Percentage of Q high Pai Gow between 52 and 62 hands?
February 25th, 2013 at 2:18:40 PM
permalink
A queen high pai gow occurs about every 57 hands. My question is this: What is the percentage of times it will occur between the following set of played hands:
52 to 62 hands: ____%
47 to 67 hands: ____%
42 to 72 hands ____%
The reason I ask is if the house pays 50 to 1 odds on a queen high, I would like to play the statistics in the safest range.
Thanks.
cosmicoomph
52 to 62 hands: ____%
47 to 67 hands: ____%
42 to 72 hands ____%
The reason I ask is if the house pays 50 to 1 odds on a queen high, I would like to play the statistics in the safest range.
Thanks.
cosmicoomph
February 25th, 2013 at 2:40:41 PM
permalink
Yes, a dealer's queen high hand occurs about once in every 57 rounds or so.
Since the cards are reshuffled and re-dealt for each round of play, any round of play has exactly the same odds of the queen's dragon bet hitting, which is 1.7643%.
In 11 rounds of play, you will see - on average - a dealer's queen's dragon hand occuring once in every 5.153 groups of 11 rounds.
in 21 rounds of play, you see it once in every 2.69 groups of 21 rounds, on average.
In 31 rounds of play, you'll see it once in every 1.828 groups of 31 rounds, on average.
In 57 rounds of play, you'll see it, on average, once in a group of 57 hands.
Since the cards are reshuffled and re-dealt for each round of play, any round of play has exactly the same odds of the queen's dragon bet hitting, which is 1.7643%.
In 11 rounds of play, you will see - on average - a dealer's queen's dragon hand occuring once in every 5.153 groups of 11 rounds.
in 21 rounds of play, you see it once in every 2.69 groups of 21 rounds, on average.
In 31 rounds of play, you'll see it once in every 1.828 groups of 31 rounds, on average.
In 57 rounds of play, you'll see it, on average, once in a group of 57 hands.
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes - Henry David Thoreau. Like Dealers' uniforms - Dan.
February 25th, 2013 at 3:09:40 PM
permalink
You mean played rounds
I think I read your question differently from Dan.
You want the probabilities and not the averages.
Well, you got both.
I used 19425/1101022
for the probability from the Wizard's site
Including the rounds a to b (example 52 to 62)
52-62: 7.1736%
47-67: 13.7529%
42-72: 20.4413%
added: other intervals
1-39: 50.052977% (this is the median. half by the 39th round, the other half after)
1-50: 58.9348082%
You do not want to know how to do this yourself??
It is very simple in a spreadsheet, more work with just a pencil and paper and calculator,
but making a table of values and adding them up is a simple task.
P= 19425/1101022 = probability of success
Q= 1-P
N = the round number
For it to happen on the first round (hand)
P
2nd round
Q*P (It did not happen on the first round but did happen on the 2nd round)
3rd round
Q*Q*P (Q^2*P)
4th round
Q*Q*Q*P (Q^3*P)
and so on
a pattern develops
Q^(N-1)*P
We can easily fill in our table
Then just add up the intervals (say 52 to 62) you desire to include.
There are a few other ways to do this, but I find this easy in a spreadsheet
here is a table for the first 100 rounds (dealer hands)
added: complete data
Round # / Probability of it happening exactly on the Nth round / Cumulative (N or less)
Hope this can help someone
I think I read your question differently from Dan.
You want the probabilities and not the averages.
Well, you got both.
I used 19425/1101022
for the probability from the Wizard's site
Including the rounds a to b (example 52 to 62)
52-62: 7.1736%
47-67: 13.7529%
42-72: 20.4413%
added: other intervals
1-39: 50.052977% (this is the median. half by the 39th round, the other half after)
1-50: 58.9348082%
You do not want to know how to do this yourself??
It is very simple in a spreadsheet, more work with just a pencil and paper and calculator,
but making a table of values and adding them up is a simple task.
P= 19425/1101022 = probability of success
Q= 1-P
N = the round number
For it to happen on the first round (hand)
P
2nd round
Q*P (It did not happen on the first round but did happen on the 2nd round)
3rd round
Q*Q*P (Q^2*P)
4th round
Q*Q*Q*P (Q^3*P)
and so on
a pattern develops
Q^(N-1)*P
We can easily fill in our table
Then just add up the intervals (say 52 to 62) you desire to include.
There are a few other ways to do this, but I find this easy in a spreadsheet
here is a table for the first 100 rounds (dealer hands)
added: complete data
Round # / Probability of it happening exactly on the Nth round / Cumulative (N or less)
1 0.017642699 0.017642699
2 0.017331434 0.034974134
3 0.017025661 0.051999795
4 0.016725282 0.068725077
5 0.016430203 0.085155281
6 0.01614033 0.101295611
7 0.015855571 0.117151182
8 0.015575836 0.132727018
9 0.015301036 0.148028055
10 0.015031085 0.163059139
11 0.014765896 0.177825035
12 0.014505386 0.192330421
13 0.014249471 0.206579892
14 0.013998072 0.220577965
15 0.013751109 0.234329073
16 0.013508502 0.247837575
17 0.013270175 0.261107751
18 0.013036054 0.274143804
19 0.012806063 0.286949867
20 0.012580129 0.299529996
21 0.012358182 0.311888178
22 0.01214015 0.324028327
23 0.011925965 0.335954292
24 0.011715559 0.347669851
25 0.011508865 0.359178716
26 0.011305817 0.370484533
27 0.011106352 0.381590885
28 0.010910406 0.392501291
29 0.010717917 0.403219208
30 0.010528824 0.413748032
31 0.010343067 0.424091099
32 0.010160588 0.434251687
33 0.009981327 0.444233014
34 0.00980523 0.454038244
35 0.009632239 0.463670483
36 0.0094623 0.473132783
37 0.00929536 0.482428143
38 0.009131365 0.491559508
39 0.008970263 0.50052977
40 0.008812003 0.509341773
41 0.008656536 0.517998309
42 0.008503811 0.52650212
43 0.008353781 0.5348559
44 0.008206397 0.543062298
45 0.008061614 0.551123912
46 0.007919386 0.559043298
47 0.007779666 0.566822965
48 0.007642412 0.574465377
49 0.007507579 0.581972956
50 0.007375125 0.589348082
51 0.007245008 0.59659309
52 0.007117187 0.603710277
53 0.00699162 0.610701897
54 0.006868269 0.617570166
55 0.006747095 0.624317261
56 0.006628058 0.630945318
57 0.006511121 0.637456439
58 0.006396247 0.643852686
59 0.0062834 0.650136086
60 0.006172544 0.65630863
61 0.006063643 0.662372273
62 0.005956664 0.668328938
63 0.005851573 0.674180511
64 0.005748335 0.679928846
65 0.005646919 0.685575765
66 0.005547292 0.691123057
67 0.005449423 0.69657248
68 0.00535328 0.701925761
69 0.005258834 0.707184595
70 0.005166054 0.712350649
71 0.005074911 0.71742556
72 0.004985376 0.722410936
73 0.00489742 0.727308356
74 0.004811017 0.732119373
75 0.004726137 0.73684551
76 0.004642756 0.741488266
77 0.004560845 0.746049111
78 0.004480379 0.75052949
79 0.004401333 0.754930823
80 0.004323682 0.759254505
81 0.0042474 0.763501905
82 0.004172465 0.76767437
83 0.004098851 0.771773221
84 0.004026536 0.775799757
85 0.003955497 0.779755255
86 0.003885712 0.783640967
87 0.003817157 0.787458124
88 0.003749812 0.791207936
89 0.003683656 0.794891592
90 0.003618666 0.798510258
91 0.003554823 0.802065081
92 0.003492106 0.805557187
93 0.003430496 0.808987683
94 0.003369973 0.812357656
95 0.003310517 0.815668173
96 0.003252111 0.818920284
97 0.003194735 0.822115019
98 0.003138371 0.825253391
99 0.003083002 0.828336392
100 0.003028609 0.831365002
Here is a complete table of probabilities up to 100 rounds
x prob[X=x] prob[X<x] prob[X>=x] prob[X<=x] prob[X>x]
1 0.01764270 0.00000000 1.00000000 0.01764270 0.98235730
2 0.01733143 0.01764270 0.98235730 0.03497413 0.96502587
3 0.01702566 0.03497413 0.96502587 0.05199979 0.94800021
4 0.01672528 0.05199979 0.94800021 0.06872508 0.93127492
5 0.01643020 0.06872508 0.93127492 0.08515528 0.91484472
6 0.01614033 0.08515528 0.91484472 0.10129561 0.89870439
7 0.01585557 0.10129561 0.89870439 0.11715118 0.88284882
8 0.01557584 0.11715118 0.88284882 0.13272702 0.86727298
9 0.01530104 0.13272702 0.86727298 0.14802805 0.85197195
10 0.01503108 0.14802805 0.85197195 0.16305914 0.83694086
11 0.01476590 0.16305914 0.83694086 0.17782503 0.82217497
12 0.01450539 0.17782503 0.82217497 0.19233042 0.80766958
13 0.01424947 0.19233042 0.80766958 0.20657989 0.79342011
14 0.01399807 0.20657989 0.79342011 0.22057796 0.77942204
15 0.01375111 0.22057796 0.77942204 0.23432907 0.76567093
16 0.01350850 0.23432907 0.76567093 0.24783757 0.75216243
17 0.01327018 0.24783757 0.75216243 0.26110775 0.73889225
18 0.01303605 0.26110775 0.73889225 0.27414380 0.72585620
19 0.01280606 0.27414380 0.72585620 0.28694986 0.71305014
20 0.01258013 0.28694986 0.71305014 0.29952999 0.70047001
21 0.01235818 0.29952999 0.70047001 0.31188817 0.68811183
22 0.01214015 0.31188817 0.68811183 0.32402832 0.67597168
23 0.01192596 0.32402832 0.67597168 0.33595429 0.66404571
24 0.01171556 0.33595429 0.66404571 0.34766985 0.65233015
25 0.01150886 0.34766985 0.65233015 0.35917871 0.64082129
26 0.01130582 0.35917871 0.64082129 0.37048453 0.62951547
27 0.01110635 0.37048453 0.62951547 0.38159088 0.61840912
28 0.01091041 0.38159088 0.61840912 0.39250129 0.60749871
29 0.01071792 0.39250129 0.60749871 0.40321920 0.59678080
30 0.01052882 0.40321920 0.59678080 0.41374803 0.58625197
31 0.01034307 0.41374803 0.58625197 0.42409109 0.57590891
32 0.01016059 0.42409109 0.57590891 0.43425168 0.56574832
33 0.00998133 0.43425168 0.56574832 0.44423301 0.55576699
34 0.00980523 0.44423301 0.55576699 0.45403824 0.54596176
35 0.00963224 0.45403824 0.54596176 0.46367048 0.53632952
36 0.00946230 0.46367048 0.53632952 0.47313278 0.52686722
37 0.00929536 0.47313278 0.52686722 0.48242814 0.51757186
38 0.00913136 0.48242814 0.51757186 0.49155950 0.50844050
39 0.00897026 0.49155950 0.50844050 0.50052977 0.49947023
40 0.00881200 0.50052977 0.49947023 0.50934177 0.49065823
41 0.00865654 0.50934177 0.49065823 0.51799830 0.48200170
42 0.00850381 0.51799830 0.48200170 0.52650211 0.47349789
43 0.00835378 0.52650211 0.47349789 0.53485590 0.46514410
44 0.00820640 0.53485590 0.46514410 0.54306229 0.45693771
45 0.00806161 0.54306229 0.45693771 0.55112391 0.44887609
46 0.00791939 0.55112391 0.44887609 0.55904329 0.44095671
47 0.00777967 0.55904329 0.44095671 0.56682296 0.43317704
48 0.00764241 0.56682296 0.43317704 0.57446537 0.42553463
49 0.00750758 0.57446537 0.42553463 0.58197295 0.41802705
50 0.00737513 0.58197295 0.41802705 0.58934808 0.41065192
51 0.00724501 0.58934808 0.41065192 0.59659308 0.40340692
52 0.00711719 0.59659308 0.40340692 0.60371027 0.39628973
53 0.00699162 0.60371027 0.39628973 0.61070189 0.38929811
54 0.00686827 0.61070189 0.38929811 0.61757016 0.38242984
55 0.00674709 0.61757016 0.38242984 0.62431726 0.37568274
56 0.00662806 0.62431726 0.37568274 0.63094531 0.36905469
57 0.00651112 0.63094531 0.36905469 0.63745643 0.36254357
58 0.00639625 0.63745643 0.36254357 0.64385268 0.35614732
59 0.00628340 0.64385268 0.35614732 0.65013608 0.34986392
60 0.00617254 0.65013608 0.34986392 0.65630862 0.34369138
61 0.00606364 0.65630862 0.34369138 0.66237227 0.33762773
62 0.00595666 0.66237227 0.33762773 0.66832893 0.33167107
63 0.00585157 0.66832893 0.33167107 0.67418051 0.32581949
64 0.00574834 0.67418051 0.32581949 0.67992884 0.32007116
65 0.00564692 0.67992884 0.32007116 0.68557576 0.31442424
66 0.00554729 0.68557576 0.31442424 0.69112305 0.30887695
67 0.00544942 0.69112305 0.30887695 0.69657248 0.30342752
68 0.00535328 0.69657248 0.30342752 0.70192576 0.29807424
69 0.00525883 0.70192576 0.29807424 0.70718459 0.29281541
70 0.00516605 0.70718459 0.29281541 0.71235064 0.28764936
