vpFREE2 Forums

? for DW players

#1

Hi,

Would anyone be willing to offer help with TRICKY hand below ?

Deuce
Ace diamond
Queen diamond
6 spade
3 heart

I held the RF3...... deuce, ace and queen diamonds. I've checked what
written literature that I have looking for a ruling on this hand but
haven't found one. I know this is an extremely MINOR error but I'm
curious if any rule applies here. I'm sure that I'm just missing the
obvious, right ?

I know the rule that says with A-Q-2 suited and the discards are 3-4
or 3-5 .....hold the deuce alone.

Thanks,

Nita

#2

I'm assuming you're talking about 5-9 full pay deuces wild.

Apparently, the rule to hold the deuce if the discards are 3-4
or 3-5 is simply incomplete. 3-6 should be added to the list. That
still isn't complete, though, if you really want to get picky. 4-5,
but only if it's suited, should also be on the list.

The closest I can come to a "rule" with this type of hand is to use a
point-count system. Count a ten as 4 points, a jack as 3 points, a
queen as 2 points, a king as 1 point, and the other potential discards
at their face values. Don't count the ace or the deuce. If the total
point values using this system of these 3 cards is 11 or less, just
hold the deuce. Otherwise, draw to the royal. The only exceptions to
this rule would be to hold the royal draw on the following hands:

43 offsuit, ATs
53 offsuit, AJs
54 offsuit, AQs

and to hold just the deuce with these:

93 (suited or not), AKs
83 suited, AKs

Maybe because it has so many exceptions, I've never used this system.
I just memorized the whole list.

···

Hi,

Would anyone be willing to offer help with TRICKY hand below ?

Deuce
Ace diamond
Queen diamond
6 spade
3 heart

I held the RF3...... deuce, ace and queen diamonds. I've checked what
written literature that I have looking for a ruling on this hand but
haven't found one. I know this is an extremely MINOR error but I'm
curious if any rule applies here. I'm sure that I'm just missing the
obvious, right ?

I know the rule that says with A-Q-2 suited and the discards are 3-4
or 3-5 .....hold the deuce alone.

Thanks,

Nita

#3

I wrote:

The only exceptions to
this rule would be to hold the royal draw on the following hands:

43 offsuit, ATs
53 offsuit, AJs
54 offsuit, AQs

and to hold just the deuce with these:

93 (suited or not), AKs
83 suited, AKs

This is assuming the royal draw doesn't have a straight penalty. I
forgot about the situations in which it does and it's still the right
draw:

T7 offsuit, AJs
J7 offsuit, ATs

#4

Sorry for not stating FPDW. But yes that's correct.
  
  Thanks for the help . The point system is pretty neat though, I'll give it a try during practice. I've never seen that before but I've only been playing DW a few months .
  
  Thanks!
  
  Nita

Tom Robertson <thomasrrobertson@earthlink.net> wrote: I'm assuming you're talking about 5-9 full pay deuces wild.
  
  Apparently, the rule to hold the deuce if the discards are 3-4
  or 3-5 is simply incomplete. 3-6 should be added to the list. That
  still isn't complete, though, if you really want to get picky. 4-5,
  but only if it's suited, should also be on the list.
  
  The closest I can come to a "rule" with this type of hand is to use a
  point-count system. Count a ten as 4 points, a jack as 3 points, a
  queen as 2 points, a king as 1 point, and the other potential discards
  at their face values. Don't count the ace or the deuce. If the total
  point values using this system of these 3 cards is 11 or less, just
  hold the deuce. Otherwise, draw to the royal. The only exceptions to
  this rule would be to hold the royal draw on the following hands:
  
  43 offsuit, ATs
  53 offsuit, AJs
  54 offsuit, AQs
  
  and to hold just the deuce with these:
  
  93 (suited or not), AKs
  83 suited, AKs
  
  Maybe because it has so many exceptions, I've never used this system.
  I just memorized the whole list.
  
  >Hi,
  >
  >Would anyone be willing to offer help with TRICKY hand below ?
  >
  >Deuce
  >Ace diamond
  >Queen diamond
  >6 spade
  >3 heart
  >
  >I held the RF3...... deuce, ace and queen diamonds. I've checked what
  >written literature that I have looking for a ruling on this hand but
  >haven't found one. I know this is an extremely MINOR error but I'm
  >curious if any rule applies here. I'm sure that I'm just missing the
  >obvious, right ?
  >
  >I know the rule that says with A-Q-2 suited and the discards are 3-4
  >or 3-5 .....hold the deuce alone.
  >
  >Thanks,
  >
  >Nita
  
    vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
  
          SPONSORED LINKS
                                                        Online gambling Outdoor recreation Recreation software Gambling

···

---------------------------------
    YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
  
    Visit your group "vpFREE" on the web.
     
    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
vpFREE-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
     
    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
  
---------------------------------
  
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#5

Sorry for not stating FPDW. But yes that's correct.

Thanks for the help . The point system is pretty neat though, I'll give it a try during practice. I've never seen that before but I've only been playing DW a few months .

Thanks!

Nita

Revising the system so that 8s and 9s are only counted as if they were
7s, which makes sense since they're no more "middle" cards than 7s as,
say, 5s are than 4s, which is the theoretical reason a 5 would be
counted as 1 point higher than a 4, might simplify things.

That would leave the only exceptions to the rule of always draw to the
royal if the hand has more than 11 points more systematic and
memorizable:

43 offsuit, ATs
53 offsuit, AJs
54 offsuit, AQs
83 offsuit, AKs

I'd probably still find just memorizing the whole list easier, but I
might be biased just due to the fact that that's what I did.

#6

Tom,
  
Thanks ! I think we all resist change to some degree. Seems (in most cases) we are always most comfortable with what we get use to first. As they say, if ain't broke why fix it. I did my book work by hand for years and really resisted computers when they first came on strong. My way SEEMED so much easier to me for the longest. However..... now I wonder how I EVER managed without a computer .
  
   Anyway since I'm not as far along as you apparently are. I may experiment a little with your point system as I'll almost be starting from scratch.
  
Is this point system in a book or on an Internet site somewhere? I have little written literature at present on DW. I've just been figuring it out as I practice using the software that I have.
    
  BTW, FPDW is not offered at higher denominations anywhere , right? In the past , was it commonly offered on $1 and higher ?
  
  Take care,
  
  Nita
Tom Robertson <thomasrrobertson@earthlink.net> wrote: >Sorry for not stating FPDW. But yes that's correct.
  >

  Thanks for the help . The point system is pretty neat though, I'll give it a try during practice. I've never seen that before but I've only been playing DW a few months .

  >
  > Thanks!
  >
  > Nita
  
  Revising the system so that 8s and 9s are only counted as if they were
  7s, which makes sense since they're no more "middle" cards than 7s as,
  say, 5s are than 4s, which is the theoretical reason a 5 would be
  counted as 1 point higher than a 4, might simplify things.
  
  That would leave the only exceptions to the rule of always draw to the
  royal if the hand has more than 11 points more systematic and
  memorizable:
  
  43 offsuit, ATs
  53 offsuit, AJs
  54 offsuit, AQs
  83 offsuit, AKs
  
  I'd probably still find just memorizing the whole list easier, but I
  might be biased just due to the fact that that's what I did.
            
    vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
  
          SPONSORED LINKS
                                                        Online gambling Outdoor recreation Recreation software Gambling

···

---------------------------------
    YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
  
    Visit your group "vpFREE" on the web.
     
    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
vpFREE-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
     
    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
  
---------------------------------
  
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#7

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Tom Robertson <thomasrrobertson@...>
wrote:

I'm assuming you're talking about 5-9 full pay deuces wild.

Apparently, the rule to hold the deuce if the discards are 3-4
or 3-5 is simply incomplete. 3-6 should be added to the list.

That

still isn't complete, though, if you really want to get picky. 4-

5,

but only if it's suited, should also be on the list.

The closest I can come to a "rule" with this type of hand is to

use a

point-count system. Count a ten as 4 points, a jack as 3 points, a
queen as 2 points, a king as 1 point, and the other potential

discards

at their face values. Don't count the ace or the deuce. If the

total

point values using this system of these 3 cards is 11 or less, just
hold the deuce. Otherwise, draw to the royal. The only

exceptions to

this rule would be to hold the royal draw on the following hands:

43 offsuit, ATs
53 offsuit, AJs
54 offsuit, AQs

and to hold just the deuce with these:

93 (suited or not), AKs
83 suited, AKs

Maybe because it has so many exceptions, I've never used this

system.

