vpFREE2 Forums

Two Deuces vs Straight Flush

#1

Besides the obvious "mathematical" choice, I would like opinions on how you personally prefer to play this hand.

You're playing FPDW. You are dealt "deuce, deuce, 7 spades, 8 spades and a blank".

I used to, without hesitation, play the four to a straight flush. After checking out the ever-so-slight difference in expected return, I find it worked out to about nine cents a hand on a quarter FPDW.

For personal enjoyment, if nothing else, I now prefer playing/holding only the two deuces for the added chance of quad deuces... as well as other high paying hands that can be made. Mathematically/over the long run, I figure it costs me typically $8 to $10 on a given trip to LV. To me, it seems a much more exciting way to have a shot at some big hands with little given up in the "long run".

Based on "long run" which I may never see in my lifetime, and given normal standard deviation, if I'm on the winning end of deviation, then I might well gain a lot of rewards. Even on the short end of the deviation, it would not cost me all that much as I compute my own play on a typical trip. Any thoughts?

ADR

#2

I do the same thing . The anticipation is worth a few cents to me. I also
hold only the aces in a two pair dealt at DB. Of course at MSS with the
scratch cards, that is the correct play.

JAS

#3

Maybe I don't play fast enough & need to make up time but I don't
stop to enjoy hands. The bottom line is all that interests me as the
playing of hands does not except to do it the correct way.

Besides the obvious "mathematical" choice, I would like opinions on

how you

personally prefer to play this hand.

You're playing FPDW. You are dealt "deuce, deuce, 7 spades, 8

spades and a

blank".

I used to, without hesitation, play the four to a straight flush.

After

checking out the ever-so-slight difference in expected return, I

find it

worked out to about nine cents a hand on a quarter FPDW.

For personal enjoyment, if nothing else, I now prefer

playing/holding only

the two deuces for the added chance of quad deuces... as well as

other high

paying hands that can be made. Mathematically/over the long run, I

figure

it costs me typically $8 to $10 on a given trip to LV. To me, it

seems a

much more exciting way to have a shot at some big hands with little

given

up in the "long run".

Based on "long run" which I may never see in my lifetime, and given

normal

standard deviation, if I'm on the winning end of deviation, then I

might

well gain a lot of rewards. Even on the short end of the deviation,

it

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, adr <adr@b...> wrote:

would not cost me all that much as I compute my own play on a
typical trip. Any thoughts?

ADR

#4

I'm a little surprised that only two people have responded to this post
(#10920) as I thought that this would be exactly the kind of idea that would
illicit response. The post said...

Besides the obvious "mathematical" choice, I would like opinions on how

you

personally prefer to play this hand.

You're playing FPDW. You are dealt "deuce, deuce, 7 spades, 8 spades and a
blank".

I used to, without hesitation, play the four to a straight flush. After
checking out the ever-so-slight difference in expected return, I find it
worked out to about nine cents a hand on a quarter FPDW.

For personal enjoyment, if nothing else, I now prefer playing/holding only
the two deuces for the added chance of quad deuces... as well as other

high

paying hands that can be made. Mathematically/over the long run, I figure
it costs me typically $8 to $10 on a given trip to LV. To me, it seems a
much more exciting way to have a shot at some big hands with little given
up in the "long run".
......... Any thoughts?

My thoughts on it are that it's a valid alternate hold in short term
strategy. Winpoker lists the ER for a 2-2-6-7 hold as roughly 16.6 and the
ER of the 2-2 hold as roughly 16.5, a difference that is negligible. My
contention is that given the huge fluctuations in short term play
(deviations), the difference is tantamount to zero.

If I were a member of a team gangbanging a bank of machines for a million or
so hands (purely theoretical, we know that never really happens) then I
would go with the 2-2-6-7 hold, for obvious reasons. But this alternate
hold seems to me to be roughly equal and does offer some additional
excitement for the recreational player who otherwise strives for perfect
play.

ADR says he figures that it might cost him around $9 per trip, but depending
on how many two-deuce draws he gets, it could be significantly lower than
that. Admittedly, it could also be a lot higher. But the one-card draw to
the sf is a very low probability event.

In terms of risk/rewards, you will end up with a minimum of trips in either
case, but of the 47 remaining cards only four of them will yield the sf
(2-2-5s-8s). But the 2-2 hold sets up a huge number of possible hands that
will yield greater than trips, including quad deuces and wild royals.