71 0.00507491 0.71235064 0.28764936 0.71742556 0.28257444
72 0.00498538 0.71742556 0.28257444 0.72241093 0.27758907
73 0.00489742 0.72241093 0.27758907 0.72730835 0.27269165
74 0.00481102 0.72730835 0.27269165 0.73211937 0.26788063
75 0.00472614 0.73211937 0.26788063 0.73684551 0.26315449
76 0.00464276 0.73684551 0.26315449 0.74148826 0.25851174
77 0.00456084 0.74148826 0.25851174 0.74604911 0.25395089
78 0.00448038 0.74604911 0.25395089 0.75052948 0.24947052
79 0.00440133 0.75052948 0.24947052 0.75493082 0.24506918
80 0.00432368 0.75493082 0.24506918 0.75925450 0.24074550
81 0.00424740 0.75925450 0.24074550 0.76350190 0.23649810
82 0.00417246 0.76350190 0.23649810 0.76767437 0.23232563
83 0.00409885 0.76767437 0.23232563 0.77177322 0.22822678
84 0.00402654 0.77177322 0.22822678 0.77579975 0.22420025
85 0.00395550 0.77579975 0.22420025 0.77975525 0.22024475
86 0.00388571 0.77975525 0.22024475 0.78364096 0.21635904
87 0.00381716 0.78364096 0.21635904 0.78745812 0.21254188
88 0.00374981 0.78745812 0.21254188 0.79120793 0.20879207
89 0.00368366 0.79120793 0.20879207 0.79489159 0.20510841
90 0.00361867 0.79489159 0.20510841 0.79851025 0.20148975
91 0.00355482 0.79851025 0.20148975 0.80206508 0.19793492
92 0.00349211 0.80206508 0.19793492 0.80555718 0.19444282
93 0.00343050 0.80555718 0.19444282 0.80898768 0.19101232
94 0.00336997 0.80898768 0.19101232 0.81235765 0.18764235
95 0.00331052 0.81235765 0.18764235 0.81566817 0.18433183
96 0.00325211 0.81566817 0.18433183 0.81892028 0.18107972
97 0.00319473 0.81892028 0.18107972 0.82211502 0.17788498
98 0.00313837 0.82211502 0.17788498 0.82525339 0.17474661
99 0.00308300 0.82525339 0.17474661 0.82833639 0.17166361
100 0.00302861 0.82833639 0.17166361 0.83136500 0.16863500
Hope this can help someone
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
February 25th, 2013 at 5:21:44 PM
permalink
Thank you for your response and your work but I am not sure I am following. A queen high on an average happens every 57 or so rounds but yet your numbers show the probability of that happening before 57 plays is greater than after 57 plays and only about 20% between 42 and 72 plays. Just by deduction, that tends me to think that cannot be correct and still have a median of 57 hands. Am I missing something? I am thinking the percentage of a queen high between 42 and 72 hands should be nearer the 50% range if not higher and less before and after incrementally decreasing the further you are away from the median, unless of course it has not be hit by 57 hands then it would be increasing. But, we are looking for the bell curve of probability here with 57 being the apex of the curve and starting at 0 hands played.
Thank you for your input.
Thank you for your input.
February 25th, 2013 at 5:29:12 PM
permalink
I do not think your answer is accurate. A queen high pai gow happens on average about every 57 hands played I believe per player (seems pretty accurate from my experience), not per a group of players, because if 7 were playing, a queen high would happen only every 399 individual hands played per your logic. Am I missing something here? Please regard my answer to the other individual that responded to get a better idea of what I am looking for. I am looking for the bell curve with 57 being the apex of the curve and wanting to know the probability in percentage of hitting the queen high between 52 and 62 hands, etc.. I am thinking that in the range of 42 and 72 hands it should be somewhere in the neighborhood of about 50% or so but do not know the math to prove it.
Thanks.
Thanks.
February 25th, 2013 at 6:35:50 PM
permalink
Quote: COSMICOOMPH
The reason I ask is if the house pays 50 to 1 odds on a queen high, I would like to play the statistics in the safest range.
Thanks.
cosmicoomph
But this math doesn't affect the house edge in any way...
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
February 25th, 2013 at 8:14:16 PM
permalink
Exactly and that is correct. The chance that it happens at least 1 time in 57 plays is ONLY 63.746%Quote: COSMICOOMPHThank you for your response and your work but I am not sure I am following.
A queen high on an average happens every 57 or so rounds but yet your numbers show the probability of that happening before 57 plays is greater than after 57 plays
(see my updated data table for the probabilities)
Here are the pics of the probability curves, Relative (for each Play) and Cumulative, for X or less plays
No peak around 57 plays.
This is also known as the wait time distribution
Cumulative, for X or less plays
This is also known as the wait time distribution
Cumulative, for X or less plays
Correct. A 20% probability of it happening between 42 and 72 plays inclusive.Quote: COSMICOOMPHand only about 20% between 42 and 72 plays.
You mean average.Quote: COSMICOOMPHJust by deduction, that tends me to think that cannot be correct and still have a median of 57 hands.
The median is the 50/50 or over/under value for all the possible outcomes in a finite number of trials.
The probabilities in the table are correct. They are probabilities and not averages.
You are confusing an average with a probability
Yep. You are mixing up "averages" and "probabilities"Quote: COSMICOOMPHAm I missing something?
57 will not be the apex of the bell curve.Quote: COSMICOOMPHI am thinking the percentage of a queen high between 42 and 72 hands should be nearer the 50% range if not higher and less before and after incrementally decreasing the further you are away from the median, unless of course it has not be hit by 57 hands then it would be increasing.
But, we are looking for the bell curve of probability here with 57 being the apex of the curve and starting at 0 hands played.
Thank you for your input.