I just memorized the whole list.

>Hi,
>
>Would anyone be willing to offer help with TRICKY hand below ?
>
>Deuce
>Ace diamond
>Queen diamond
>6 spade
>3 heart
>
>I held the RF3...... deuce, ace and queen diamonds. I've checked

what

>written literature that I have looking for a ruling on this hand

but

>haven't found one. I know this is an extremely MINOR error but

I'm

>curious if any rule applies here. I'm sure that I'm just missing

the

>obvious, right ?
>
>I know the rule that says with A-Q-2 suited and the discards are

3-4

>or 3-5 .....hold the deuce alone.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Nita

I think this is a case for Dan Paymar and Optimum play. I play the
RF3 if there is no flush penalty or straight penalty. This hand
shows a slight profit either way you play it. Yes, I know that the
deuce alone sometimes has a higher ER. But I don't get bogged down
with the hand. Imagine two players of equal speed playing machines
that only cranked out RF3 with Ace hands. The player who only pays
attention to flush/straight penalties will make more money simply
because he will get out many more hands than the player who looks
for more penalties.

#8

http://wizardofodds.com/deuceswild/appendix2.html

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "ab4nita" <ab4nita@...> wrote:

Hi,

Would anyone be willing to offer help with TRICKY hand below ?

Deuce
Ace diamond
Queen diamond
6 spade
3 heart

I held the RF3...... deuce, ace and queen diamonds. I've checked what
written literature that I have looking for a ruling on this hand but
haven't found one. I know this is an extremely MINOR error but I'm
curious if any rule applies here. I'm sure that I'm just missing the
obvious, right ?

I know the rule that says with A-Q-2 suited and the discards are 3-4
or 3-5 .....hold the deuce alone.

Thanks,

Nita

#9

mickeycrimm wrote:

I think this is a case for Dan Paymar and Optimum play. I play the
RF3 if there is no flush penalty or straight penalty. This hand
shows a slight profit either way you play it. Yes, I know that the
deuce alone sometimes has a higher ER. But I don't get bogged down
with the hand. Imagine two players of equal speed playing machines
that only cranked out RF3 with Ace hands. The player who only pays
attention to flush/straight penalties will make more money simply
because he will get out many more hands than the player who looks
for more penalties.

It's tough to know where to draw the line. Maybe the player who
always held just the deuce if the royal draw had an ace in it would do
even better for the same reason. Always holding the royal draw over
the deuce is even simpler and probably not very costly. And the cost
of learning a complex strategy has to be included. Time spent
learning the complex strategy could be spent playing.

#10

Is this point system in a book or on an Internet site somewhere?

Not that I know of. The link that nightoftheiguana2000 posted goes
over the complete list and gives an indication of how unimportant it
is to know the close ones. To my list of exceptions, I meant to add
"ignorable."

I have little written literature at present on DW. I've just been figuring it out as I practice using the software that I have.
   
BTW, FPDW is not offered at higher denominations anywhere , right? In the past , was it commonly offered on $1 and higher ?

Take care,

Nita

$1s occasionally crop up, but they're too popular to last long. When
I was first learning it, there were $5 machines at the El Cortez, at
least, and $1 machines at a few places. I played $1s at the Rainbow
Club, the Gold Coast, the Frontier, the El Cortez, the Riverside, the
Las Vegas Club, Arizona Charlie's Decatur, the Circus Circus, and the
Tropicana, at least. The Desert Inn had $5 machines for a while. The
Reserve had $1s when they first opened, as did the Wynn.

#11

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Tom Robertson <thomasrrobertson@...>
wrote:

mickeycrimm wrote:

>I think this is a case for Dan Paymar and Optimum play. I play

the

>RF3 if there is no flush penalty or straight penalty. This hand
>shows a slight profit either way you play it. Yes, I know that

the

>deuce alone sometimes has a higher ER. But I don't get bogged

down

>with the hand. Imagine two players of equal speed playing

machines

>that only cranked out RF3 with Ace hands. The player who only

pays

>attention to flush/straight penalties will make more money simply
>because he will get out many more hands than the player who looks
>for more penalties.

