Any math/gambling wiz to test my 3 card poker strategy to make you a favorite??

[JoeD617]

So I've worked in a casino in the past as a poker dealer & carnival games dealer and have lived 10 minutes from Atlantic City since I was 5 and came up with a strategy that I believe makes you a favorite against the house in 3 card poker but have no idea how to determine the percentages. This might be confusing but if you know the game it shouldn't be.

So all bonus bets have horrible odds and of course you shouldn't be betting that ever. But in 3 card poker, as for overall odds w/o payouts being factored in, the odds are 50:50 that you or the dealer win. Either your 3 cards are higher or the dealers are. My strategy is to play the ante and the play bets every hand no matter what you have which gives you 50:50 odds. On top of that if you hit a hand of a straight or higher you receive bonus ante payouts which increases the odds in your favor. Also when the dealer doesn't qualify you can not lose even with a worse hand which also increases the odds in your favor (quite a bit I'd think.) the only downside is when you have a winning hand and the dealer doesn't qualify you only get paid on the ante bet not play but that also happens if you have a worse hand when the dealer doesn't qualify you actually win 1 bet.
That should explain everything important and I can't imagine the house still having an edge as long as you play every single hand. The payout odds might get skewed against you with the non qualifying hands but it also helps by paying you when you really lost occasionally.
So without the payout per bets odds being taken into consideration playing with this strategy clearly you will win more hands then you lose. I still think even when you don't get paid on both bets when you win against a non qualified hand it really doesn't hurt your odds too much if at all overall because the same rules helps give you an edge. I'd REALLY APPRECIATE any insight or crazy calculus solutions to help prove (or disprove) my theory. Even if you just know the game well and have no idea how to figure this out I'd still love to hear what you think. Thanks for readig & hopefully leaving some input!

[adamrosen]

If the dealer doesn't qualify and the player does you win your ante. If you don't "qualify" and the dealer does you loose your ante and bet. It's
A house game. If played correctly I believe a 46 or 47 percent payback

[JoeD617]

Originally Posted by adamrosen

If the dealer doesn't qualify and the player does you win your ante. If you don't "qualify" and the dealer does you loose your ante and bet. It's
A house game. If played correctly I believe a 46 or 47 percent payback

But that doesn't change the 50:50 odds of having a better hand. When you win you always win and sometimes when you lose you still win. Can't imagine how the house had the edge. Guess it's the payout odds but I'd think its more than made up for with getting paid on some loosing hands plus the bonus pay outs.

[JoeD617]

An played "correctly" is folding anything under Q62 or something. For my strategy to work you play 100% of hands

[Frankp2311]

I think 3 card poker is one of the worst games you can play. The Texas Holdem table game is by far the best because you have more control over the money you bet, and can bet based on your hand as it progresses. Much better chance to hit the bonus as well and better odds IMO to beat the house.

[Dobber2330]

Three Card Poker - Wizard of Odds

The math is here but if you want a shortcut here is their analysis:

Overall on the ante the probability of a win is 44.91%, push 0.06%, and loss 55.03%.

[JoeD617]

Originally Posted by Dobber2330

Three Card Poker - Wizard of Odds

The math is here but if you want a shortcut here is their analysis:

Overall on the ante the probability of a win is 44.91%, push 0.06%, and loss 55.03%.

I've seen that but don't know how? 3 cards vs. 3 cards is 50:50. I think that factors in the fact that you act first and are supposed to fold? I think those odds are for perfect strategy which is folding Q62 or lower. Playing every hand is what I believe gives you the edge. I'm not arguing btw I just don't get how the dealers 3 random cards can be 5% better then the players e random cards?

[JoeD617]

Originally Posted by Frankp2311

I think 3 card poker is one of the worst games you can play. The Texas Holdem table game is by far the best because you have more control over the money you bet, and can bet based on your hand as it progresses. Much better chance to hit the bonus as well and better odds IMO to beat the house.

All bonus bets favor the house HUGE. Of course they are fun so most people play them and there's nothing wrong with it since the games are just for fun for most. Three card is a horrible game playing the way most play. You're betting $30 to win $10 for the most part. And the payout for a straight flush is normally 40 to 1 when the odds to hit one are about 500:1 I believe. I think the regular Texas hold 'em game is pretty rough but the one where you can bet extra (instead of just 2x I think it's 2x-4x maybe Even 2x-6x?) I think is a little better. Still a fun game and I play occasionally!

[brett06]

Today is my birthday...went to the casino last night. Hit trips and 7 hands later hit a straight flush. Put $700 aside and that's what I went home with. Took $100. I believe this game is a good bet to make money. Before I sit, I see how many times the dealer qualifies/hits. If they get nothing great in 8 hands I sit. I don't always win. I did lose $100 once, went during the day. Other than that, I've won everytime. Only play this game. Nothing else. I know this luck will run out eventually bit should I be going more than once a month? 40 to 1(straight flush) have hit probably 7 times and 30-1 trips alot. Pit boss doesn't even congratulate me on big hands and does to others? Guy stairs at me constantly. To my knowledge, you can't cheat. Guy makes me nervous as hell. If Boone believes me on this, hell, I'll take bradsholly with me in a week or two. I am with this guy. Odds are 50-50 but seems like more to your favor. I could also be blinded by all the dumb luck. Never played ANY other game. Inlove this one.