That would only happen at about 3231 plays
Again, you are mixing up and "average" and a "probability".
You need to review prob/stats 101. You got some ideas mixed up.
The "mean" or average can be in the center of the curve (also the mode and median)
IF and ONLY IF it is a normal distribution.
At 100 plays, the curve you want is NOT normal. Not even close.
(I answered your SD question in your blog)
The average comes from ALL the possible outcomes divided by the number of successes in N trials.
N/n
N = all possible outcomes (the sample space)
n= number of successes
A Probability has a value between 0 and 1 and is in the form of n/N
Histograms of 100 and 3231 plays
One looks normal and we can use the mean and standard deviation to find the probability of any interval
One is not and if we use the mean and sd we will not be happy with the results as explained in your blog
Basically, the "probability" of your event hitting on the (say)
32nd hand to the 56th hand is the total of all the individual probabilities of hitting on 32,33,...,55,56
forgot to add: when you have your probabilities (between 0 and 1) just multiply that value by 100 to get the % value
Sometimes these concepts of averages and probabilities can get confusing. Just remember which one you are dealing with
Good Luck
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
February 25th, 2013 at 8:52:00 PM
permalink
I appreciate your response. I will add up some of your numbers and see if a bet 15 or 20 consecutively plays for a queen high on a 50 to 1 payout can pay for itself over time in a certain spread. If you have an answer to this, I would love to hear. The house always has numbers to its favor so it would be pleasant to hedge them whenever possible.
February 26th, 2013 at 6:04:37 AM
permalink
Quote: COSMICOOMPHI appreciate your response. I will add up some of your numbers and see if a bet 15 or 20 consecutively plays for a queen high on a 50 to 1 payout can pay for itself over time in a certain spread.
Of course it can't.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
February 26th, 2013 at 6:12:56 AM
permalink
The odds of it happening between hands 52 and 62 are the same as it happening from hands 1-11
The odds of it happening from hands 47 to 67 are the same as it happening from hands 1-21
The odds of it happening from hands 42 to 72 are the same as it happening from hands 1-31.
The only way to get an edge on a 50:1 payout which has a 57:1 chance is all about fortuitous timing, i.e. dumb luck
The odds of it happening from hands 47 to 67 are the same as it happening from hands 1-21
The odds of it happening from hands 42 to 72 are the same as it happening from hands 1-31.
The only way to get an edge on a 50:1 payout which has a 57:1 chance is all about fortuitous timing, i.e. dumb luck
A flute with no holes is not a flute, a donut with no holes is a danish
February 26th, 2013 at 6:12:34 PM
permalink
It would be nice if this was true, but it is not.Quote: Gabes22The odds of it happening between hands 52 and 62 are the same as it happening from hands 1-11
The odds of it happening from hands 47 to 67 are the same as it happening from hands 1-21
The odds of it happening from hands 42 to 72 are the same as it happening from hands 1-31.
The win probability distribution is geometric.
The round with the single highest win probability is the fist one.
52-62: 7.1736%
1-11: 17.783%
47-67: 13.7529%
1-21: 31.189%
42-72: 20.4413%
1-31: 42.409%
These values can be found in a data table in my first post in this thread.
Good Luck
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
February 26th, 2013 at 7:59:49 PM
permalink
Quote: 7crapsIt would be nice if this was true, but it is not.
I'm not following. Every hand is an independent event. Every hand has the same probability of being a q-high pai gow. How could two ranges of equal size have unequal probabilities of containing a q-high pai gow?
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
February 26th, 2013 at 8:15:55 PM
permalink
Nice question.Quote: rdw4potusI'm not following.
Every hand is an independent event.
Every hand has the same probability of being a q-high pai gow.
How could two ranges of equal size have unequal probabilities of containing a q-high pai gow?
I answered that in my first post one page 1.
We are basically looking at the "wait time" for the event to happen.
The chance of a q-high pai gow to happen on exactly the Nth round or
how many rounds do we have to wait to see a a q-high pai gow ?
Review
P= 19425/1101022 = probability of success (about 1/56.68)
Q= 1-P probability of failure (no q-high pai gow)
N = the round number
For a q-high pai gow to happen on the very first round of play (N=1)
= P
0.017642699
a q-high pai gow to happen on exactly the 2nd round of play and not the first
Q*P (It did not happen on the first round (Q) but did happen on the 2nd round (P))
0.017331434 (already smaller than the probability of hitting it on the very first round)
a q-high pai gow to happen on exactly the 3rd round and not the first 2 rounds
Q*Q*P (Q^2*P)
0.017025661
and so on.
The probability of a q-high pai gow to happen on exactly the Nth round keeps getting smaller each round played.
We sum the individual probabilities for any interval (range of hands).
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
February 27th, 2013 at 5:43:36 AM
permalink
Quote: 7craps
The probability of a q-high pai gow to happen on exactly the Nth round keeps getting smaller each round played.
No, it doesn't. The probability of the FIRST queen high pai gow happening on exactly the Nth round decreases as the number of rounds increases. The probability of a q-high pai gow happening at all on any given round is a constant.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
February 27th, 2013 at 6:36:52 AM
permalink
Quote: rdw4potusNo, it doesn't. The probability of the FIRST queen high pai gow happening on exactly the Nth round decreases as the number of rounds increases. The probability of a q-high pai gow happening at all on any given round is a constant.
Correct. It seems obvious that's what 7craps meant and it was simply an omission on his part, but it's an important distinction to make.
February 27th, 2013 at 6:50:10 AM
permalink
Quote: jc2286Correct. It seems obvious that's what 7craps meant and it was simply an omission on his part, but it's an important distinction to make.
I agree that it's obvious that's what 7craps meant. But it's not what Gabes22 meant. I'm also not entirely certain that it's what the OP meant. What if the Q-high is only "due" after it's hit 3 times...;-)
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
February 27th, 2013 at 7:15:50 AM
permalink
The OP made no distinction whether hand 1 was the first in a shoe or the first randomly when sitting down at the table mid-shoe and to be honest even if he is starting a new 8 deck shoe (424 cards in a 8 53 card Pai Gow decks), to get to 57 or 72 hands, just playing between you or the dealer, even if the dealer allowed full penetration, they would need to shuffle at a minimum every 30 hands.
A flute with no holes is not a flute, a donut with no holes is a danish
February 27th, 2013 at 7:21:30 AM
permalink
Quote: Gabes22The OP made no distinction whether hand 1 was the first in a shoe or the first randomly when sitting down at the table mid-shoe and to be honest even if he is starting a new 8 deck shoe (424 cards in a 8 53 card Pai Gow decks), to get to 57 or 72 hands, just playing between you or the dealer, even if the dealer allowed full penetration, they would need to shuffle at a minimum every 30 hands.
There's no shoe in pai gow poker. One full 53 card deck is used and reshuffled for each hand.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
February 27th, 2013 at 7:24:48 AM
permalink
Then how do the odds change based upon what hand in a sequence it is when being dealt with from the same exact sample size?
A flute with no holes is not a flute, a donut with no holes is a danish
February 27th, 2013 at 7:38:50 AM
permalink
Quote: Gabes22Then how do the odds change based upon what hand in a sequence it is when being dealt with from the same exact sample size?
The odds of a given hand being the first hand in the sequence to have a q-high pai gow decrease as the number of hands gets larger. Q-high pai gow happens 1 in 57 hands on average. So the odds of the first q-high pai gow happening on hand 1 are much better than the odds of the first Q-high pai gow happening on hand 8,000.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
February 27th, 2013 at 7:45:17 AM
permalink
There I completely agree with you, but the OP is looking to time his bets to take advantage of a 50:1 payout on something that happens once every 57 hands. There is no scheme or sequence of betting that is going to overcome that with a fresh full deck every hand. If it were a game played in a shoe and the cards available to be played changed, there might be someway to develop a count to place that bet to where it were advantageous to the player and not the house, but since pai gow isn't played that way, there is no way to do that.
I think you interpreted my post before being where the first Q high Pai Gow would occur, which I was not. I was merely saying there is no way to time his bets other than by dumb luck.
I think you interpreted my post before being where the first Q high Pai Gow would occur, which I was not. I was merely saying there is no way to time his bets other than by dumb luck.
A flute with no holes is not a flute, a donut with no holes is a danish
February 27th, 2013 at 7:48:41 AM
permalink
Quote: Gabes22There I completely agree with you, but the OP is looking to time his bets to take advantage of a 50:1 payout on something that happens once every 57 hands. There is no scheme or sequence of betting that is going to overcome that with a fresh full deck every hand. If it were a game played in a shoe and the cards available to be played changed, there might be someway to develop a count to place that bet to where it were advantageous to the player and not the house, but since pai gow isn't played that way, there is no way to do that.
I think you interpreted my post before being where the first Q high Pai Gow would occur, which I was not. I was merely saying there is no way to time his bets other than by dumb luck.
Yes, the OP's plan has no merit. I play a lot of pai gow poker - I wish making money at this game was that easy.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
February 27th, 2013 at 10:04:29 AM
permalink
The OP, to me, wants to know the percentage (the number of times it would hit/number of times played)
in an interval (a range) by asking between 52 and 62.
How can there be a round 52 if he did not see rounds 1 to 51? He had to wait.
I used the wait time or first occurrence approach.
Just like if you sat down and started counting each round from 1 and tabulating the round # when a Q-High finally hit.
Then reset your counter back to 1 and start counting again.
I stand by my results as it exactly answers the question "I feel and think" the OP asked.
Others think the OP asked a different question. That is fine too.
Here is the data from a 10 million event simulation. Because I have it
round__freq__probability__N or less
1__176475__0.0176475__0.0176475
2__173357__0.0173357__0.0349832
3__170292__0.0170292__0.0520124
4__167301__0.0167301__0.0687425
5__164273__0.0164273__0.0851698
6__161605__0.0161605__0.1013303
7__158542__0.0158542__0.1171845
8__155662__0.0155662__0.1327507
9__152675__0.0152675__0.1480182
10__150324__0.0150324__0.1630506
11__147441__0.0147441__0.1777947
12__144779__0.0144779__0.1922726
13__142754__0.0142754__0.206548
14__140086__0.0140086__0.2205566
15__137571__0.0137571__0.2343137
16__134533__0.0134533__0.247767
17__133134__0.0133134__0.2610804
18__130490__0.013049__0.2741294
19__127806__0.0127806__0.28691
20__126585__0.0126585__0.2995685
21__123424__0.0123424__0.3119109
22__122013__0.0122013__0.3241122
23__119098__0.0119098__0.336022
24__117365__0.0117365__0.3477585
25__115510__0.011551__0.3593095
26__113334__0.0113334__0.3706429
27__111298__0.0111298__0.3817727
28__109440__0.010944__0.3927167
29__107740__0.010774__0.4034907
30__105280__0.010528__0.4140187
31__103481__0.0103481__0.4243668
32__101818__0.0101818__0.4345486
33__100214__0.0100214__0.44457
34__98157__0.0098157__0.4543857
35__96518__0.0096518__0.4640375
36__94217__0.0094217__0.4734592
37__92989__0.0092989__0.4827581
38__91322__0.0091322__0.4918903
39__89446__0.0089446__0.5008349
40__87862__0.0087862__0.5096211
41__86402__0.0086402__0.5182613
42__85101__0.0085101__0.5267714
43__83402__0.0083402__0.5351116
44__82020__0.008202__0.5433136
45__80178__0.0080178__0.5513314
46__78912__0.0078912__0.5592226
47__77050__0.007705__0.5669276
48__76788__0.0076788__0.5746064
49__75145__0.0075145__0.5821209
50__73117__0.0073117__0.5894326
51__72654__0.0072654__0.596698
52__71473__0.0071473__0.6038453
53__70282__0.0070282__0.6108735
54__68724__0.0068724__0.6177459
55__67404__0.0067404__0.6244863
56__66485__0.0066485__0.6311348
57__64716__0.0064716__0.6376064
58__63936__0.0063936__0.644
59__63072__0.0063072__0.6503072
60__61472__0.0061472__0.6564544
61__60405__0.0060405__0.6624949
62__59673__0.0059673__0.6684622
63__58920__0.005892__0.6743542
64__57067__0.0057067__0.6800609
65__56630__0.005663__0.6857239
66__55224__0.0055224__0.6912463
67__54815__0.0054815__0.6967278
68__53615__0.0053615__0.7020893
