Comments on: Mississippi Stud (+EV @ Barona)

By: Tom Mc

Tom Mc — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 23:22:14 +0000

Been to Harrah’s 3 times so far this year. Got my win/loss statement and it is way off.
They are not keeping a count in the pit when you buy in. I suggest when you go to MS you buy in at $300 increments. They usually check that. $100 not so much.
Had a couple good hands so far this year,

See ya there

By: stephenhow

stephenhow — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 18:46:11 +0000

Ahhh … I’ll have to correct the baseline EV numbers for the 5:1 straight paytable. But I already have the 5:1 paytable in my collusion analysis, so my +EV numbers stand as they are.

Steve

By: Akatora

Akatora — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 04:50:34 +0000

The house edge for a game with 4 to 1 on the straight is 4.91%. So barona’s game of 5 to 1 on the straight is only 3.97% house edge. This could change your +EV numbers a bit.

By: Tom Mc

Tom Mc — Sat, 03 Sep 2011 21:19:32 +0000

Had a great day at a casino. Don’t want to get anyone in trouble so name withheld.
Had one dealer kept flashing community cards. A few times he actually dealt all three face up. He had been dealing another carnival game prior to this.
played all day on their money as I hit good on my first buy in. Had one boat with $100 down. Ended up $2300 ahead.
Wish I was closer to Barona

By: stephenhow

stephenhow — Sat, 27 Aug 2011 18:51:49 +0000

I’ve been wanting to check the effects of betting all 6 hands on EV and variance as you point out. I’ll get around to it soon!

By: TBones

TBones — Sat, 27 Aug 2011 18:31:23 +0000

Stephen,
Now that you can play multiple hands. Do you think it would be better for a person to Bet $30 on one hand of MS Stud at a full table or Bet $5 on all 6 hands? What is the effect on variance and EV? Thanks Bro

By: stephenhow

stephenhow — Sun, 07 Aug 2011 01:43:13 +0000

The paytable pays 5-to-1 for a straight at Barona. It’s the first table I ever saw, so I thought it was standard. But as usual, Barona has the best paytables, and everyone else pays 4-to-1 for the straight. I used 5-to-1 for the analysis, so it’ll probably change the 3x decision points for a straight draw. Eventually, I’ll get around to updating the analysis for the more common paytable.

By: aq

aq — Sun, 07 Aug 2011 01:22:11 +0000

just curious, the practice game pays 5:1 on straights. but the wizard of odds lists the payout as 4:1. what payout did you use for your analysis? thanks!

By: stephenhow

stephenhow — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 08:14:37 +0000

I used “monte-carlo” analysis (i.e., random simulation of hands satisfying a proposed hypothesis) to develop individual decision points of the collusion strategy. I constructed a complete strategy (all hand classifications and decisions), coded it up, and ran it for billions of hands. First, I verified the baseline simulation that basic strategy (no collusion) returned the expected -4.91% EV. Then, I substituted in the full collusion strategy, and observed the improved return. This type of simulation is the least susceptible to error, because there’s no way to “cheat”, other than through collusion information. In other words, the baseline -4.91% simulation guarantees the +EV collusion strategy must be the result of the strategy, not any bug in the programming.

By: Terry

Terry — Sun, 17 Jul 2011 05:38:34 +0000

Stephen, Can you tell me how to figured out that there is a 1.5 % advantage? Thanks Terry