CasinoGaming.com


	Sundays: Inside Gaming Tuesdays: Video Poker Wednesdays: Off the Shelf Fridays: Richard Eng, Player's Edge Saturdays: Pocket Aces

VIDEO POKER

Columns

• Back to Bob's index

• Back to columnist index

Bob Dancer writes a video poker column for beginners to experts. He also writes a column with Jeffrey Compton, "Player's Edge", featuring information on promotions at various Las Vegas casinos. Player's Edge is published each Friday in the Neon section of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Click here to send Bob Dancer an e-mail.

For more details and a schedule of Bob's free classes, visit www.bobdancer.com.

Jan. 08, 2008

Joker Ace or King versus mid-range straight flushes in KBJW

The 3-card straight flushes we're going to talk about today include the joker, have one inside, and at least one card in the {6, 7, 8} range. Letting the W (for wild card) stand for the joker and quotation marks signifying suitedness, we're talking about W '46', W '57', W '68', W '79', and W '8T' only. For the five-coin $1 player, these 3-card straight flushes are 13¢ more valuable than otherwise similar straight flushes that do not include a card in the {6, 7, 8} range, namely W '34', W '35', and W '9J'. The reason for this difference is the "redundant high pair" factor that was discussed in my Christmas Day column on this site a few weeks ago.

It happens that these mid-range 3-card straight flushes are fairly close in value to a WA or WK. When the straight flushes have neither flush nor straight penalties, they are better than WA or WK, but when they are subject to either penalty, they are less valuable. In other words,

a. From W Ah Qs 6d 8d --- hold W '68' by 7¢
b. From W Ah Qd 6d 8d --- hold WA by 14¢ --- flush penalty
c. From W Ah Ts 6d 8d --- hold WA by 4¢ --- at-the-limit straight penalty
d. From W Ah 7s 6d 8d --- hold WA by 17¢ --- extreme straight penalty
e. From W Ah 4s Jd 9d --- hold WA by 4¢ --- not a mid-range SF3
To my mind these are big enough differences between the best play and the second-best plays to worry about. And these hands are necessary background to what I really want to discuss.

The hand I want to discuss today is similar to these, namely W Ah Ks 6d 8d. This is almost identical to hand a) above. The W '68' combination is a mid-range SF3 with one inside, and there is neither flush nor straight penalty. However, instead of W '68' being the better play by 7¢, now WA is the better play by 7¢.

To explain this 14¢ swing, we are left with the inescapable conclusion that either WA changes in value when you change the Q to a K, or the W '68' changes in value, or both. Which do you think it is? The answer will likely surprise several readers. As a reminder, this is a kings or better game and WK gives you your money back and WQ doesn't.

It is frequently surprising to players in this game that, assuming you are going to hold WA, there is no difference in value between WAK and WAQ. Yes the king is a "high card" that yields a high pair when joined with the joker, you already HAVE a high pair with WA. There is no bonus in getting a single high pair twice over instead of just once.

What is happening here is that the value of W '68' is 14¢ less valuable if we've thrown away an AK than if we've thrown away an AQ. This isn't particularly obvious. After all, when you draw two cards to W '68', you certainly aren't hoping to draw a king.

While you're not hoping to draw a king, if you DO draw an ace and/or a king, you'll get paid for a high pair. These high pairs only pay $5 apiece, but they add up. Losing one king before the draw because you've discarded it ends up costing you 14¢ in expected value in this case.

While it wasn't particularly obvious why throwing the king away cost you so much, it's fairly easy to understand once the logic is pointed out.