I've been fooling around with the Opponent Poker game I'll bet many of
you have also been invited to try. It's kinda fun --- except when the
guy with all the tattoos makes quads out of his trips and you don't. If
a casino version of the game is in the offing, I foresee some
interesting strategy discussions ahead.
Opponent Poker
jaywilly240:
I've been fooling around with the Opponent Poker game I'll bet many
of you have also been invited to try. It's kinda fun --- except when
the guy with all the tattoos makes quads out of his trips and you
don't. If a casino version of the game is in the offing, I foresee
some interesting strategy discussions ahead.
This game from Action Gaming is available for download at
videopoker.com. 10-day trial for free, purchase for $9.95.
Indication is that we will see it in the casino.
Link: http://www.opponentpoker.com
···
------
The gist of it is that you place a wager of up to 5 credits for a
standard vp game and, at your option, place a separate 5 cr wager that
your ending hand rank will be higher than that of two computer
opponents (who are each dealt the same original hand).
If you play without the opponent option, your play is standard play
and you're paid for your wins normally. If you buy into opponent
play, things change a bit (however, you continue to play the same
paytable).
The other 2 computer opponents will hold cards based upon EV optimal
strategy for the paytable - you see their hold. After the draw, the
player with the highest ranking hand wins not only the payout on their
hand, but receives any wins generated by the opponents hands.
Hand ranking is based on type only, not specific cards. Thus, two
pair (3/2) ties with two pair (A/K). If there's a tie between any two
players, the winnings go into a pot that carries over into the next hand.
------
Provided that you play "paytable optimal EV" strategy yourself, the
additional 5 cr wager becomes a break-even proposition bet. If,
however, you occasionally adjust your play the improve chance of a
higher hand (when the pot is high), it's perhaps possible to turn that
portion of the bet into a positive EV wager. You might, for example,
hold an A with a pair.
If we see some 99% paytables, it could be an interesting proposition
game. However, since all casino players will now be guided to an
optimal EV strategy when playing this game against computer opponents,
I think casinos will be loathe to offer good paytables.
- Harry
I'd add only one note to your excellent summary of the game's
features. Whenever you and/or your opponents "tie" with the best
paying hand, a pot is established --- one that continues to grow
until one player beats the other two. This pot can be split (into
thirds) at your option, anytime before the next hand is dealt.
Because you and your opponents start every hand with the same cards,
there are lots of ties. As the size of this pot increases, you may
find it to your advantage to alter basic strategy more and more
often --- especially since you'll know what your opponents will
hold.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@...>
wrote:
This game from Action Gaming is available for download at
videopoker.com. 10-day trial for free, purchase for $9.95.
Indication is that we will see it in the casino.Link: http://www.opponentpoker.com
------
The gist of it is that you place a wager of up to 5 credits for a
standard vp game and, at your option, place a separate 5 cr wager
that
your ending hand rank will be higher than that of two computer
opponents (who are each dealt the same original hand).If you play without the opponent option, your play is standard play
and you're paid for your wins normally. If you buy into opponent
play, things change a bit (however, you continue to play the same
paytable).The other 2 computer opponents will hold cards based upon EV optimal
strategy for the paytable - you see their hold. After the draw, the
player with the highest ranking hand wins not only the payout on
their
hand, but receives any wins generated by the opponents hands.
Hand ranking is based on type only, not specific cards. Thus, two
pair (3/2) ties with two pair (A/K). If there's a tie between any
two
players, the winnings go into a pot that carries over into the next
hand.
------
Provided that you play "paytable optimal EV" strategy yourself, the
additional 5 cr wager becomes a break-even proposition bet. If,
however, you occasionally adjust your play the improve chance of a
higher hand (when the pot is high), it's perhaps possible to turn
that
portion of the bet into a positive EV wager. You might, for
example,
hold an A with a pair.
If we see some 99% paytables, it could be an interesting proposition
game. However, since all casino players will now be guided to an
optimal EV strategy when playing this game against computer
opponents,
···
I think casinos will be loathe to offer good paytables.
- Harry
It's already at Red Rock. One of the "opponents" looks a lot like
Robert Williamson, another looks a lot like Mike Matusow, and a third
looks like a well-known longtime NL cash game player whose name
escapes me at this time. The two girls look like they have rock hard
implants; they could have been drawn a lot better.
