Variance in Let it Ride with 3-card bonus bet
February 20th, 2011 at 8:31:32 PM
permalink
Hey folks,
Apologies if this is a silly question; my grasp of this sort of math is shaky. My question is about Let it Ride.
I know this is one of the higher house edge games out there, and has a particularly high variance, to boot. And I know that the three-card bonus bet increases the house edge with most pay tables. (Though not as dramatically as the deplorable $1 bonus!)
What I'm wondering is if the three-card bet actually decreases the variance overall. That is, assuming I'm playing the basic bet plus the three-card bet (but not the pretty light-up $1 bet) -- would I theoretically see smaller swings in my bankroll than when playing the basic bet alone? Anecdotally, it appears that way to me, but I'm wondering if the math bears it out.
I'm fairly confident theres not a direct correlation between house adge wnd variance, but I lack the experience to investigate further on my own...
Thanks!
-j.
Apologies if this is a silly question; my grasp of this sort of math is shaky. My question is about Let it Ride.
I know this is one of the higher house edge games out there, and has a particularly high variance, to boot. And I know that the three-card bonus bet increases the house edge with most pay tables. (Though not as dramatically as the deplorable $1 bonus!)
What I'm wondering is if the three-card bet actually decreases the variance overall. That is, assuming I'm playing the basic bet plus the three-card bet (but not the pretty light-up $1 bet) -- would I theoretically see smaller swings in my bankroll than when playing the basic bet alone? Anecdotally, it appears that way to me, but I'm wondering if the math bears it out.
I'm fairly confident theres not a direct correlation between house adge wnd variance, but I lack the experience to investigate further on my own...
Thanks!
-j.
February 20th, 2011 at 8:58:58 PM
permalink
Quote: JohnnyHighGroundI'm fairly confident theres not a direct correlation between house adge wnd variance, but I lack the experience to investigate further on my own...
-j.
Not only is there no direct correlation, there's no correlation at all.
As a good rule of thumb, the higher the potential payout (in # of bets), the higher the variance will be. (There's no such thing as a casino game where you could either win one bet or lose 10,000 bets, but a Martingale progressive betting system simulates it rather nicely.) Also, in general casino practice, the higher the potential payout, the higher the house edge, although this doesn't HAVE to be the case--but the casino compensates for variance (which it, in general, does NOT want) in such bets by charging that high house edge.
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
February 21st, 2011 at 5:34:18 AM
permalink
Very educational! So, would it be fair to assume that, since the highest possible payout of the 3-card bet is 50 to 1 -- 1/20th the highest payout of the basic bet -- that ithe variance is dramatically lower as well? Or does it not work that way?
I'm also curious if it's mathematically sound to say that playing the 3-card bet actually does decrease your variance at the table overall...
I'm also curious if it's mathematically sound to say that playing the 3-card bet actually does decrease your variance at the table overall...
February 21st, 2011 at 10:22:14 AM
permalink
Quote: JohnnyHighGroundVery educational! So, would it be fair to assume that, since the highest possible payout of the 3-card bet is 50 to 1 -- 1/20th the highest payout of the basic bet -- that ithe variance is dramatically lower as well? Or does it not work that way?
I'm also curious if it's mathematically sound to say that playing the 3-card bet actually does decrease your variance at the table overall...
Probably not "dramatically" lower, though to answer that precisely, I'd have to know what the relative frequency of hitting was--and I never play 3CP. The Wiz has some excellent tables dealing with the game on his companion "Wizard of Odds" site.
I'm also not sure what you mean by the "highest payout of the basic bet" that pays 20 times a 50 to 1 payout, i.e., 1000 to 1. The basic bet is the Ante bet, which pays even money, with the Ante Bonus usually paying no more than 5-1 (and that rarely).
The Ante bet has a very low variance, so by diverting any of your action to any of the side bets, you will be increasing your variance as well as the house edge.
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
February 21st, 2011 at 6:42:45 PM
permalink
Well, I'm talking about Let it Ride, not 3-Card Poker. LIR has recently introduced an additional bonus bet that, as I understand, is similar to the "pairs plus" bet in 3CP. (I've never played 3CP, myself.) The highest payout for that is 50 to 1 on most tables, for a "mini royal," while the highest payout on a basic bet is 1000 to 1 on most tables, for a full royal flush.
February 21st, 2011 at 6:59:37 PM
permalink
Quote: JohnnyHighGroundWell, I'm talking about Let it Ride, not 3-Card Poker. LIR has recently introduced an additional bonus bet that, as I understand, is similar to the "pairs plus" bet in 3CP. (I've never played 3CP, myself.) The highest payout for that is 50 to 1 on most tables, for a "mini royal," while the highest payout on a basic bet is 1000 to 1 on most tables, for a full royal flush.
Sorry, I conflate those two games in my mind sometimes :)
To answer your original question, yes, this is a much higher variance bet than the basic bet in LIR.
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