69__52508__0.0052508__0.7073401
70__51385__0.0051385__0.7124786
71__50755__0.0050755__0.7175541
72__49719__0.0049719__0.722526
73__48920__0.004892__0.727418
74__48093__0.0048093__0.7322273
75__47194__0.0047194__0.7369467
76__46537__0.0046537__0.7416004
77__45692__0.0045692__0.7461696
78__44520__0.004452__0.7506216
79__43964__0.0043964__0.755018
80__43302__0.0043302__0.7593482
81__42593__0.0042593__0.7636075
82__41881__0.0041881__0.7677956
83__40611__0.0040611__0.7718567
84__40416__0.0040416__0.7758983
85__39920__0.003992__0.7798903
86__39215__0.0039215__0.7838118
87__38307__0.0038307__0.7876425
88__37574__0.0037574__0.7913999
89__37104__0.0037104__0.7951103
90__36530__0.003653__0.7987633
91__35300__0.00353__0.8022933
92__34914__0.0034914__0.8057847
93__34216__0.0034216__0.8092063
94__33726__0.0033726__0.8125789
95__33180__0.003318__0.8158969
96__32142__0.0032142__0.8191111
97__31902__0.0031902__0.8223013
98__31421__0.0031421__0.8254434
99__30972__0.0030972__0.8285406
100__29639__0.0029639__0.8315045
101__29857__0.0029857__0.8344902
102__28985__0.0028985__0.8373887
103__28821__0.0028821__0.8402708
104__28186__0.0028186__0.8430894
105__27679__0.0027679__0.8458573
106__27218__0.0027218__0.8485791
107__26497__0.0026497__0.8512288
108__26452__0.0026452__0.853874
109__25661__0.0025661__0.8564401
110__25210__0.002521__0.8589611
111__24989__0.0024989__0.86146
112__24318__0.0024318__0.8638918
113__24010__0.002401__0.8662928
114__23601__0.0023601__0.8686529
115__23258__0.0023258__0.8709787
116__22896__0.0022896__0.8732683
117__22367__0.0022367__0.875505
118__22078__0.0022078__0.8777128
119__21724__0.0021724__0.8798852
120__21058__0.0021058__0.881991
121__20717__0.0020717__0.8840627
122__20410__0.002041__0.8861037
123__19947__0.0019947__0.8880984
124__19718__0.0019718__0.8900702
125__19235__0.0019235__0.8919937
126__19092__0.0019092__0.8939029
127__18662__0.0018662__0.8957691
128__18371__0.0018371__0.8976062
129__18071__0.0018071__0.8994133
130__17578__0.0017578__0.9011711
131__17463__0.0017463__0.9029174
132__17057__0.0017057__0.9046231
133__16635__0.0016635__0.9062866
134__16627__0.0016627__0.9079493
135__16298__0.0016298__0.9095791
136__15683__0.0015683__0.9111474
137__15761__0.0015761__0.9127235
138__15487__0.0015487__0.9142722
139__15061__0.0015061__0.9157783
140__14861__0.0014861__0.9172644
141__14597__0.0014597__0.9187241
142__14289__0.0014289__0.920153
143__14275__0.0014275__0.9215805
144__13751__0.0013751__0.9229556
145__13461__0.0013461__0.9243017
146__13400__0.00134__0.9256417
147__13178__0.0013178__0.9269595
148__13019__0.0013019__0.9282614
149__12608__0.0012608__0.9295222
150__12471__0.0012471__0.9307693
151__12430__0.001243__0.9320123
152__11890__0.001189__0.9332013
153__11991__0.0011991__0.9344004
154__11669__0.0011669__0.9355673
155__11232__0.0011232__0.9366905
156__11169__0.0011169__0.9378074
157__11006__0.0011006__0.938908
158__10979__0.0010979__0.9400059
159__10734__0.0010734__0.9410793
160__10207__0.0010207__0.9421
161__10122__0.0010122__0.9431122
162__10228__0.0010228__0.944135
163__9764__0.0009764__0.9451114
164__9694__0.0009694__0.9460808
165__9560__0.000956__0.9470368
166__9407__0.0009407__0.9479775
167__9212__0.0009212__0.9488987
168__8991__0.0008991__0.9497978
169__8816__0.0008816__0.9506794
170__8815__0.0008815__0.9515609
171__8397__0.0008397__0.9524006
172__8451__0.0008451__0.9532457
173__8320__0.000832__0.9540777
174__8109__0.0008109__0.9548886
175__7995__0.0007995__0.9556881
176__7764__0.0007764__0.9564645
177__7536__0.0007536__0.9572181
178__7677__0.0007677__0.9579858
179__7375__0.0007375__0.9587233
180__7499__0.0007499__0.9594732
181__7180__0.000718__0.9601912
182__7058__0.0007058__0.960897
183__6968__0.0006968__0.9615938
184__6744__0.0006744__0.9622682
185__6745__0.0006745__0.9629427
186__6564__0.0006564__0.9635991
187__6460__0.000646__0.9642451
188__6345__0.0006345__0.9648796
189__6115__0.0006115__0.9654911
190__5976__0.0005976__0.9660887
191__5961__0.0005961__0.9666848
192__5963__0.0005963__0.9672811
193__5784__0.0005784__0.9678595
194__5630__0.000563__0.9684225
195__5521__0.0005521__0.9689746
196__5711__0.0005711__0.9695457
197__5538__0.0005538__0.9700995
198__5390__0.000539__0.9706385
199__5162__0.0005162__0.9711547
200__5078__0.0005078__0.9716625
964__1__0.0000001__0.999999999999996
(I cut if off at round 200. It went to 964 and 8 over 800)
(the event counted the number of rounds played until the Q-High hit.
Then counting starts over again with 1 and ends when the next Q-High hits.)
This is a relative frequency table. I added a cumulative column also.
It is large, but shows all the data collected up to round 200.
The chance of hitting a Q-High by round 57 from the sim data = 0.6376064 (0.637456439 is calculated)
The probability of hitting a Q-High at any round, I used 19425/1101022
or about 1 in 56.68
==================================
Fact remains that if the OP thinks he can win more times to overcome the HE by betting "intervals" we all know he is sorely mistaken.
we all agree on that.
If you do show a profit after making 10,000 lifetime bets on the Q-High, it was by luck only.
Bet selection and money management can get lucky in any short run, but see who is left standing after many such bets even after 5000 of them.
Your chances of showing a profit the more times you make this bet keep going down, they never get better.
Trying to beat a 10% edge is best when making less number of bets.
That allows variance to work for you.
The SD of 6.71 is good.
at 100 bets made: chance of being in the red: 47.15% (same average bets)
at 200 bets made: chance of being in the red: 52.95%
at 500 bets made: chance of being in the red: 61.11%
at 1000 bets made: chance of being in the red: 68.33%
at 5000 bets made: chance of being in the red: 86.47%
at 10000 bets made: chance of being in the red: 93.44%
Good Luck all
in an interval (a range) by asking between 52 and 62.
