home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: rec.gambling
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!hellgate!jacobs
- From: jacobs@cs.utah.edu (Steven R Jacobs)
- Subject: Re: Opinions on "Red Dog"?
- Message-ID: <JACOBS.93Jan22170058@cells.cs.utah.edu>
- In-reply-to: gln@cs.arizona.edu's message of 22 Jan 93 21:21:30 GMT
- Organization: University of Utah CS Dept
- References: <74154@cup.portal.com> <30339@optima.cs.arizona.edu>
- Distribution: usa
- Date: 22 Jan 93 17:00:58
- Lines: 25
-
- In article <30339@optima.cs.arizona.edu> gln@cs.arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell) writes:
- >
- > In article <74154@cup.portal.com>, Harv@cup.portal.com (Harv R Laser) writes:
- >> What's the general opinion of the group mind here on the card game
- >> known as "Red Dog" (also referred to as Acey Ducey, or In-Betweens,
- >> or Between the Sheets)?
- >
- > I'm sure that someone with more exact knowledge than I can give you
- > the specifics but everything I have read indicates that it is a big-time
- > sucker bet intended to draw people who are totally clueless about
- > playing cards and who would otherwise be too intimidated to play
- > blackjack for example. I have a book at home which gives the actual
- > house advantage but if memory serves it was well into the double digits.
- > I could be wrong but I sure seem to remember something like a 12 or 14%
- > advantage for the house. Anyone know for sure?
-
- It isn't that bad, not even close. The house edge for Red Dog is a bit
- less than 3%, the exact edge depends on the number of decks. Better
- than Roulette, even using CQM5 ;-) The game is beatable by computer
- when played with a single deck and a large bet spread, but is typically
- dealt from a 5 deck shoe.
-
- --
- Steve Jacobs ({bellcore,hplabs,uunet}!utah-cs!jacobs, jacobs@cs.utah.edu)
- "Don't worry, I just have these harmless pocket rockets...."
-