Three to a Royal, Hold or Don't Hold?

[jconifer7]

Let's say you have in your hand a Kd, Ks, Js, 10s, and a fifth card that you wouldn't keep.

Now here's the question, do you throw out the King of Diamonds in the pair in favor of going for Royal Flush when you have been dealt three of what you need? Typically I would go after the Royal most often when I have three to a Royal especially if I don't have a winning pair, but on the flip side if I were to have a pair of Aces and I'm playing a TDB game I would choose the Aces when four of them with a low kicker is worth 4000, same as the Royal.

With the hand above, going for four Kings was only going to be worth 250 but holding them would at least assure an even return on the bet if it didn't work out, where as three spades and other Aces and Queens would have allowed for another flush, straight, or a 9 to K straight flush if they had been drawn just right. Granted you're more likely to lose the hand by going for Royal but then again, you never know how the cards will be drawn.

In my view, unless you are dealt two Aces on a bonus game, you should go after the Royal considering Jacks or Better is the lowest payout and giving at least two chances at 16 cards, ten of which are spades of which any two could be drawn, six of which are the other suited Aces and Queens that will help if one of each was drawn. Where as the other option is going after two kings out of 47 other cards in the deck that only pay 6.25% of the higher payout.

[tech58]

This may depend on the game being played. Not familiar with lots of new Carnival games.
JOB proper play is the Kings. DW proper hold is 3 to the Royal. Not sure on any others.

[dinghy]

In my view, unless you are dealt two Aces on a bonus game, you should go after the Royal considering Jacks or Better is the lowest payout and giving at least two chances at 16 cards, ten of which are spades of which any two could be drawn, six of which are the other suited Aces and Queens that will help if one of each was drawn. Where as the other option is going after two kings out of 47 other cards in the deck that only pay 6.25% of the higher payout.

That's what computers are for. I do whatever the computer tells me.

Example, 9/6 Jacks. Here's the strategy chart showing the high pair outranking 3-to-a-royal:



If I want more detail, I can analyze the specific hand:



In case it's not clear which cards are bolded, the KK hold is at the top, and the TJK hold is at the bottom.

This may depend on the game being played.

For sure. Continuing with 9/6 Jacks as the example, the odds will change if the royal is progressive. Here are the numbers for a 6000-coin royal instead of the usual 4000:

[jconifer7]

In case it's not clear which cards are bolded, the KK hold is at the top, and the TJK hold is at the bottom.

Well that is how I played it this morning when I was dealt that, I held the two Kings, but then in a not-so-cool moment the Queen and Ace of Spades both came up as the first two cards on the draw, and this is what prompted me to ask this question. I blew off a Royal but at the same time I did the right thing according to the tables you showed me.

But then again I could have held the King, Jack, and 10 of Spades and then the other two Kings in the deck would come up on the draw and I would just be trading one reason to be upset for another, I guess I don't know what to like better.

This may depend on the game being played. Not familiar with lots of new Carnival games.
JOB proper play is the Kings. DW proper hold is 3 to the Royal. Not sure on any others.

There were no wilds in this game, it was Jacks or Better DDB game I was playing.

[TripleTriple]

I may be (unintended post- disregard)

[dinghy]

Well that is how I played it this morning when I was dealt that, I held the two Kings, but then in a not-so-cool moment the Queen and Ace of Spades both came up as the first two cards on the draw, and this is what prompted me to ask this question.

Yes, that's annoying.

We need to hear from someone who tried for the royal and drew two more Kings.

[olds442jetaway]

I just posted this in the rec forum, but I thought I should post here as well.

[olds442jetaway]

I think I have the wording messed up. In general though, is there a longer wait for a Royal in Spin Poker?

[dinghy]

In general though, is there a longer wait for a Royal in Spin Poker?

Yes, because the royals are clumped together, so to speak.

The Wizard has general volatility indications here:

https://wizardofodds.com/games/video-po ... pin-poker/



At 3 lines, Spin is very slightly less volatile than a Triple Play game. That's because all the cards are pulled from 1 deck instead of 3, and the paylines don't intersect.

But if you play 4 lines or more, the Spin Poker paylines run into each other which correlates the results giving feast-or-famine outcomes.

As an example, consider when you're dealt 4 to a royal. If playing 9 lines on a 10-play, you'll almost never catch more than one royal.

But playing 9 lines on Spin Poker, it's impossible to catch only one royal. You can only get 2, 3 or 5. (Or zero.)

Hope that makes sense.

[dinghy]

But that discussion is only for standard Spin Poker, or one panel of Triple Spin.

If you play all three panels of Triple Spin, now you're really mixing things up because the extra panels should reduce volatility. I haven't seen the numbers on that.