Who can explain why if I have QJT2, a 3 is penalty card, and I should
just hold the deuce? How does a 3 possibly relate to the QJT straight?
(Similarly, why 3 or 4 a penalty with 7892?)
This question has been bugging me on and off for a couple of years.
Thanks.
Nbuntz asked: Who can explain why if I have QJT2, a 3 is penalty card,
and I should
just hold the deuce? How does a 3 possibly relate to the QJT straight?
It's not really a penalty card. It's actually the OPPOSITE of a penalty
card. A penalty card is a card that affects the value of card
combinations you keep. The 3 here affects the value of the combinations
STILL IN THE PACK of 47 cards.
The best overall explanation of this is in the "Power of the Pack"
appendix of the Dancer/Daily NSU Winner's Guide. In general, and as
Brian has already noted, cards near the extreme (A, 3, K, 4) have less
potential to yield straights and straight flushes, so when such a card
is missing from the pack, less damage is done. So comparing WQJT3 with
WQJT4 (where the W stands for wild card), the value of WQJT remains the
same, but in the first combination, the W by itself is barely worth more
than WQJT and in the second the W by itself is barely worth less than
the WQJT.
In two case, it also matters if the fifth card is SUITED with one of the
cards of the straight as this affects the possibility of the cards in
the pack forming a flush. The complete list is:
W567 --- hold W alone when fifth card is A, K, Q
W678 --- hold W alone when fifth card is 3, A, or a K suited
with one of the other cards
W789 --- hold W alone when fifth card is 3 or 4 suited with one
of the other cards
W89T --- always go for the straight
W9TJ --- always go for the straight
WTJQ --- hold W alone when fifth card is 3
The power of the pack phenomenom is also in effect in FPDW and
other Deuces Wild games. In FPDW, for example, from "KQ"345 you draw
five new cards but from "KQ"347 you hold "KQ". A different sort of
example is that from "KJ"975 you hold "KJ" but from "KJ"973 you draw
five new cards. There are a LOT of these exceptions and I suspect that
basically nobody plays these games perfectly. For the complete list, see
the appropriate Winner's Guide.
Bob Dancer
For the best in video poker information, visit www.bobdancer.com
or call 1-800-244-2224 M-F 9-5 Pacific Time.
Bob Dancer wrote:
Nbuntz asked: Who can explain why if I have QJT2, a 3 is penalty
card, and I should just hold the deuce? How does a 3 possibly relate
to the QJT straight?It's not really a penalty card. It's actually the OPPOSITE of a
penalty card. A penalty card is a card that affects the value of card
combinations you keep. The 3 here affects the value of the
combinations STILL IN THE PACK of 47 cards.
Bob, my initial reaction was initially the same as yours. However,
upon reading Brian's discussion I was satisfied that "penalty card" is
an appropriate term here.
There are two holds under consideration -- QJT-2 and 2-only. There
are a few valid definitions of penalties out there, the difference
lying in the focus of the definition. I've deemed a penalty card to
be any discard that, if otherwise held, could form a winning hand with
the cards that are held. It's the reduction of potential winning
hands as a consequence of the discard that comprises the "penalty".
Under that definition, any card is a penalty to a long deuce hold --
that penalty differs in magnitude, depending upon the specific card.
In the example put forth, it takes a 3 or 4 as the fifth card before
the related penalty to the deuce falls enough that the lone deuce
becomes a stronger hold than the QJT-2.
I'm quite satisfied with the penalty card reference here.
- Harry
I wrote:
In the example put forth, it takes a 3 or 4 as the fifth card ...
Clearly I should have limited this to "a 3" only. NSUD is little more
than a fantasy game out here on the east coast ... I was writing in
the abstract 
- H.
My In-laws stayed at the Aladdin the last four days.
While I was there,I checked for the (4) slant-tops
near the sports book bar for 9/5 BP. They seem to be
MIA. After speaking with a floor walker, she stated
due to the switch over to Planet Hollywood, mny
machines have been removed.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Harry Porter said: I've deemed a penalty card to be any discard that, if
otherwise held, could form a winning hand with the cards that are held .
. . I'm quite satified with the penalty card reference here.
Please note, my disagreement is meant to be instructional and helpful,
not confrontational. I'm not worried about Harry taking it the wrong
way, but others might feel like I am "bashing" him --- which is hardly
the case.
There are problems with your definition. First of all, insisting that a
penalty card is a DISCARD is a problem in 10/7 DB on hands like "K92"Q3
versus "K32"Q9. According to my definition, in both cases the 9 is a
straight penalty card, which means you favor the FL3 1hi over KQ.
According to your definition, the 9 could not be a penalty card in the
first hand (because it's not discarded). So if the 9 is not a straight
penalty in the first hand, why do you hold the FL3 1hi?
In my FPDW discussion, the power of the pack criteria works when you
compare "KQ"345 with "KQ"347. This cannot possibly be a penalty card
situation according to your definition because neither 345 nor 347 could
possibly form a winning hand with the cards that are held (in this case
"KQ"). Since in the first hand in this case the proper play is "draw 5",
there can not be any penalty cards because your definition of penalty
cards is limited to the cases where one or more cards is held.
You don't have to stick with my definition of penalty cards, but yours
needs some work.
Bob Dancer
For the best in video poker information, visit www.bobdancer.com
or call 1-800-244-2224 M-F 9-5 Pacific Time.
It's not so much that the 3 is a penalty card to 2TJQ as it is NOT as much of a penalty to the lone deuce. So the value of the deuce alone is higher than the outside straight with the deuce.