Basically, don't expect any of the "opponents" to make any mistakes.
The whole concept doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever at all.
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@...> wrote:
jaywilly240:
> I've been fooling around with the Opponent Poker game I'll bet many
> of you have also been invited to try. It's kinda fun --- except when
> the guy with all the tattoos makes quads out of his trips and you
> don't. If a casino version of the game is in the offing, I foresee
> some interesting strategy discussions ahead.This game from Action Gaming is available for download at
videopoker.com. 10-day trial for free, purchase for $9.95.
Indication is that we will see it in the casino.
_______________________________________________________________________
Paladin wrote: Basically, don't expect any of the "opponents" to make
any mistakes. The whole concept doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever
at all.
The opponents play 100% correctly assuming a 4000 royal and no money in
the pot. If you always make the standard play as well, then the game is
pure gambling with no skill. What makes the game interesting is the
player frequently should NOT go with the standard play, depending on how
much money is in the pot.
As a simple example, assume there are 200 coins in the pot (playing 9/6
DDB) and you are dealt Qh Jh Th 9h 8s. Your two opponents hold the
straight, of course. Your best play is to just hold the hearts. Your
opponents will tie, so there's no chance of the pot going to anyone
else. But if you catch any heart, in addition to getting paid for the
flush or straight flush, you win the 200 coins in the kitty because
you're the sole winner of the hand. If you don't catch a heart (or a K
or an 8), the cost of your play is 20 coins on your base bet and a 1/3
equity in the additional 20 coins that would go into the pot. (If you
catch a Q or J, the cost is a little less because you get paid for the
pair and you get a 1/3 equity in the 5 coins the pair earned and is now
going into the pot.) There are a LOT of these plays, and frequently the
best play depends on the pot size.
Bob Dancer
For a 3-day free trial of Video Poker for Winners, the best video poker
computer trainer ever invented, go to //www.videopokerforwinners.com
Good point, but are there enough of these plays to overcome the house
edge on the game? How often does the pot get to 200 coins? Probably
not often enough to overcome the house edge. Without running a sim,
I'd guess that the gain from the aggregate of these situations is less
than .5%. Again, it's a guess. The one thing you would want to do
would be to play the paytable with the highest variance, and probably*
one without any wild cards. Quadruple Triple Double Bonus, anyone?
When I played the game, I didn't give a lot of thought to this
possibility, because the pots were settled every 3d or 4th hand max. I
also don't think this is the main selling point of the game. At least
the Jazbos and Shacklefords of the world will have something new to
analyze.
*I'd need to think about that one a little bit. Joker, Double Joker,
OEJ possibly makes it more complex; Deuces less so. To maximize earn,
you'd want as complex a game as possible. On the Joker games, the cost
of making the non-standard play may exceed the gain from winning the
pot by making the non-standard play.
Consider TDB for a minute. You pick up 33329. The correct hold is
3332. How big does the pot have to be to just hold the trips?
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Dancer" <bob.dancer@...> wrote:
Paladin wrote: Basically, don't expect any of the "opponents" to make
any mistakes. The whole concept doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever
at all.The opponents play 100% correctly assuming a 4000 royal and no money in
the pot. If you always make the standard play as well, then the game is
pure gambling with no skill. What makes the game interesting is the
player frequently should NOT go with the standard play, depending on how
much money is in the pot.As a simple example, assume there are 200 coins in the pot (playing 9/6
DDB) and you are dealt Qh Jh Th 9h 8s. Your two opponents hold the
straight, of course. Your best play is to just hold the hearts. Your
opponents will tie, so there's no chance of the pot going to anyone
else. But if you catch any heart, in addition to getting paid for the
flush or straight flush, you win the 200 coins in the kitty because
you're the sole winner of the hand. If you don't catch a heart (or a K
or an 8), the cost of your play is 20 coins on your base bet and a 1/3
equity in the additional 20 coins that would go into the pot. (If you
catch a Q or J, the cost is a little less because you get paid for the
pair and you get a 1/3 equity in the 5 coins the pair earned and is now
going into the pot.) There are a LOT of these plays, and frequently the
best play depends on the pot size.