Boston 7 Invades Taj Mahal in Atlantic City



            Almost everyone is familiar with what a heavy Boston accent sounds like.  Or should I say Bah-stun?  I'll never forget a story I heard while a freshman in college.  A classmate had visited one of the Boston colleges the year before to check it out.  The student giving the tour told him that "Freshman are not allowed to have cars on campus."  What he heard was "cahs: and not "cars."   A bit confused he asked the student leading the tour - "why would a freshman want to have a cow on campus?"

            Less well known about Bostonians is that they have taken the word 'wicked' and turned it upside down.  Wicked doesn't mean evil in Boston.  It means 'very'.  A wicked bad headache is a very bad headache.  So, when I say that John Feola of New Vision Gaming has invented one wicked cool game, it means it is a game worth playing! 

            The new game is called Boston 7 Stud Poker and it just opened at the Trump Taj Mahal in Atlantic City.  It is a wicked simple game and if you're familiar with Mr. Feola's Boston 5 Stud, you'll notice some similarities.  Boston 7 Stud just takes advantage of the on-going popularity of the 7-card Poker games.

            To begin with, the Player makes 2 equal size wagers, called the Ante and the 1st Wager.  He then receives 3 cards.  The Player now has a choice to make.  He can either Fold, forfeiting his Ante and 1st Wager or he can make a 2nd Wager - equal in size to the other two wagers - and receive 4 additional cards.

            If the Player decides to make the 2nd Wager, his hand will go head-to-head against the Dealer's hand.  The Player will make his best 5-Card Poker hand from his 7 cards.  The Dealer is also dealt 7 cards to make his best 5-card Poker Hand.   If the Player's hand beats the Dealer's hand, his 1st and 2nd Wager will pay even money.  The Ante will push unless the Player's hand is a Three of a Kind or better, in which case it will pay an Ante Bonus according to the following paytable:

Hand
Pays
7 - Card Royal
$25,000
6 - Card Royal
$5,000
5 - Card Royal
250
Straight Flush
100
Four of a Kind
25
Full House
4
Flush
3
Straight
2
Three of a Kind
1

            Note that the top two hands actually consist of 6-card and 7-card hands, respectively and are fixed pays, not odds pays.

            If the Dealer's hand beats the Player's hand, all wagers are taken, BUT the Player will still be paid according to the above paytable if he has a Three of a Kind or better.  So, while he will still lose his Ante Wager itself, he will still be paid for the hand.  If the Player's hand and Dealer's hands tie, all wagers push, but the Player can still earn an Ante Bonus.

            There is also an optional 3-card Bonus Sidebet that the Player can make that is based on his first three cards.  The Player MUST show his first three cards to the Dealer if he has a Pair or better in order to claim his win.  The paytable for the 3-Card Bonus is as follows:

Hand
Pays*
Royal Flush
100
Straight Flush
  40
Three of A Kind
  30
Straight
    6
Flush
    3
Pair
    1
* Pays are "TO 1"

            As I did the analysis on this game for the regulatory agencies, I'm quite familiar with the math.  The overall payback of the base game is 97.59% which is fine for a game with essentially no strategy.  While the Player has to make a decision, in theory, there really is no decision in reality.  The Player should NEVER Fold.  Even the worst possible 3-card starter hand can come back to beat the Dealer often enough to make it not worth Folding.  As a result, what we really have is a game in which the Player and Dealer will each win 50% of the time.  The House edge is created from the fact that the Ante Pushes unless the Player's hand is Three of a Kind or better.  The Player also gets the advantage of being paid even on losing hands of Trips or better.

            For the 3-Card Bonus Sidebet, the payback is 93.81%, which is in-line with many other 3-Card paytables that can be found, especially in Atlantic City.  The game was developed with numerous Ante Bonus and 3-Card Bonus paytables, so pay careful attention to the actual paytables before you sit down and play. 

            If you do make it down to Atlantic City and play Boston 7, I'm sure you're in for one wicked good time.  You can go to www.newvisiongaming.com and check out more of their games, including Imperial Pai Gow

Counting on Strategy

For those of you who follow the financial pages, you know that last month, the Tropicana in Atlantic City reported that it actually LOST money on its blackjack tables.  This is not a common occurrence.  In fact, it may never have happened before for such a sizable casino.  At the time, they reported that a single Player had won about $5 million dollars playing hands of about $100,000 per hand.  The casino tried to chalk this up to 'bad luck' (on their part).  My first reaction when I read the story was either cheating or counting.

This week, the Press of Atlantic City reported that this same Player had taken two other casinos for several million as well.  They also identified (and interviewed) the Player.  His name is Don Johnson (no, not the one from Miami Vice).  He is the CEO of a company that uses computer-assisted wagering programs for horse racing. Hmmm?!

Mr. Johnson states in the article that he does not cheat.  He simply beats the casino using his skill and a sufficiently sized bankroll.  He also freely admits that in between his wins he's had some significant losses, but he declines to talk about the size of those losses.  Having no reason to doubt him and realizing that his story is quite plausible, I believe we may have stumbled upon one of the best Blackjack Players in the world.

I'm sure that Mr. Johnson has no idea who I am and I'm certainly not suggesting that he endorses any of my strategies, but his story still reinforces so much of Expert Strategy that I felt the need to comment.

Mr. Johnson knew which game to play - Blackjack.  Blackjack affords the player the opportunity to earn a payback of 99.5% by playing proper basic strategy - which is really not all that hard to learn.  Many casinos will even allow Players to have strategy cards with them as long as it doesn't slow up the game.  

Mr. Johnson clearly knew the right strategy to play.  I have no doubt that he knows basic strategy and then some.  Even without card counting, there are some subtle strategy points that an expert would utilize that the average Player would not.  However, these will NOT turn the game positive.  The only way a Player might be able to turn the tables on the casino is to count cards and to adjust both the wager size and the hit/stick strategy accordingly.  Of course, let's not kid ourselves.  This will NOT turn Blackjack into a 105% game.  With just the right changes, a Player might be able to flip the advantage to his own direction - i.e. 100.5%.

That brings me to the other key point that Mr. Johnson raises in his interview.  He was properly BANKROLLED.  Playing a 100.5% or even a 102% game does not mean that the Player will always win or that his session will go in only one direction.  Just as easily as a Player can win playing a 99.5% game, he can lose playing a 100.5%.  However, when you are playing a 100.5% game, you know that the longer you play, the more likely you are going to win.  So, the key is making sure your bankroll lasts long enough to sustain you through a rough patch.  If you're planning on playing $100K per hand, you better show up with more than $1 million.

It took a great deal of knowledge and discipline for Mr. Johnson to do what he did.  Many have tried a variety of card counting schemes with some success, but not too many are known to have taken the casinos for as much as $15 million.  Of course, a portion of this may have been an element of surprise.  The casinos did not know who he was or what he was capable of, so they gladly let him throw his 100K down at a time and probably figured they were about to make a lot of money.

The casinos were so unprepared that at least one of them agreed beforehand to forgive 20% of his losses.  So, if he had walked away down $2 million, they would have given him $400K back.  Clearly the casinos did not do their homework on this guy.  Kind of like facing Nolan Ryan in his prime and saying he can start the count at 0-1!