Learn From This Strategy Lesson

[babybubba]

Here's a good point for players to consider whn playing DDB at any paytable. About 6 weeks ago when I hit the four Aces w/kicker on $1 DDB I actually used one of my special plays that deviate from expert strategy to hit it. The dealt hand was As Qd Jc X X. If you know the game the "correct play" is to holds the QJ because of straight and other consideration compared to holding all three high cards or just the Ace. But my special play calls for always only holding the lone Ace and as a result, this time three more Aces with a 3 showed up. At the time I was playing a 25c/50c/$1/$2/$5 Romp-Thru-Town strategy so the hit was BIG because it was on my 3rd level. I make this play all the time and usually it nets a loser or other small winner. But there's times when it gives the big winner and if you don't take advantage of all the opportunities that happen then you'll only know losing.
 
Good luck....the game is at least 95% luck and the remaing 5% is having the skill to understand the optimal plays and when not to hold them.

[MikeA]

That's a very close "mathematical" call Rob.  The difference in EV between holding the QJ vs the A is only .024 coins.  Very slight advantage indeed in favor of holding the QJ.  I would never criticize that decision.
To put that into perspective, the difference between holding a pat King-high Straight Flush and throwing away the 9 and going for the Royal (as discussed in another thread) is 156.92 coins (playing 5-coins a hand) in favor of holding the pat ST Flush.

[babybubba]

That's a very close "mathematical" call Rob.  The difference in EV between holding the QJ vs the A is only .024 coins.  Very slight advantage indeed in favor of holding the QJ.  I would never criticize that decision.
To put that into perspective, the difference between holding a pat King-high Straight Flush and throwing away the 9 and going for the Royal (as discussed in another thread) is 156.92 coins (playing 5-coins a hand) in favor of holding the pat ST Flush.
 
Yes, this one's a close call but others are not. And guess what? They're all smart plays for someone serious about winning TODAY. That other thread about holding the pat K-hi SF vs. going for the royal is a no-brainer. Again, if the SF gets you to a goal--and it will many times--then you hold it. If not, you go for the royal. Simple stuff really. I'm sure you've also heard of this one that actually was a hand I faced on the $25 machine at Bellagio four years ago. I was stuck about $6k and on $25 BP when dealt QQQAK with 3 of the cards being royal cards. Would the possible $3125 quad get me to a goal, i.e. back to $10 BP including a $1000 "soft" profit? No (if I were on DDB it more probably would have depending on where I hit it within my 300 credits). So the correct Fa La La La La.... La la la la-smart play was to go for the RF and it hit. I took a lot of heat from the math gods and gurus when that got into print, but all I needed to do was smile at the stack of fresh cash and I let their theories battle it out with them instead of wasting my time.

[Eduardo]

What were the odds of hitting the royal holding that QQQAK? 

[babybubba]

What were the odds of hitting the royal holding that QQQAK? 
 
No different than any time you hold 3-to-the-royal--which BTW is mathematically the best way to hit a royal on the draw.

[shadowman]

[QUOTE=Eduardo]What were the odds of hitting the royal holding that QQQAK? 
 
No different than any time you hold 3-to-the-royal--which BTW is mathematically the best way to hit a royal on the draw.[/QUOTE]
 
Hitting RF3 happens once every 1081 tries on average. Hitting RF4 happens once every 47 tries on average. Personally, I rather have a 1-47 chance and its pretty obvious this is "mathematically the best way to hit a royal on the draw".
 
I suspect what Rob meant (at least I hope he knows the difference between 1081 and 47) is you will end up with more royals from RF3 draws because you get so many more chances.

[babybubba]

[QUOTE=babybubba][QUOTE=Eduardo]What were the odds of hitting the royal holding that QQQAK? 
 
No different than any time you hold 3-to-the-royal--which BTW is mathematically the best way to hit a royal on the draw.[/QUOTE]
 
Hitting RF3 happens once every 1081 tries on average. Hitting RF4 happens once every 47 tries on average. Personally, I rather have a 1-47 chance and its pretty obvious this is "mathematically the best way to hit a royal on the draw".
 
I suspect what Rob meant (at least I hope he knows the difference between 1081 and 47) is you will end up with more royals from RF3 draws because you get so many more chances.[/QUOTE]
 
You're really not helping you're already reduced credibility by spinning the words. Do you think people here are as stupid as you want them to be?

[Webman]

Rob, please clarify what you did mean then. What are you disputing from shadowman's statement?

[babybubba]

Rob, please clarify what you did mean then. What are you disputing from shadowman's statement?
 
I said that holding 3-to-the-royal was the mathematically best opportunity to hit a RF. And it absolutely is. Shadow spun it as he usually does so as to make it appear to other less knowledgeable readers that he's the ultimate "teacher" when he's far from it.  He said holding 4 is the mathematically best way and that is incorrect because he knows what I was referring to. A player sees more RF's by holding 3 than they do 4, and that is the only point that matters.
 
 

[Webman]

So what you are saying is that shadowman was correct in his last statement.
 
"I suspect what Rob meant . . . is you will end up with more royals from RF3 draws because you get so many more chances."
 
I think we are dealing with symantics here and getting on a high horse over nothing. Good grief.
 
Clearly the odds of hitting a royal flush are greater when holding 4 to the royal instead of 3 after the hand has been dealt, but also clearly you will be dealt three to the royal far more often.
 
Eduardo, I assume these two answered your question sufficiently?
 
The odds were the same as any other chance holding 3 to the royal as stated by babybubba, which were 1 in 1,081 according as stated by shadowman.