I analyzed the Montana version of Triple Ace Poker several years ago and put it at 97%. Must be the short pay version.
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
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
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
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
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
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)