How can there be a round 52 if he did not see rounds 1 to 51? He had to wait.
I used the wait time or first occurrence approach.
Just like if you sat down and started counting each round from 1 and tabulating the round # when a Q-High finally hit.
Then reset your counter back to 1 and start counting again.
I stand by my results as it exactly answers the question "I feel and think" the OP asked.
Others think the OP asked a different question. That is fine too.
Here is the data from a 10 million event simulation. Because I have it
round__freq__probability__N or less
1__176475__0.0176475__0.0176475
2__173357__0.0173357__0.0349832
3__170292__0.0170292__0.0520124
4__167301__0.0167301__0.0687425
5__164273__0.0164273__0.0851698
6__161605__0.0161605__0.1013303
7__158542__0.0158542__0.1171845
8__155662__0.0155662__0.1327507
9__152675__0.0152675__0.1480182
10__150324__0.0150324__0.1630506
11__147441__0.0147441__0.1777947
12__144779__0.0144779__0.1922726
13__142754__0.0142754__0.206548
14__140086__0.0140086__0.2205566
15__137571__0.0137571__0.2343137
16__134533__0.0134533__0.247767
17__133134__0.0133134__0.2610804
18__130490__0.013049__0.2741294
19__127806__0.0127806__0.28691
20__126585__0.0126585__0.2995685
21__123424__0.0123424__0.3119109
22__122013__0.0122013__0.3241122
23__119098__0.0119098__0.336022
24__117365__0.0117365__0.3477585
25__115510__0.011551__0.3593095
26__113334__0.0113334__0.3706429
27__111298__0.0111298__0.3817727
28__109440__0.010944__0.3927167
29__107740__0.010774__0.4034907
30__105280__0.010528__0.4140187
31__103481__0.0103481__0.4243668
32__101818__0.0101818__0.4345486
33__100214__0.0100214__0.44457
34__98157__0.0098157__0.4543857
35__96518__0.0096518__0.4640375
36__94217__0.0094217__0.4734592
37__92989__0.0092989__0.4827581
38__91322__0.0091322__0.4918903
39__89446__0.0089446__0.5008349
40__87862__0.0087862__0.5096211
41__86402__0.0086402__0.5182613
42__85101__0.0085101__0.5267714
43__83402__0.0083402__0.5351116
44__82020__0.008202__0.5433136
45__80178__0.0080178__0.5513314
46__78912__0.0078912__0.5592226
47__77050__0.007705__0.5669276
48__76788__0.0076788__0.5746064
49__75145__0.0075145__0.5821209
50__73117__0.0073117__0.5894326
51__72654__0.0072654__0.596698
52__71473__0.0071473__0.6038453
53__70282__0.0070282__0.6108735
54__68724__0.0068724__0.6177459
55__67404__0.0067404__0.6244863
56__66485__0.0066485__0.6311348
57__64716__0.0064716__0.6376064
58__63936__0.0063936__0.644
59__63072__0.0063072__0.6503072
60__61472__0.0061472__0.6564544
61__60405__0.0060405__0.6624949
62__59673__0.0059673__0.6684622
63__58920__0.005892__0.6743542
64__57067__0.0057067__0.6800609
65__56630__0.005663__0.6857239
66__55224__0.0055224__0.6912463
67__54815__0.0054815__0.6967278
68__53615__0.0053615__0.7020893
69__52508__0.0052508__0.7073401
70__51385__0.0051385__0.7124786
71__50755__0.0050755__0.7175541
72__49719__0.0049719__0.722526
73__48920__0.004892__0.727418
74__48093__0.0048093__0.7322273
75__47194__0.0047194__0.7369467
76__46537__0.0046537__0.7416004
77__45692__0.0045692__0.7461696
78__44520__0.004452__0.7506216
79__43964__0.0043964__0.755018
80__43302__0.0043302__0.7593482
81__42593__0.0042593__0.7636075
82__41881__0.0041881__0.7677956
83__40611__0.0040611__0.7718567
84__40416__0.0040416__0.7758983
85__39920__0.003992__0.7798903
86__39215__0.0039215__0.7838118
87__38307__0.0038307__0.7876425
88__37574__0.0037574__0.7913999
89__37104__0.0037104__0.7951103
90__36530__0.003653__0.7987633
91__35300__0.00353__0.8022933
92__34914__0.0034914__0.8057847
93__34216__0.0034216__0.8092063
94__33726__0.0033726__0.8125789
95__33180__0.003318__0.8158969
96__32142__0.0032142__0.8191111
97__31902__0.0031902__0.8223013
98__31421__0.0031421__0.8254434
99__30972__0.0030972__0.8285406
100__29639__0.0029639__0.8315045
101__29857__0.0029857__0.8344902
102__28985__0.0028985__0.8373887
103__28821__0.0028821__0.8402708
104__28186__0.0028186__0.8430894
105__27679__0.0027679__0.8458573
106__27218__0.0027218__0.8485791
107__26497__0.0026497__0.8512288
108__26452__0.0026452__0.853874
109__25661__0.0025661__0.8564401
110__25210__0.002521__0.8589611
111__24989__0.0024989__0.86146
112__24318__0.0024318__0.8638918
113__24010__0.002401__0.8662928
114__23601__0.0023601__0.8686529
115__23258__0.0023258__0.8709787
116__22896__0.0022896__0.8732683
117__22367__0.0022367__0.875505
118__22078__0.0022078__0.8777128
119__21724__0.0021724__0.8798852
120__21058__0.0021058__0.881991
121__20717__0.0020717__0.8840627
122__20410__0.002041__0.8861037
123__19947__0.0019947__0.8880984
124__19718__0.0019718__0.8900702
125__19235__0.0019235__0.8919937
126__19092__0.0019092__0.8939029
127__18662__0.0018662__0.8957691
128__18371__0.0018371__0.8976062
129__18071__0.0018071__0.8994133
130__17578__0.0017578__0.9011711
131__17463__0.0017463__0.9029174
132__17057__0.0017057__0.9046231
133__16635__0.0016635__0.9062866
134__16627__0.0016627__0.9079493
135__16298__0.0016298__0.9095791
136__15683__0.0015683__0.9111474
137__15761__0.0015761__0.9127235
138__15487__0.0015487__0.9142722
139__15061__0.0015061__0.9157783
140__14861__0.0014861__0.9172644
141__14597__0.0014597__0.9187241
142__14289__0.0014289__0.920153
143__14275__0.0014275__0.9215805
144__13751__0.0013751__0.9229556
145__13461__0.0013461__0.9243017
146__13400__0.00134__0.9256417
147__13178__0.0013178__0.9269595
148__13019__0.0013019__0.9282614
149__12608__0.0012608__0.9295222
150__12471__0.0012471__0.9307693
151__12430__0.001243__0.9320123
152__11890__0.001189__0.9332013
153__11991__0.0011991__0.9344004
154__11669__0.0011669__0.9355673
155__11232__0.0011232__0.9366905
156__11169__0.0011169__0.9378074
157__11006__0.0011006__0.938908
158__10979__0.0010979__0.9400059
159__10734__0.0010734__0.9410793
160__10207__0.0010207__0.9421
161__10122__0.0010122__0.9431122
162__10228__0.0010228__0.944135
163__9764__0.0009764__0.9451114
164__9694__0.0009694__0.9460808
165__9560__0.000956__0.9470368
166__9407__0.0009407__0.9479775
167__9212__0.0009212__0.9488987
168__8991__0.0008991__0.9497978
169__8816__0.0008816__0.9506794
170__8815__0.0008815__0.9515609
171__8397__0.0008397__0.9524006
172__8451__0.0008451__0.9532457
173__8320__0.000832__0.9540777
174__8109__0.0008109__0.9548886
175__7995__0.0007995__0.9556881
176__7764__0.0007764__0.9564645
177__7536__0.0007536__0.9572181
178__7677__0.0007677__0.9579858
179__7375__0.0007375__0.9587233
180__7499__0.0007499__0.9594732
181__7180__0.000718__0.9601912
182__7058__0.0007058__0.960897
183__6968__0.0006968__0.9615938
184__6744__0.0006744__0.9622682
185__6745__0.0006745__0.9629427
186__6564__0.0006564__0.9635991
187__6460__0.000646__0.9642451
188__6345__0.0006345__0.9648796
189__6115__0.0006115__0.9654911
190__5976__0.0005976__0.9660887
191__5961__0.0005961__0.9666848
192__5963__0.0005963__0.9672811
193__5784__0.0005784__0.9678595
194__5630__0.000563__0.9684225
195__5521__0.0005521__0.9689746
196__5711__0.0005711__0.9695457
197__5538__0.0005538__0.9700995
198__5390__0.000539__0.9706385
199__5162__0.0005162__0.9711547
200__5078__0.0005078__0.9716625
964__1__0.0000001__0.999999999999996
(I cut if off at round 200. It went to 964 and 8 over 800)
(the event counted the number of rounds played until the Q-High hit.
Then counting starts over again with 1 and ends when the next Q-High hits.)
This is a relative frequency table. I added a cumulative column also.
It is large, but shows all the data collected up to round 200.
The chance of hitting a Q-High by round 57 from the sim data = 0.6376064 (0.637456439 is calculated)
The probability of hitting a Q-High at any round, I used 19425/1101022
or about 1 in 56.68
==================================
Fact remains that if the OP thinks he can win more times to overcome the HE by betting "intervals" we all know he is sorely mistaken.
we all agree on that.
If you do show a profit after making 10,000 lifetime bets on the Q-High, it was by luck only.
Bet selection and money management can get lucky in any short run, but see who is left standing after many such bets even after 5000 of them.
Your chances of showing a profit the more times you make this bet keep going down, they never get better.
Trying to beat a 10% edge is best when making less number of bets.
That allows variance to work for you.
The SD of 6.71 is good.
at 100 bets made: chance of being in the red: 47.15% (same average bets)
at 200 bets made: chance of being in the red: 52.95%
at 500 bets made: chance of being in the red: 61.11%
at 1000 bets made: chance of being in the red: 68.33%
at 5000 bets made: chance of being in the red: 86.47%
at 10000 bets made: chance of being in the red: 93.44%
Good Luck all
winsome johnny (not Win some johnny)
February 27th, 2013 at 10:19:09 AM
permalink
I'm up on the bet lifetime. I've bet it 3 times.
People spend a lot of time working on meaningless math for other people. Y'all are nicer than I am.
People spend a lot of time working on meaningless math for other people. Y'all are nicer than I am.
February 27th, 2013 at 10:36:22 AM
permalink
Quote: rdw4potusQuote: Gabes22
The OP made no distinction whether hand 1 was the first in a shoe or the first randomly when sitting down at the table mid-shoe and to be honest even if he is starting a new 8 deck shoe (424 cards in a 8 53 card Pai Gow decks), to get to 57 or 72 hands, just playing between you or the dealer, even if the dealer allowed full penetration, they would need to shuffle at a minimum every 30 hands.
There's no shoe in pai gow poker. One full 53 card deck is used and reshuffled for each hand.
I've been thinking about this since we made these posts. I actually really like the idea of a game along the lines that you described. Maybe there should be a PGP variant with a shoe! Two of my favorite casino games are Texas Shootout (Hold'em with an 8 card shoe) and Pai Gow Poker. This would basically combine the two. Think of getting 2 or 3 jokers in a hand, or 5 natural Aces! Part of the downside of Pai Gow Poker - way too many 2-pair hands - would be addressed by the newly created hand possibilities made possible by the inclusion of 8 decks of cards.
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
February 27th, 2013 at 10:48:20 AM
permalink
A 5 joker jackpot perhaps?
A flute with no holes is not a flute, a donut with no holes is a danish
February 27th, 2013 at 10:50:39 AM
permalink
Quote: rdw4potusI've been thinking about this since we made these posts. I actually really like the idea of a game along the lines that you described. Maybe there should be a PGP variant with a shoe! Two of my favorite casino games are Texas Shootout (Hold'em with an 8 card shoe) and Pai Gow Poker. This would basically combine the two. Think of getting 2 or 3 jokers in a hand, or 5 natural Aces! Part of the downside of Pai Gow Poker - way too many 2-pair hands - would be addressed by the newly created hand possibilities made possible by the inclusion of 8 decks of cards.
I would think a shoe version of PGP would have a higher house edge. More copies. I'm pretty sure Double Dragon Pai Gow did and it regular just PGP with 2 jokers.
“Man Babes” #AxelFabulous
February 27th, 2013 at 10:52:46 AM
permalink
Quote: mipletI would think a shoe version of PGP would have a higher house edge. More copies. I'm pretty sure Double Dragon Pai Gow did and it regular just PGP with 2 jokers.
So, it'd be both more exciting and more profitable for the house? Hmmm...I hope Roger is reading this? ;-)
"So as the clock ticked and the day passed, opportunity met preparation, and luck happened." - Maurice Clarett
