to mention the frustration of getting counterfeited when you have 2 pair and the board pairs on the river higher than your bottom pair. I also was playing poker one night where there was a 4 of a kind on the board, but I also had a 3 of a kind, and I lost this hand because the other guy had an ace - I got outkicked. So I began to look into the how such hands would compare, and came up with this:
HAND ODDS, 1 in:
Seven card Royal flush 33446140
Seven card straight flush 4778020
Six card Royal flush 743247.5556
Four of a kind with three of a kind 14398.3333
Six card straight flush 94748.27195
Five card Royal flush 32315.11111
Seven card flush 20393.9878
Four of a kind and one pair 3248.459596
Five card straight flush 3794.660767
Two sets of three of a kind 2436.344697
Three of a kind and two pairs 1082.819865
Seven card straight 1030.761218
Four of a kind 730.9034091
Six card flush 521.9190737
Six card straight 122.7156118
Three pairs 54.14099327
Full house 40.60574495
Five card flush 35.76377572
Five card straight 26.73253193
Three of a kind 20.70449206
Two pairs 4.619256166
One pair 2.281930415
The math has all ben done by Charles Mousseau. (Wizard referred me to him).
The website is
The brochure is
The brochure has sample pay tables. I realize that I should put them on the website as well, and link to the brochure there as well. There are 4 sample pay tables with HE near 6% and hit rate ranging from 3-17%. As with other concepts here, I'd let the distributor or casino figure out how they want to angle the payouts... fewer but higher payouts, more often but lower payouts, middle of the road or in between. Additionally, the paytables can be cut down and simplified, such as eliminating paying for 4 of a kind plus one pair. Paytable 4 has a hit rate of just 3%, and it is really just there to show what it would be to just pay for hands that require 6 or 7 cards - no one would want to play a bonus bet with a 3% hit rate.
Before someone says something, I am aware of the 7 card royal bet in Pai Gow. I didn't patent these hands, I patented the hand rank, and the patent applies to any subset of the rank and not to any specific pay tables. Pai Gow bonuses that I'm aware of do not have any of these other "new" hands.
One interesting thing is that I could or would get to name a few of the hands, like a "Super full house" being a 4ofak+3oak, or a "Double 3 of a kind."
Implementation as a game:
Unlikely because I believe it is too complicated. Novice players already struggle with memorizing the standard 5 card hand rank.
Implementation as a bonus/side bet:
a. Live Poker: Unlikely because players don't want to show their hand if they don't want to. But would be a great way to bring in extra revenue in the poker room.
b. Table games like Pai Gow, Texas Holdem Bonus, etc.: Easy implementation here.
-Pai Gow: Unlikely to replace existing bonus bets, possible if there is no existing side bet
-Texas Holdem Bonus: This would have to be a second side bet, unlikely to replace existing side bet which is based on 2 hole cards
-Others... (?)
c. Electronic or Online poker, cash & tournament: This is where I see it being most useful. Millions of hands of poker are played on top onlike poker sites every day. What if a player could place a side bet on every hand? And these bets could be auto-bet, and could be micro-bets, $.01 and up. Hands could be automatically evaluated at the end of each hand, regardless of if the player folded. You could have a rule that either the bet is cancelled if a hand is not played out fully, or you could fully deal every hand to completion even if the main-hand action is over.
I have attended G2E, and the Raving Game Developers conference where I did meet the Wizard and gave him a brochure but didn't get to talk to him much. I haven't seriously pursued getting this picked up by a distributor yet. I don't know how to approach the online casinos, but if I can get a pro player's attention and get him to sell it to his sponsor that's probably the best route. The only issue may be the fact that online poker sites aren't based in the US and might not respect a US patent...
My feedback so far has matched what I've read through a lot of the threads where people have written that casinos don't like to make large payouts. That makes sense, and perhaps a solution is a progressive payout. OTOH, I'd really like to encourage them to retain the high payouts because then each bet is like a lottery ticket. And casinos can find an insurance underwriter to insure against a huge jackpot. But as stated earlier, there's no reason why the payout can't be just 20,000 for a 7 card royal either.
Oh, and as for the name, I'm looking for suggestions.
What do you all think?
