Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 45 of 45

Thread: Video poker question

  1. #41
    I analyzed the Montana version of Triple Ace Poker several years ago and put it at 97%. Must be the short pay version.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  2. #42
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    I analyzed the Montana version of Triple Ace Poker several years ago and put it at 97%. Must be the short pay version.
    Triple Ace Poker is an Aces or Better VP game. When you make a hand that has three Aces in it (3 Aces, Aces Full, 4 Aces) you are dealt five cards face down. Behind one of the cards is a 2X multiplier, behind two of the cards is a 3X multiplier and behind two of the cards is a 4X multiplier. You get to pick a card. Whatever the multiplier is you get it for the next 8 hands. When in multiplier mode you can win more multipliers the same way.

    I'll get a pic of the payscale and post it up. The multiplier games are not free. You still have to pay for each game.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  3. #43
    Originally Posted by Ex-AP View Post
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    I'm the only AP that ever wrote about a Bally video poker game called Draw Till U Win. It was a 103.2%. It went extinct about 14 years ago. Because of the strategy you had about a 33,000 chance of hitting a royal from the deal and draw. But you also had a chance to make a royal anytime your final hand was a non-paying 4-card royal. Examples:

    As-Ks-Qs-Ts-7s or As-Ks-Qs-Ts-Jh or As-Ks-Qs-Ts-Ac were paying hands so didn't qualify.

    As-Ks-Qs-Ts-5c was a non-paying 4-card royal so you got to draw one card at a time until you hit a pay. With this hand there are only 21 cards left in the deck that will make a paying hand, 8 flush cards, 3 straight cards, 9 high pair cards, and 1 royal card. So the chance of making the royal on the draw was 1 in 21. And it could be even lower than that. If you were dealt a 3-card royal then discarded a high pair card, and/or straight card, and/or flush card, then caught a 4th royal card on the draw, your odds of making the royal in the Draw Till U Win feature was 1 in 20 or 1 in 19.

    The overall effect was reducing overall royals odds down to 9700. That was the problem with this game. If you played it heavily you averaged a royal a day. That brought a lot of attention to it from casino personnel. Some players were even accused of cheating and investigated by Gaming. I hit 3 royals in a day twice.

    At Stockmen's in Fallon, Nevada my ole' buddy Al and i were playing side by side when he hit 4 royals in 4 hours. That was the end of Draw Till U Win at Stockmen's. At the Carson Valley Inn in Minden, Nevada, Doug Reul hit 6 royals in one day and wound up having to explain to Gaming how he did that.

    It was fun while it lasted.
    I played that game in Reno. It was Baldini’s in 2001. It had two guns as the icon. The over cycle for the Royal Flush was under 9,000 because you would break a pat flush if it had 4 to the Royal.
    The royal frequency is 9700 according to the program/analyzer that Doug Reul, former writer for Video Poker Times, wrote for the game. Doug is the one that discovered the game was 103%. Your assertion that the royal freq. is under 9000 is wrong and I would point out that you break a pat flush for a four card royal at most all video poker games.

    There are several reasons for the big reduction in royals odds (from 40K down to 9.7K).

    First, you are drawing to more 2 and 3 card royals than normal video poker.

    Second, when you wind up with a 4 card royal after the draw you get to draw one card at a time until you win. In normal video poker the hand would be over at that point.

    Third, since you get to draw until you win it eliminates a lot of cards. In normal video poker the royal chances would be 1 in 47. But the non-paying cards are eliminated so the royal freq. is enhanced to 1 in 26 or better depending on how many pay cards you may have thrown away before the draw. And the 4 card royal with 4 high cards has at least a 1 in 23 chance.

    It was a feeble attempt here by ex-ap to act like he knew anything about Draw Till U Win.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  4. #44
    Originally Posted by Ex-AP View Post
    Spielo had several over 100% VP games in Montana. Best one involved Triple Aces or better gets you a bonus round with multipliers.
    The above statement is false. I found only one Spielo game, Joker's Vault, a progressive video poker game that will go positive. It's been around for many years but I rarely find one with a playable number.

    Triple Aces Poker in Montana is a 97% video poker game. It's had the same payscale since it came out.

    I could have pointed all this out last year when this thread was fresh but I let it go. Ex-Ap has proven to be an insufferable prick so I'm not letting it go anymore.
    Last edited by mickeycrimm; 07-21-2020 at 05:08 AM.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  5. #45
    Originally Posted by Ex-AP View Post
    Dude, do you even know what a 103%+ non-progressive VP game looks like? I played them *only* after very smart people point them out to me. I have never found a 103%+ non-progressive VP in my entire 20+ year career ... very hard to find them, but people find them and as Micky Crimm said himself someone had tipped him off.

    The game was Triple Ace Poker and I doubt Mickey Crimm played it in Montana. Chicken Ranch casino near Jamestown removed their last two Spielo’s and the short pay Triple Ace Poker were on both of those machines in the back of the casino. Those two remaining Spielo’s uprights got removed right around the time Chicken Ranch removed Cash Eruption and other +EV bonus games like Jungle Riches (this was before their big expansion). Right about the time Cash Eruption and Jungle Riches also disappeared from nearby Black Oak casino ... too much of a coincidence if you ask me.

    The 103%+ Triple Ace Poker was only known to a few people who had the right skills to analyze the game due to a difficult feature.
    This is the post where ex-ap gets snarky with tableplay for no reason. And he also made some erroneous assertions. "I doubt Mickey Crimm played it in Montana." Wrong. I analyzed Triple Ace Poker many years ago.

    Why would ex-ap point out that a short pay version of Triple Ace Poker was removed from a casino? If there was a positive pay version then where was it? What was the payscale? In the short pay version where was the chop made on the payscale?

    And this statement: "The 103% Triple Ace Poker was only known to a few people who had the right skills to analyze the game due to a difficult feature."
    This statement is both interesting and telling. Ex-Ap does not say that HE analyzed the game. He states "people who had the right skills" analyzed the game.

    Perhaps there was a positive version in California. Either that or those that analyzed the game made a mistake. When you make 3 Aces, Aces Full or 4 Aces you are awarded multipliers for the next 8 games. But the games are not free. You still have to pay for them. If this was not factored in then the game will show positive. If its factored in then the game will show negative. At least that's the way it is with the Montana payscale. So they may have made a mistake in analyzing the game.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Video poker card display question
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 11-18-2018, 04:22 PM
  2. FRUGAL VIDEO POKER
    By mickeycrimm in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 12-21-2017, 02:46 PM
  3. The Video Poker RNG question... again
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 01-15-2014, 04:48 PM
  4. Video Poker: RIP
    By redietz in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 08-11-2013, 04:44 PM
  5. Video poker machines in a casino poker room.
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-10-2011, 05:55 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •