TDB Betting Strategy

[mikey963]

I was reading an old thread on gaming today about a betting strategy for TDB that seemed prettying interesting. Assuming have that kind of bankroll does this technique seem possible?

Here's the article.
http://bit.ly/2ikXB19

The specific portion i'm referring to is:

In 9/7 TDB sometimes you can become a very BIG winner.

That’s accomplished first by bankroll - where a player must have a minimum of $11,175 on hand for any one session — and then by incorporating a dual-phased progression in both denomination and number of credits being played within each level. And no, critics and nay Sayers, this has no relation to Martingale since the player can lose 50 or 60 straight hands and still both win the session and never come close to approaching machine limits.

The strategy requires 100 credits be played at 25c; 200 at 50c; 300 at $1; 400 at $2; and 500 at $5. A session’s MINI-GOAL (i.e., minimum cash out point) is just $5 before going back to begin again at quarters, while the session’s overall win goal is $250. Within each mini-session the player simply continues play until the minimum $5 win goal is met or he busts out.

The bankroll allows for three session attempts, and with the number of exceedingly large jackpots the game has to offer and because there are a number of special plays that deviate from optimal play in order to take full advantage of every opportunity presented, huge wins will occur more often than huge losses (in addition to all the smaller wins) and if anyone chooses to look down the road some at their "long-term" potential — they will be far ahead.

[paco13]

Interesting, But my BR is nowhere near enough to try it.

[Vman96]

"What’s a "special play" that deviates from optimal strategy? Example: You’re dealt AAA94. If the hand were played millions of times, the best value would be obtained from holding AAA4 since four Aces with a 2, 3, or 4 pays a whopping 4,000 credits. But it is not the smart play when playing short-term strategy and trying to hit a win goal in a single session. In this case, the intelligent player would only hold the 3 Aces since four of them pay 800 and will get you to your win goal. Holding the "4" is simply wrong because it attempts to apply long-term rules to short term play."

Horrible advice. Probably from a banned member here.

If you're not going to hold kickers you're better off playing 9/6 DDB than 9/7 TDB.

[onemoretry]

Horrible advice. Probably from a banned member here.
Yes, it certainly sounds are-ess-like.

[pokerpokerpoker]

That is definitely Fa la la la la... la la la... la.. Rob's system throws out long term math for what will hit a win-goal today. In his mind, no one will play enough to reach the long term odds anyway. If a non-optimal hold will allow him to reach a session goal, he uses it - and calls them "special plays".

To Rob, it would be foolish to say hold a paying pair over 3 to a royal. The 5 (or maybe 15 if you get trips) is almost meaningless, while the potential royal would certainly reach a session goal. He even famously (allegedly) broke up trip Qs to go for the royal on a $25 machine - and hit the $100k.

Other Fa La La La La.... La la la la strategies: never tip, play the best paytables available but don't fret over a percent here and there, Ev is great but results are what matter.

[pokerpokerpoker]

WTH? Censorship?

[Tedlark]

His name shall not be written on this site and when a person tries it gets auto-edited. Falalalafalafala.....

[Vman96]

Ev is great but results are what matter.

This one I don't mind as much. But I also know I have control over EV, but I don't have control over what cards are dealt/drawn to me. If I did, my royal run the past 15 months would be permanent!    I guess I could hope though!   

The trip Q thing is setting money on fire. I don't care if he actually hit it or not. But I have also seen that move done by someone with trip Aces on a progressive 7/5 Super Aces game in Tunica. No idea wtf that guy was thinking... Maybe he missed the 3rd Ace? And did he get the Royal? Hell no!

[ukaserex]

Interesting.

Ultimately, on a $25 machine, I don't think I could pass up trip anything. Particularly, trip Aces.

Now, if I got a 2,3,4 kicker, I'd probably hold that, too.

But AhAcAsKsQs - I'd still keep the trips.

It may not be optimum play, but I'll take a guaranteed $75 vs the odds of completing the royal.

I know it's flawed logic, but on less than a $1 machine, I might let the trips go for a chance at the royal. But, not likely. A bird in the hand is worth more than a flock in the bush. I just don't have the stones to go for it like that.

[alpax]

Interesting.

Ultimately, on a $25 machine, I don't think I could pass up trip anything. Particularly, trip Aces.

Now, if I got a 2,3,4 kicker, I'd probably hold that, too.

But AhAcAsKsQs - I'd still keep the trips.

It may not be optimum play, but I'll take a guaranteed $75 vs the odds of completing the royal.

I know it's flawed logic, but on less than a $1 machine, I might let the trips go for a chance at the royal. But, not likely. A bird in the hand is worth more than a flock in the bush. I just don't have the stones to go for it like that.



Whoever even needs to think twice about keeping the trips over 3 to a Royal is not a competent player to begin with.

Keeping the 3 to a Royal over trips is the 5th best play possible, not even the 2nd best. Even holding the entire hand is a BETTER play.