The downside is that while it may be a good short term strategy hold, all
the short terms ultimately add up to the long term, and admittedly it's the
wrong long term strategy hold. But I like it short term and look forward to
trying it.

I'd also like to hear others' thoughts on this.
lb

#5

In terms of risk/rewards, you will end up with a minimum of trips in

either

case, but of the 47 remaining cards only four of them will yield the sf
(2-2-5s-8s). But the 2-2 hold sets up a huge number of possible hands that
will yield greater than trips, including quad deuces and wild royals.

I'm sure if you re-read that paragraph you'll catch your error.

Holding 2-2-6s-7s, you can catch 2, 2, 3s, 4s, 5s, 8s, 9s, Ts for the SF.

Gamb00lers

G'luck

#6

I'm a little surprised that only two people have responded to this post
(#10920) as I thought that this would be exactly the kind of idea that

would

illicit response. The post said...

  I held my tounge. I have commented on this kind of thing before, so
I saw no need to start another flame war.

  QZ

#7

Holding 2-2-6s-7s, you can catch 2, 2, 3s, 4s, 5s, 8s, 9s, Ts for the

SF.<<

You're right, that was a dumb mistake. I do see it as a valid alternate
draw though, that glaring error notwithstanding. Thanks for pointing that
out.

lb

#8

Your argument is untrue.
In 2 2 6s 7s there are 8 cards that will fill a St Fl not 4.
2, 2, 3s, 4s, 5s, 8s, 9s, 10s,
8 of 47.
And the ev is approx 16.7 vs 16.2

in
2, 2, 7s, 8s,
the ev is approx 16.5 vs 16.2

at any rate too much money for me.
I'm still trying to commit these to memory...
10h, Kh, 3c, 4c, 5s (1.6392 vs 1.6376)
and
7c, 8c, As, 10h, Kh (1.600 vs 1.6078)
stu

···

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lawrence Boxer" <ljboxer@earthlink.net>
To: <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 12, 2003 10:03 PM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Two Deuces vs Straight Flush

I'm a little surprised that only two people have responded to this post
(#10920) as I thought that this would be exactly the kind of idea that

would

illicit response. The post said...

> Besides the obvious "mathematical" choice, I would like opinions on how
you
> personally prefer to play this hand.
>
> You're playing FPDW. You are dealt "deuce, deuce, 7 spades, 8 spades and

a

> blank".
>
> I used to, without hesitation, play the four to a straight flush. After
> checking out the ever-so-slight difference in expected return, I find it
> worked out to about nine cents a hand on a quarter FPDW.
>
> For personal enjoyment, if nothing else, I now prefer playing/holding

only

> the two deuces for the added chance of quad deuces... as well as other
high
> paying hands that can be made. Mathematically/over the long run, I

figure

> it costs me typically $8 to $10 on a given trip to LV. To me, it seems

a

> much more exciting way to have a shot at some big hands with little

given

> up in the "long run".
>......... Any thoughts?

My thoughts on it are that it's a valid alternate hold in short term
strategy. Winpoker lists the ER for a 2-2-6-7 hold as roughly 16.6 and

the

ER of the 2-2 hold as roughly 16.5, a difference that is negligible. My
contention is that given the huge fluctuations in short term play
(deviations), the difference is tantamount to zero.

If I were a member of a team gangbanging a bank of machines for a million

or

so hands (purely theoretical, we know that never really happens) then I
would go with the 2-2-6-7 hold, for obvious reasons. But this alternate
hold seems to me to be roughly equal and does offer some additional
excitement for the recreational player who otherwise strives for perfect
play.

ADR says he figures that it might cost him around $9 per trip, but

depending

on how many two-deuce draws he gets, it could be significantly lower than
that. Admittedly, it could also be a lot higher. But the one-card draw to
the sf is a very low probability event.

In terms of risk/rewards, you will end up with a minimum of trips in

either

case, but of the 47 remaining cards only four of them will yield the sf
(2-2-5s-8s). But the 2-2 hold sets up a huge number of possible hands that
will yield greater than trips, including quad deuces and wild royals.

The downside is that while it may be a good short term strategy hold, all
the short terms ultimately add up to the long term, and admittedly it's

the

wrong long term strategy hold. But I like it short term and look forward

to

trying it.

I'd also like to hear others' thoughts on this.
lb

vpFREE Home Page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE

vpFREE Links:
http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

#9

I for one ALWAYS consciously play optimum strategy. Of course that excludes
accidents and mistakes. I don't have to make a decision in a situation
like that, as the decision has already been made for me. Why abandon the
best probability for a lesser possibility? There is no such thing as short
term strategy for me. Every hand is for the long term since I don't plan to
stop playing in "this lifetime".