[JoeD617]

Originally Posted by adamrosen

If the dealer doesn't qualify and the player does you win your ante. If you don't "qualify" and the dealer does you loose your ante and bet. It's
A house game. If played correctly I believe a 46 or 47 percent payback

When you "don't qualify" it doesn't matter since only the dealer needs to. That just goes back to you have a 50:50 chance of having a better hand an if you don't you lose, but also you win when they don't qualify. In no situation does the opposite happen where you beat the dealer but lose money. I know for a fact that playing this way you will win more hands then you lose meaning your are a favorite to win more hands then the house, it's just the pay outs that I really wondering about and how they affect the overall odds.

[VWBUS1978]

My grandfather played this game every time at the casinos.

He had a pretty decent return, I think he won the progressive payout too, it might have been $60k at the time. He always said that 3 card had the best odds for a table game.

[jlzinck]

I once sat at a Caribbean Stud Poker table for about 2 hours with a woman who played every hand blind, with no bonus.

She jotted down notes after every hand.

In the 2 hours the dealer "qualified" 37% of those times.

Of the time the dealer qualified the dealer won 61% of those hands

The woman won a total of $35 in the 2 hours.

[Metsfan1121]

Am I reading this right?
There are five possibilities:
1) Both the dealer and player qualify, player has better hand, player wins.
2) Both the dealer and player qualify, player has worst hand, dealer wins.
3) Dealer doesn't qualify, players doesn't qualify. No one wins.
4) Dealer doesn't qualify, player does qualify. Player wins.
5) Player doesn't qualify, dealer does qualify. Dealer wins.

Also, are these statements true?
-Outcome #1 and #2 are equally as likely.
-Outcome #4 and #5 are equally as likely.

I'll try the money calculations but first I'm not even sure I understand the potential outcomes, I've never seen this game.

[TarjetasBéisbol]

Originally Posted by jlzinck

I once sat at a Caribbean Stud Poker table for about 2 hours with a woman who played every hand blind, with no bonus.

She jotted down notes after every hand.

In the 2 hours the dealer "qualified" 37% of those times.

Of the time the dealer qualified the dealer won 61% of those hands

The woman won a total of $35 in the 2 hours.

$17.50 per hour isn't something I would waste my time on, my time is worth much more.

[jlzinck]

Originally Posted by TarjetasBéisbol

$17.50 per hour isn't something I would waste my time on, my time is worth much more.

It was a $5 table and it's the exception to the rule I would expect

[JoeD617]

Originally Posted by Metsfan1121

Am I reading this right?
There are five possibilities:
1) Both the dealer and player qualify, player has better hand, player wins. (Player wins 2 bets)
2) Both the dealer and player qualify, player has worst hand, dealer wins. Player loses 2 bets)
3) Dealer doesn't qualify, players doesn't qualify. No one wins. (Player wins 1 bet)
4) Dealer doesn't qualify, player does qualify. Player wins. (Player wins 1 bet)
5) Player doesn't qualify, dealer does qualify. Dealer wins. (Player loses 2 bets)

Also, are these statements true?
-Outcome #1 and #2 are equally as likely.
-Outcome #4 and #5 are equally as likely.

I'll try the money calculations but first I'm not even sure I understand the potential outcomes, I've never seen this game.

Added above. All outcomes are equally as likely either way (player/dealer)

[JoeD617]

Originally Posted by TarjetasBéisbol

$17.50 per hour isn't something I would waste my time on, my time is worth much more.

That's with $5 bets, multiple it by 20 for $100 bets and so on

Btw that's carribean stud not 3 card and that game is rough the dealer not qualifying when you have a huge hand you don't get the bonus payout.

[mnvikingstwins]

I'm not sure how the game works, but just write a simulator and it would be quite simple to track.

[JoeD617]

Originally Posted by mnvikingstwins

I'm not sure how the game works, but just write a simulator and it would be quite simple to track.

If I had a clue how to I would. For growing up in the computer age I'm not that good with them.

[mnvikingstwins]

Originally Posted by JoeD617

If I had a clue how to I would. For growing up in the computer age I'm not that good with them.

Just create a list of all of the cards for however many decks you want, randomly pull cards from them, regenerate the list when you want to shuffle, and have a way to figure out the winner each hand.

[Orangejello727]

Originally Posted by jlzinck

I once sat at a Caribbean Stud Poker table for about 2 hours with a woman who played every hand blind, with no bonus.

She jotted down notes after every hand.

In the 2 hours the dealer "qualified" 37% of those times.

Of the time the dealer qualified the dealer won 61% of those hands

The woman won a total of $35 in the 2 hours.

I used to do this. I used to play ever hand so as long as the Dealer showed no A or K. Basically if his top cards showed anything else, id double my ante and go in no matter what. I still play once in a while if the table limit is low ($10). I rarely play during prime time at niagara. Just to expensive (due to lack of tables)

[JoeD617]

Originally Posted by mnvikingstwins

Just create a list of all of the cards for however many decks you want, randomly pull cards from them, regenerate the list when you want to shuffle, and have a way to figure out the winner each hand.

We'll I already know playing with this system the player will win more hands with the few advantages, just have no idea how to tie in the return on bets per hand