3 Card Poker - Simple? Q-6-4?

[edro]

I am going to Vegas soon and have been practicing 3 Card Poker online.

The Q-6-4 strategy is well known as the best statistically.
You basically bet Ante and Pair Plus every time, and Raise on any hand better than a Q-6-4.

With this strategy, the house supposedly has a 3.37% edge.
This is higher than other games, like blackjack and craps... but it is extremely simple to play the best known strategy.

Has anyone ever used the Q-6-4 in a real casino? Do well?

I have been practicing it online and I pretty much always walk away with $50+ when using $5 bets and having a bankroll of $150.

I am starting to think the online casinos let you win more during practice to sucker you in for real money.

 

[HardcoreRobot]

I am going to Vegas soon and have been practicing 3 Card Poker online.

The Q-6-4 strategy is well known as the best statistically.
You basically bet Ante and Pair Plus every time, and Raise on any hand better than a Q-6-4.

With this strategy, the house supposedly has a 3.37% edge.
This is higher than other games, like blackjack and craps... but it is extremely simple to play the best known strategy.

Has anyone ever used the Q-6-4 in a real casino? Do well?

I have been practicing it online and I pretty much always walk away with $50+ when using $5 bets and having a bankroll of $150.

I am starting to think the online casinos let you win more during practice to sucker you in for real money.

the house has an edge. play long enough and they will take your money. never think otherwise, but do enjoy yourself!

 

[thegimp03]

I've had varying degrees of success with 3 card poker. The last time I played I basically had bad luck the whole day, with my last few hands coming down to tying the dealer on the first two cards and being out-kicked on the third card. My brother in-law, two chairs down from me at the table won it seemed 75% of his hands and even pulled a straight flush and a couple three of a kinds.

 

[edro]

the house has an edge. play long enough and they will take your money. never think otherwise, but do enjoy yourself!

Of course, but the idea of all gambling is that your bets will fall into the "lucky" side of probability, for the short time you play.

It just seems that it is hard to screw up the Q-6-4 strategy, so the house edge is ALWAYS 3.3%.
On craps or blackjack, you can forget or screw up the best statistical strategy, giving the house edge a big bump.

 

[Malak]

I generally won't play the Q-6-4, I prefer to go with something more reasonable. But I will tell you a few things.

1. You always do the play bet, it's not worth it to do otherwise.
2. With 7 hands your most likely to see 2 unqualified hands, 2 qualified but nothing more than ace high, and 2 pair or better. The 7th hand varies, but generally it will be 2 each minimum most of the time. So if you play more than one hand or can spy the other players then you have a better idea where you are sitting. If you have a full table and you have Q-6-4 and nobody folds, you might as well fold.

 

[thegimp03]

Of course, but the idea of all gambling is that your bets will fall into the "lucky" side of probability, for the short time you play.

It just seems that it is hard to screw up the Q-6-4 strategy, so the house edge is ALWAYS 3.3%.
On craps or blackjack, you can forget or screw up the best statistical strategy, giving the house edge a big bump.

Blackjack you can play with perfect strategy and still lose because the idiot at the end of the table who acts before you hits where they shouldn't...i.e. on 17.

 

[edro]

Blackjack you can play with perfect strategy and still lose because the idiot at the end of the table who acts before you hits where they shouldn't...i.e. on 17.

I have never understood that.
People will get PISSED if you "screw up" because you "stole" their card.

With a 4+ deck shoe, I don't see why it matters much at all.

 

[thegimp03]

I have never understood that.
People will get PISSED if you "screw up" because you "stole" their card.

With a 4+ deck shoe, I don't see why it matters much at all.

Well, I'm just referring to the "extreme" scenario here of hitting on 17. I can remember a few times it's happened at a table I was sitting at and it screwed up everybody.

 

[Schfifty Five]

I have never understood that.
People will get PISSED if you "screw up" because you "stole" their card.

With a 4+ deck shoe, I don't see why it matters much at all.

Blackjack is the only game I can think of that your actions affect other people's outcome.

Thus, if you play stupidly, it can ruin other people's chances of winning.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

I have never understood that.
People will get PISSED if you "screw up" because you "stole" their card.

With a 4+ deck shoe, I don't see why it matters much at all.

i saw someone FREEEEEAK OUT over that once. when it was explained to me what happened, i said "woo hoo, fun game ya got there!"

1. its that player's card to take or not take. don't like it? sit somewhere else.
2. if it worked in his favor, would he complain? yes, while raking in his chips. douche

 

[Possessed Freak]

i saw someone FREEEEEAK OUT over that once. when it was explained to me what happened, i said "woo hoo, fun game ya got there!"

1. its that player's card to take or not take. don't like it? sit somewhere else.
2. if it worked in his favor, would he complain? yes, while raking in his chips. douche

I remember splitting 10's 5 times when the dealer showed a 6. The remaining players were beyond pissed. The dealer still busted, I still raked in, screw the others.