It's tough to know where to draw the line. Maybe the player who
always held just the deuce if the royal draw had an ace in it

would do

even better for the same reason. Always holding the royal draw

over

the deuce is even simpler and probably not very costly. And the

cost

of learning a complex strategy has to be included. Time spent
learning the complex strategy could be spent playing.

You're right. I originally learned to play the hand just holding
the deuce which is probably the fastest way to play it.

#12

I wonder if any such experiment / study has ever been conduct. I wonder what would be the actual cost to the player if one was using optimum play while the other used the complex strategies.

mickeycrimm <mickeycrimm@yahoo.com> wrote: --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Tom Robertson <thomasrrobertson@...>
  wrote:
  >
  > mickeycrimm wrote:
  >
  > >I think this is a case for Dan Paymar and Optimum play. I play
  the
  > >RF3 if there is no flush penalty or straight penalty. This hand
  > >shows a slight profit either way you play it. Yes, I know that
  the
  > >deuce alone sometimes has a higher ER. But I don't get bogged
  down
  > >with the hand. Imagine two players of equal speed playing
  machines
  > >that only cranked out RF3 with Ace hands. The player who only
  pays
  > >attention to flush/straight penalties will make more money simply
  > >because he will get out many more hands than the player who looks
  > >for more penalties.
  >
  > It's tough to know where to draw the line. Maybe the player who
  > always held just the deuce if the royal draw had an ace in it
  would do
  > even better for the same reason. Always holding the royal draw
  over
  > the deuce is even simpler and probably not very costly. And the
  cost
  > of learning a complex strategy has to be included. Time spent
  > learning the complex strategy could be spent playing.
  >
  
  You're right. I originally learned to play the hand just holding
  the deuce which is probably the fastest way to play it.
  
    vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
  
          SPONSORED LINKS
                                                        Online gambling Outdoor recreation Recreation software Gambling

···

---------------------------------
    YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
  
    Visit your group "vpFREE" on the web.
     
    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
vpFREE-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
     
    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
  
---------------------------------
  
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Travel
Find great deals to the top 10 hottest destinations!

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#13

  BTW, FPDW is not offered at higher denominations anywhere ,

right? In the past , was it commonly offered on $1 and higher ?

Probably not one in the whole state at dollar denom at this time.
They do pop up occasionally, but never last long. The last time I
played dollars was at the Peppermill in Reno a few years ago. I
played for three days and my casino host which I did not want and
would never go meet arbitrarily disqualified me from all drawings
and special events. Luckily he left my comp account alone. Some of
us feel like the only reason casinos put them out for awhile is to
figure out who the pros are. I'm not in that thundering herd when
they appear anymore.

I wasn't a VP player back then but my guess is that FPDW up through
$5.00 denom was in practically every casino in the state for years.
Lenny Frome, the pioneer VP theorist let the cat out of the bag
about l989, I think. Just imagine. They sat there for all those
years and nobody knew what to do with them.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, anita walker <ab4nita@...> wrote:

#14

How much a complex strategy slows a player down isn't easy to pinpoint
and I've never heard of any studies done, but how much a simple
strategy costs per hand is fairly straightforward to calculate. As
the Wizard of Odds wrote, knowing to keep AJs with a deuce when the
discards are T7 offsuit will save the player 1¢ per $392,584.27 played
through a 5-coin $1 machine, as will knowing to keep ATs with a deuce
when the discards are J7 offsuit, and some of the other ones, such as
knowing to keep ATs with a deuce when the discards are 43 offsuit, but
not when the 43 is suited, are of similar non-value, but some of them
are more significant. Keeping ATs with a deuce when the discards are
87 offsuit is about 2% of a bet better than holding just the deuce.
Assuming the average gain of holding the royal draw with an ace over
just the deuce is 1%, it adds about .004% to the overall value of the
game, so that the player who played perfectly except for always
holding just the deuce over the royal draw with an ace would have a
.758% advantage instead of the .762% advantage that the perfect player
would have. Always holding the royal draw with an ace when it had no
penalties over the deuce would eliminate most of this .004% loss, and
knowing the exceptions is a tiny fraction of that significance.

···

I wonder if any such experiment / study has ever been conduct. I wonder what would be the actual cost to the player if one was using optimum play while the other used the complex strategies.