Background: When playing poker, it seemed like every now and then someone would comment when they had made a 6 or 7 card straight, or had 3 pair, or some other "exotic" poker hand. And in some situations you would think, that it ought to be worth something if you had achived a 6 or 7 card straight or flush, not to mention the frustration of getting counterfeited when you have 2 pair and the board pairs on the river higher than your bottom pair. I also was playing poker one night where there was a 4 of a kind on the board, but I also had a 3 of a kind, and I lost this hand because the other guy had an ace - I got outkicked. So I began to look into the how such hands would compare, and came up with this:
HAND ODDS, 1 in:
Seven card Royal flush 33446140
Seven card straight flush 4778020
Six card Royal flush 743247.5556
Four of a kind with three of a kind 14398.3333
Six card straight flush 94748.27195
Five card Royal flush 32315.11111
Seven card flush 20393.9878
Four of a kind and one pair 3248.459596
Five card straight flush 3794.660767
Two sets of three of a kind 2436.344697
Three of a kind and two pairs 1082.819865
Seven card straight 1030.761218
Four of a kind 730.9034091
Six card flush 521.9190737
Six card straight 122.7156118
Three pairs 54.14099327
Full house 40.60574495
Five card flush 35.76377572
Five card straight 26.73253193
Three of a kind 20.70449206
Two pairs 4.619256166
One pair 2.281930415
The math has all ben done by Charles Mousseau. (Wizard referred me to him).
The website is
The brochure is
The brochure has sample pay tables. I realize that I should put them on the website as well, and link to the brochure there as well. There are 4 sample pay tables with HE near 6% and hit rate ranging from 3-17%. As with other concepts here, I'd let the distributor or casino figure out how they want to angle the payouts... fewer but higher payouts, more often but lower payouts, middle of the road or in between. Additionally, the paytables can be cut down and simplified, such as eliminating paying for 4 of a kind plus one pair. Paytable 4 has a hit rate of just 3%, and it is really just there to show what it would be to just pay for hands that require 6 or 7 cards - no one would want to play a bonus bet with a 3% hit rate.
Before someone says something, I am aware of the 7 card royal bet in Pai Gow. I didn't patent these hands, I patented the hand rank, and the patent applies to any subset of the rank and not to any specific pay tables. Pai Gow bonuses that I'm aware of do not have any of these other "new" hands.
One interesting thing is that I could or would get to name a few of the hands, like a "Super full house" being a 4ofak+3oak, or a "Double 3 of a kind."
Implementation as a game:
Unlikely because I believe it is too complicated. Novice players already struggle with memorizing the standard 5 card hand rank.
Implementation as a bonus/side bet:
a. Live Poker: Unlikely because players don't want to show their hand if they don't want to. But would be a great way to bring in extra revenue in the poker room.
b. Table games like Pai Gow, Texas Holdem Bonus, etc.: Easy implementation here.
-Pai Gow: Unlikely to replace existing bonus bets, possible if there is no existing side bet
-Texas Holdem Bonus: This would have to be a second side bet, unlikely to replace existing side bet which is based on 2 hole cards
-Others... (?)
c. Electronic or Online poker, cash & tournament: This is where I see it being most useful. Millions of hands of poker are played on top onlike poker sites every day. What if a player could place a side bet on every hand? And these bets could be auto-bet, and could be micro-bets, $.01 and up. Hands could be automatically evaluated at the end of each hand, regardless of if the player folded. You could have a rule that either the bet is cancelled if a hand is not played out fully, or you could fully deal every hand to completion even if the main-hand action is over.
I have attended G2E, and the Raving Game Developers conference where I did meet the Wizard and gave him a brochure but didn't get to talk to him much. I haven't seriously pursued getting this picked up by a distributor yet. I don't know how to approach the online casinos, but if I can get a pro player's attention and get him to sell it to his sponsor that's probably the best route. The only issue may be the fact that online poker sites aren't based in the US and might not respect a US patent...
My feedback so far has matched what I've read through a lot of the threads where people have written that casinos don't like to make large payouts. That makes sense, and perhaps a solution is a progressive payout. OTOH, I'd really like to encourage them to retain the high payouts because then each bet is like a lottery ticket. And casinos can find an insurance underwriter to insure against a huge jackpot. But as stated earlier, there's no reason why the payout can't be just 20,000 for a 7 card royal either.
Oh, and as for the name, I'm looking for suggestions.
What do you all think?
April 10th, 2011 at 6:12:20 PM
permalink
Online and at live electronic poker systems are the only way to go for additional reasons besides what you mentioned:
1 - Players would not want other players to know they threw out a hand that would have been a winner.
2 - Similar to side bets on other games, other players may chastise a player whose hand is part of the showdown, and has a qualifier, but didn't bet the side bet. For this reason I would not even sit at a table that had this bet in action.
3 - At live games, some players would say "Man, I would have had..." to which other players often suggest that once they fold, they should do their best to forget what they had.
4 - For similar reasons, there is the rule to not rabbit hunt.
5 - Winnings that put the player over the table buy-in (or of the player's regular winnings are already over the buy-in) must be kept separate.
