Quick Quads

[littleray]

Does anyone know if in Quick Quads why you would hold a QQ card with 33 or 44 but not with other low pairs?

[shadowman]

I assume by "QQ card" you mean a lower card that would help form a QQ. Basically, that is the answer. You get more QQs by holding that lower card with 22,33,44 than you get by holding just the low pair. You actually get fewer 3oaks and FHs but the extra return on the QQs makes up for it.
 
For example, if you just hold 33 you get a Quad/QQ .45% of the time. If you hold 332 you get one .83% of the time.
 
Also keep in mind that the higher the low pair the more QQs are possible without holding a lower card. That is why you don't hold the lower card with 55-TT in most cases.
 
This will all be explained in more detail very soon (stay tuned).
 

[littleray]

I failed to mention that this is 96 JOB.  But I still don't know why you would not hold a Low Pair of 2's with an A, or a low pair of 5's with a 4 or A.  The strategy I have states to hold Low Pairs of 3's with a 2 or A and Low Pairs of 4's with a 3 or A...nothing on 6's, 7's, 8's or 9's..can you elaborate?  Also, how do you get the strategy from this site if it is a pdf file?  Had it once, now can't find it.  Thanks

[shadowman]

The strategy on this site was not for JOB. I believe it was DDB or TDB (maybe both) and it was around the 11th or 12th page of the quick quad strategy thread. However, that strategy was not perfect, though reasonably accurate.
 
OK, for your questions. Holding 221 is exactly the same as 442. It is different than 443, 441 or 332. You can get more QQs with these latter holds. Write them out and you will see what I mean. You have 1 quad and 8 QQs vs. 1 quad and 6 QQs for the first two.
 
With 552 you also have 1 quad and 8 QQs. However, the difference is the number of quads you get when you don't hold a lower card. The number increases as the card rank increases. That is because more combinations now make a QQ, hence, holding a card starts limiting the possible results more and more as the pair goes up in rank. For example, you can only use 21 with 3s to make a QQ. With tens you can use 91, 82, 73, 64 and 55. 
 
Hope this helps, it will be explained in more detail very soon.

[New2vp]

The strategy is at http://www.videopoker.com/insideScoop/s ... tegy.pdfIt was first referenced in a post by Webman on Nov 18 2008 at 3:14.When you hold a quick quad kicker to a pair, you increase your chance at getting a particular type of of quick quads but reduce your chances of getting a full house, trips, or a regular set of quads.  Also if you hold something like TT9, while you can get more hands like TTT9A, you can not get the other Quick Quad combinations like TTT82, TTT73, TTT64, or TTT55.  So, for the larger pairs like 66-TT, since there are more chances to get the other quick quads when holding just a pair, the balance is tipped in favor of NOT holding the kicker.The difference between holding 33A and 22A is that with 33A there are 2 threes and 4 twos in the deck to make 8 ways to get 3332A while when holding 22A there are only 2 twos and 3 aces left in the deck to make only 6 ways to get 222AA.  Thus 22A is less valuable than 33A.  And it turns out that with Jacks or Better, when there is no extra payout for low quads, this reduction is enough to make a hold of 22 a bit more valuable usually than 22A.  The values of the two holds are actually very, very close, so unless you are an extreme purist, it will not matter much over the long run which one you wish to hold.If you look closely at the strategy in the pdf file near the bottom, you will see some times when holding 22A or 55 + A,2,3,or 4 is the best play but is not recommended unless you are noticing the "penalty cards" that you would be discarding.When you have 22A and would be discarding a 4, the hold of 22 is less valuable than it would otherwise be because you now have fewer chances of getting the Quick Quads combination of 44422.  So, in this case, you are better off holding 22A.  You would only hold 55 + a kicker when the dealt hand is 5543T, 5542T, 553AT, or 552AT because the value of 55 is lower than normal with all of the deals because each reduces the number of ALL of the possible Quick Quad combinations with 55: 5554A, 55532, or TTT55.If you don't want to pay attention to discards and just want to follow a simpler rule, always hold 22 or 55 without the quick quad kicker.  That's the Paymar way.  The Dancer way would be to pay attention to discards and here I don't think it is really that hard, but that's subjective.Edit:  Sorry Shadowman, didn't mean to step on your explanation.  I started to write this before I knew you had posted a response, but as cddenver knows, it takes me longer to explain myself.

[Webman]

We will have updated strategy and much more soon. Stay tuned.

[shadowman]

New2vp, those strategies are a little different than normal strategies as they are based on the dealt hand. If one is used to normal strategies they might be a little confusing.  The return is also a little low for a couple of the games.
 
Here's an article by Bob Dancer that may shed a little light on the different number of 4oaks.
 
http://www.casinogaming.com/columnists/ ... /0217.html
 

[New2vp]

New2vp, those strategies are a little different than normal strategies as they are based on the dealt hand. If one is used to normal strategies they might be a little confusing.  The return is also a little low for a couple of the games.
 
Here's an article by Bob Dancer that may shed a little light on the different number of 4oaks.
 
http://www.casinogaming.com/columnists/ ... /0217.html
 Thanks Shadow, I prefer strategies that tell you what to do in each circumstance, up
to a point, but I understand that some like the "no-penalty-card"
approach.  So, what's normal to me is abnormal from the perspective of
most.  I think Dancer is a notable exception as well, with his penchant
for going after each exception.And after spending some time analyzing your favorite game, one-eyed jacks, I can see that a penalty-card approach there is certainly not worth it in every instance.  I haven't done it, but it seems to me from what I have done that it might take nearly 10 pages per game to put together a strategy chart that identifies every possible "best play" with that game.I'd read the article you referenced and some of Bob's earlier articles both at casino gaming and on Video Poker 365.  It was clear that in the earlier articles, Dancer was not up on some of the more subtle plays.  He even had some of basic plays wrong for a while.From the site below, he said as late as September of last year, the following:"By far the biggest
strategy change is "always hold a kicker to TRIPS if it will help you."
That is, from 7773K, hold 7773. Do NOT hold kickers from pairs. And do
not hold add-em-up cards to pairs such as 7743."   http://www.casinogaming.com/columnists/ ... 9.htmlEach of the 3 assertions is wrong, but to different degrees.  The first sentence would be correct if it said "usually" instead of "always."  You should not generally hold TTT5 from TTT5K or 8884 from 8884J, instead opting for the trips because you have so many chances at other types of quick quads with a hold of TTT or 888.The third sentence is wrong because we all know it is often correct to hold kickers with pairs, particularly the small pairs in bonus games, like 44A, 443, 332 or 33A.And the fourth sentence is almost always wrong.  You would lose a lot of value in Quick Quads listening to this advice.  You should almost always hold 7743 with exceptions being when the 5th card was a 7 OR was a 4 or 3 when you were playing a game that paid 10 coins for two pair.Since Dancer's now teaching a class (and both Webman and you keep saying, "Wait, more news is coming"), I presume that someone's developed some computer analysis to help to identify all the correct plays including those where penalty cards affect the proper hold.  If he didn't address penalty cards, that really wouldn't be Dancer, would it?See rd, I do not discriminate when it comes to criticism of gurus.  If the math is wrong, it's wrong.Here at this site, we were fortunate to get to preview Quick Quads and I'm guessing there were quite a few here who had better knowledge of that game than Dancer did in September 2008, thanks to Shadow's analysis and the evolution of the strategies that he posted, our discussions, and the posting of the pdf-file strategy by Webman prior to one of the QQ contests.

[littleray]

Thanks for the information, Shadowman and New2vp...I also pay attention to penalty cards...have since I've been playing vp (about 15 years) I have most of the programs there are pertaining to video poker and look forward to the strategy/program for Quick Quads.

[shadowman]

New2vp, I sent a note to Dancer a long time ago correcting him on his published errors. He is now completely up to speed on QQs.


 
As for OEJs, I've often wondered exactly how many pages would be required for a "perfect" strategy. It would be extremely large. However, I know from practicing the game that I can come within .01% of perfect play by ignoring most of the penalty situations. However, the strategy is pretty difficult and non-standard even ignoring those situations. For those who like to be mentally stimulated while playing VP, OEJs is the best game there is.