 

[edro]

Anyone who freaks out about that generally has a gambling problem.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Using the statistically best strategy against the house is just the slowest way to lose money. Not that any other way is going to make you money. Play some poker against real people if you're going to the casino. If you're better than a few people there and careful you can mathematically beat the rake. You'll never do that with anything against the house directly.

 

[NuclearNed]

Well, I'm just referring to the "extreme" scenario here of hitting on 17. I can remember a few times it's happened at a table I was sitting at and it screwed up everybody.

Math disagrees with you.

Other players may affect a single hand, but over the long term statistically their play doesn't affect your winning/losing ratio.

 

[DominionSeraph]

Math disagrees with you.

Other players may affect a single hand, but over the long term statistically their play doesn't affect your winning/losing ratio.

But I think that if you've been dealt a high hand the shoe is lower than average. If low cards are better for hitting then that could affect things in the tiniest of ways.

 

[DrunkenSano]

The best way to play 3 card is to play every hand, because when the dealer doesn't qualify, you get your money back, if you fold you lose the two initial bets. To 'win' money in 3 card is betting larger amounts at the right time.

 

[edro]

Math disagrees with you.

The complainers are not statisticians.
All they know is that YOU STOLE THEIR CARD.
And for this single hand, you changed their fate and cost them $10!

Actually, that sounds like fun.

 

[edro]

The best way to play 3 card is to play every hand, because when the dealer doesn't qualify, you get your money back, if you fold you lose the two initial bets. To 'win' money in 3 card is betting larger amounts at the right time.

If you beat them and they don't qualify, you get your money back but lose your Pair Plus bet.

You definitely shouldn't Raise on a 2-4-6 unsuited.

Edited to reduce confusion.

 

[bignateyk]

Blackjack is the only game I can think of that your actions affect other people's outcome.

Thus, if you play stupidly, it can ruin other people's chances of winning.

haha, that's awesome. If I were rich I would totally go and troll everyone at the blackjack table for the lulz.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkzMA1jrm00

 

[DrunkenSano]

No, you do not get your money back.
If they beat you, even with an unqualified hand, you lose all money.
If you beat them and they don't qualify, you get your money back but lose your Pair Plus bet.

You should definitely shouldn't Raise on a 2-4-6 unsuited.

No, that is not true.

If the dealer does not play then there is no action on Play wagers and Ante wagers are paid 1 to 1. If the dealer does play the dealer and player hands are compared. If the player hand loses both the Ante and Play wagers lose. If the player hand wins both the Ante and Play wagers are paid 1 to 1. If the hands are tied then there is no action on the Ante and Play wagers.

If the dealer's hand doesn't qualify, then there is no action.

 

[edro]

No, that is not true.
If the dealer's hand doesn't qualify, then there is no action.

Ok, right, they don't win your Ante or Raise if they don't play, but you still lose your Pair Plus wager.

 

[SearchMaster]

Heh - I was on a cruise with family and my brother-in-law was playing blackjack. He was playing purely on gut instinct ("I have a feeling the dealer will bust this hand so I'm sticking") - regardless of what the book or even common sense said.

He was up about $1500 and the rest of the table was PISSED that he "wasn't playing right". From the stack of chips in front of him, I think he was playing pretty damn perfectly.

 

[DrunkenSano]

Ok, right, they don't win your Ante or Raise if they don't play, but you still lose your Pair Plus wager.

You lose the pair plus but you get paid even money on your ante while your raise is pushed back to you. So in the end, instead of losing pair plus and ante, you even out. That's why some speculate that you play every hand since the changes of dealer qualifying is the same chance as you qualifying.

Heh - I was on a cruise with family and my brother-in-law was playing blackjack. He was playing purely on gut instinct ("I have a feeling the dealer will bust this hand so I'm sticking") - regardless of what the book or even common sense said.

He was up about $1500 and the rest of the table was PISSED that he "wasn't playing right". From the stack of chips in front of him, I think he was playing pretty damn perfectly.

In a way, he was playing right, especially if he's the anchor. Some people may 'count' cards without knowing, because in their head they realize a lot of high cards are already out.

 

[Schfifty Five]

Heh - I was on a cruise with family and my brother-in-law was playing blackjack. He was playing purely on gut instinct ("I have a feeling the dealer will bust this hand so I'm sticking") - regardless of what the book or even common sense said.

He was up about $1500 and the rest of the table was PISSED that he "wasn't playing right". From the stack of chips in front of him, I think he was playing pretty damn perfectly.

Being lucky != playing perfectly.

 

[edro]

You lose the pair plus but you get paid even money on your ante while your raise is pushed back to you. So in the end, instead of losing pair plus and ante, you even out. That's why some speculate that you play every hand since the changes of dealer qualifying is the same chance as you qualifying..

Wait, what?
Losing the Pair Plus is still losing.
You get your ante back, so you lose 1/2 your wager, which is still a loss.