You're right that casinos would not want to let go of a lot of money all at once. Doesn't matter that the math supports the payouts. Slot machine jackpots and poker bad beats are all based upon the coin-in. Sure, the casino will provide a seed value for these, but that seed is returned to the casino by having the meter increase slowly initially, as well as paying only a portion of the collection when it hits, so subsequent jackpot starts at a value that is usually higher than the first seed.
For that reason, I'd recommend you get rid of those extremely rare seven card hands, or make them progressive. Note that progressives add a whole 'nuther set of problems to implementation.
Change the name of the "Two sets of Three Of A Kind". A "Set" is not the same thing as "Three Of A Kind", but many people mistakenly use them interchangeably.
You might want to add payouts for Counterfeits.
1 - Players would not want other players to know they threw out a hand that would have been a winner.
2 - Similar to side bets on other games, other players may chastise a player whose hand is part of the showdown, and has a qualifier, but didn't bet the side bet. For this reason I would not even sit at a table that had this bet in action.
3 - At live games, some players would say "Man, I would have had..." to which other players often suggest that once they fold, they should do their best to forget what they had.
4 - For similar reasons, there is the rule to not rabbit hunt.
5 - Winnings that put the player over the table buy-in (or of the player's regular winnings are already over the buy-in) must be kept separate.
You're right that casinos would not want to let go of a lot of money all at once. Doesn't matter that the math supports the payouts. Slot machine jackpots and poker bad beats are all based upon the coin-in. Sure, the casino will provide a seed value for these, but that seed is returned to the casino by having the meter increase slowly initially, as well as paying only a portion of the collection when it hits, so subsequent jackpot starts at a value that is usually higher than the first seed.
For that reason, I'd recommend you get rid of those extremely rare seven card hands, or make them progressive. Note that progressives add a whole 'nuther set of problems to implementation.
Change the name of the "Two sets of Three Of A Kind". A "Set" is not the same thing as "Three Of A Kind", but many people mistakenly use them interchangeably.
You might want to add payouts for Counterfeits.
I invented a few casino games. Info:
http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ —————————————————————————————————————
Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
April 10th, 2011 at 6:33:48 PM
permalink
I think that the 'rabbit hunting' factor is interesting. Where most experienced poker players don't want to know or don't care what the turn or river might have been, a lot of players (mostly novice or casual) actually do... and if playing the side bet means getting to see 'what could have been' it might actually encourage more action.
April 10th, 2011 at 7:34:23 PM
permalink
Hi Phosphorous,
It will be very interesting to know what the success rate of getting a patent based on what you describe.
I have so many set of ranking hands for various games, please let us know the outcome, no doubts other inventors would want to know too.
I would think, even if you did get the patent, other inventors will just change the payouts or +/- some ranking hands or names the hands different from yours.
Games patent normally based on the method of play, not a set of ranking hands with names and odds.
Has anyone seen a full patent bass on a set of ranking hands and the hands names?
the other factor:
Would the casino pay anybody for a set of ranking hands?
It will be very interesting to know what the success rate of getting a patent based on what you describe.
I have so many set of ranking hands for various games, please let us know the outcome, no doubts other inventors would want to know too.
I would think, even if you did get the patent, other inventors will just change the payouts or +/- some ranking hands or names the hands different from yours.
Games patent normally based on the method of play, not a set of ranking hands with names and odds.
Has anyone seen a full patent bass on a set of ranking hands and the hands names?
the other factor:
Would the casino pay anybody for a set of ranking hands?
Stephen Au-Yeung (Legend of New Table Games®) NewTableGames.com
October 31st, 2011 at 5:59:55 PM
permalink
Quote: PhosphorousI have a patent pending for a poker game variation. I envision this as a side/bonus bet, as I just don't think it would ever catch on as a full blown game. Basically, the patent is a 7 card hand rank.
Are you talking about patent pending as in "Provisional Patent" or "Utility Patent"?
October 31st, 2011 at 6:14:02 PM
permalink
How about the Joker? Pai Gow has one Joker. Stephen's every point is right.
October 31st, 2011 at 6:25:29 PM
permalink
The risks in this new side bet are that:
1. The standard 7-card side bet based on regular 5-card poker hands (which is public domain) extends far enough into "rarity territory" payouts that it would probably do as an added side bet. Do the 7-card freak hands really add anything?
2. If it were a viable side bet, it would have already been done.
3. People are accustomed to five-card exception hands of standard poker.
Might be a challenge to get out...
1. The standard 7-card side bet based on regular 5-card poker hands (which is public domain) extends far enough into "rarity territory" payouts that it would probably do as an added side bet. Do the 7-card freak hands really add anything?
2. If it were a viable side bet, it would have already been done.
3. People are accustomed to five-card exception hands of standard poker.
Might be a challenge to get out...
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