···

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lawrence Boxer" <ljboxer@earthlink.net>
To: <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 12:03 AM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Two Deuces vs Straight Flush

I'm a little surprised that only two people have responded to this post
(#10920) as I thought that this would be exactly the kind of idea that

would

illicit response. The post said...

> Besides the obvious "mathematical" choice, I would like opinions on how
you
> personally prefer to play this hand.
>
> You're playing FPDW. You are dealt "deuce, deuce, 7 spades, 8 spades and

a

> blank".

#10

Slightly lower ER isn't the only consideration. This increases
variance as well -- which you can tell intuitively based on the
possiblity of a low-percentage "big hit" that comes with the same or
lower ER. I'll leave it to those much more accomplished in math to
calculate the actual amount, but you're getting into bankroll
considerations.

Alan

I'm a little surprised that only two people have responded to this

post

(#10920) as I thought that this would be exactly the kind of idea

that would

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Lawrence Boxer" <ljboxer@e...> wrote:

illicit response. The post said...

#11

Your argument is untrue.
In 2 2 6s 7s there are 8 cards that will fill a St Fl not 4.
2, 2, 3s, 4s, 5s, 8s, 9s, 10s,
8 of 47.

Yes, I've already acknowledged that admittedly dumbass mistake, and I know
better.

I wish that ADR had used clubs, diamonds, or hearts in his example. I'd
probably have made the same error in my rush to post the reply, but now I've
made it in Spades! Very embarassing.

But I think that despite that, the argument that it's a valid short term
hold is true and that due to short term high volitility, the difference in
ER is negligible.

As for the EVs of the two holds, they came directly from winpoker, although
I admit to rounding to the nearest tenth.

lb

#12

If I understand you correctly, the sf could still be hit and other big hand
opportunities are increased. Any increased variance is accounted for, in
part, because short term variance is generally much higher anyway, even
assuming the correct hold, and this alternate would not be a long term
strategy hold.

lb

···

Slightly lower ER isn't the only consideration. This increases
variance as well -- which you can tell intuitively based on the
possiblity of a low-percentage "big hit" that comes with the same or
lower ER. I'll leave it to those much more accomplished in math to
calculate the actual amount, but you're getting into bankroll
considerations.

#13

You also have a lot of draws for a regular straight or a regular flush. If my numbers are right there are 30 cards that will improve your hand to a payoff of 10 or better.

Regards
A.P.

···

----- Original Message -----
  From: Lawrence Boxer
  To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 1:58 AM
  Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Two Deuces vs Straight Flush

  >>> Holding 2-2-6s-7s, you can catch 2, 2, 3s, 4s, 5s, 8s, 9s, Ts for the
  SF.<<

  You're right, that was a dumb mistake. I do see it as a valid alternate
  draw though, that glaring error notwithstanding. Thanks for pointing that
  out.

  lb

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

#14

QZ - You've admirably mellowed with time. Of course, sounds like LB
was looking precisely for such a flame war: he did say that he
expected the idea to provoke "illicit response".

- H.

Quad Zilla wrote:

I held my tounge. I have commented on this kind of thing before, so
I saw no need to start another flame war.

Lawrence Boxer wrote:

···

> I'm a little surprised that only two people have responded to this
> post (#10920) as I thought that this would be exactly the kind of
> idea that would illicit response. The post said...

#15

Harry,

Obviously it's a controversial suggestion (2-2- vs 2-2-6s-7s), but a flame
war? No way! I read the original post with interest, saw some validity to
the reasoning behind it, and thought it was a worthy topic to toss around.
Really no other reasons behind it.
lb

···

QZ - You've admirably mellowed with time. Of course, sounds like LB
was looking precisely for such a flame war: he did say that he
expected the idea to provoke "illicit response".

Quad Zilla wrote:
> I held my tounge. I have commented on this kind of thing before, so
> I saw no need to start another flame war.

Lawrence Boxer wrote:
> > I'm a little surprised that only two people have responded to this
> > post (#10920) as I thought that this would be exactly the kind of
> > idea that would illicit response. The post said...

#16

Of course, sounds like LB
was looking precisely for such a flame war: he did say that he
expected the idea to provoke "illicit response".

Okay, Okay. It took a while. I wanted to ELICIT response, not provoke
ILLICIT response. Extremely clever of you.
lb