Look at it another way: the appearance of 4-7 make 2TJQ a better hold than the 2 alone. That's because 4-7 are "middle" cards and hurt (i.e. decrease the value of) the lone 2 more because they reduce the probability of many straights and straight flushes occurring. On the other hand, a 3 does not belong in nearly as many straights and straight flushes, and doesn't hurt the lone 2 as much, so you only hold the 2. Hope that helps!
nbuntz <nbuntz@yahoo.com> wrote:
Who can explain why if I have QJT2, a 3 is penalty card, and I should
just hold the deuce? How does a 3 possibly relate to the QJT straight?
(Similarly, why 3 or 4 a penalty with 7892?)
This question has been bugging me on and off for a couple of years.
Thanks.
vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Bob Dancer wrote:
Please note, my disagreement is meant to be instructional and
helpful, not confrontational. I'm not worried about Harry taking it
the wrong way, but others might feel like I am "bashing" him ---
which is hardly the case.
Bob, if there's anyone concerned that you might be "bashing", they
obviously hold me to be an underdog to an extent that I could only
find embarrassing
There are problems with your definition. First of all, insisting that
a penalty card is a DISCARD is a problem in 10/7 DB on hands like
"K92"Q3 versus "K32"Q9. According to my definition, in both cases the
9 is a straight penalty card, which means you favor the FL3 1hi over
KQ. According to your definition, the 9 could not be a penalty card
in the first hand (because it's not discarded). So if the 9 is not a
straight penalty in the first hand, why do you hold the FL3 1hi?
I'm a little concerned because something's getting lost in translation
(for which I'll take responsibility).
A penalty card is always defined relative to a hold under
consideration. So there's no question that the 9 is a penalty to a KQ
hold (and, is a discard when KQ is held).
For that matter, if the deal were "KQ7"83, the 7 is a flush penalty to
holding just KQ. Of course, this penalty is inconsequential in
determining the proper hold -- it isn't of sufficient magnitude
relative to whether there's a straight penalty to the KQ hold.
In my FPDW discussion, the power of the pack criteria works when you
compare "KQ"345 with "KQ"347. This cannot possibly be a penalty card
situation according to your definition because neither 345 nor 347
could possibly form a winning hand with the cards that are held (in
this case "KQ"). Since in the first hand in this case the proper play
is "draw 5", there can not be any penalty cards because your
definition of penalty cards is limited to the cases where one or more
cards is held.
Not exactly. I defined a penalty card in relation to a hold under
consideration. Just as I indicated any discard is a penalty to a lone
deuce hold, any discard is a penalty to a "draw 5" play. While this
might appear to trivialize the definition of penalty, it doesn't --
for it's the extent to which the discards penalize the value of
drawing 5 cards that determines whether it's a prefered move over some
other hold in the hand.
You don't have to stick with my definition of penalty cards, but
yours needs some work.
I hope it's clear that I have no problem with "power of the pack".
This discussion arose from my stating comfort with the "penalty"
reference in the original post. I'm not even saying that I find it
preferable to discuss a complete redraw in terms of penalties.
I don't find any inconsistencies in application of my definition to
any play situation. However, I expect this is one that you're not
going to buy on to.
- H.
I think you meant 8-5 BP.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Les Silber <lesfromli@...> wrote:
My In-laws stayed at the Aladdin the last four days.
While I was there,I checked for the (4) slant-tops
near the sports book bar for 9/5 BP. They seem to be
MIA. After speaking with a floor walker, she stated
due to the switch over to Planet Hollywood, mny
machines have been removed.
In my own strategy card, I prefer to state these in the affirmative: when DO you hold the 4-card outside straight?
W567 when T-J
W678 when J-Q, K unsuited
W789 when Q-A, 4 unsuited
W89T always
W9TJ always
WTJQ when 4-7
Some quick little memory aids: you always hold the two with 9T in them (W89T and W9TJ). And in the other four cases, you'll notice that the cards are just beyond the reach of possible straights. That helps to remember them too.
It's 6 of one, half a dozen of the other in this case - not much difference either way. But sometimes it helps to look at these kinds of situations in the reverse way when creating exception or inclusion tables. You'll find that you can state the exclusions (or inclusions) in a more concise manner one way than you can in the other.
Bob Dancer <bob.dancer@compdance.com> wrote:
W567 --- hold W alone when fifth card is A, K, Q
W678 --- hold W alone when fifth card is 3, A, or a K suited
with one of the other cards
W789 --- hold W alone when fifth card is 3 or 4 suited with one
of the other cards
W89T --- always go for the straight
W9TJ --- always go for the straight
WTJQ --- hold W alone when fifth card is 3
---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yes I did. Thanks for the correction.
--- paladingamingllc <paladingamingllc@yahoo.com>
wrote:
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Les Silber
<lesfromli@...> wrote:
>
> My In-laws stayed at the Aladdin the last four
days.
> While I was there,I checked for the (4) slant-tops
> near the sports book bar for 9/5 BP. They seem to
be
> MIA. After speaking with a floor walker, she
stated
> due to the switch over to Planet Hollywood, mny
> machines have been removed.I think you meant 8-5 BP.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "paladingamingllc"
<paladingamingllc@...> wrote:
>
> My In-laws stayed at the Aladdin the last four days.
> While I was there,I checked for the (4) slant-tops
> near the sports book bar for 9/5 BP. They seem to be
> MIA.
I think you meant 8-5 BP.
----------------we also could not locate the 8/5 BP slant-tops, but
did discover 1 MG/MD upright in the same area with that schedule.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Les Silber <lesfromli@> wrote:
This discussion has been very helpful to me.
In my worldview, the 3 is a *bonus* card, a crappy card (in relation
to the deuce) removed from the deck, just as it would if you were
playing BJ. Lacking the three, the deck is now richer, in relation to
the lone deuce, than a full deck.
So thanks for the explanation.
Yahoo! Groups Links
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and
30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]