Does the RTG software cheat at Paigow Poker?

**chuchu59** · 5th August 2009, 03:55 PM

I have been playing paigow poker at RTG for several years and sometimes feel that the house way is set to either deprive me of a win or make me lose. However, I understand there are many ways to set house rules so I am not 100% sure they cheat. I have been asking Inetbet to let me have the house rules but despite many promises nothing actually transpired. They did not even have the courtesy to tell me they are still on it. Useless people!

Now Club World has managed to tell me that RTG follows Stanford Wong's strategy in setting the House Way. Now, wonder of wonders. I play at an RTG and had a Hand comprising a pair of 4's, a Queen and 8,5,3 and 2. The dealer had 3 Kings a 10 and severl other small cards. The result was the Dealer splitting the 3 Kings into a pair for the High Hand and a K and 10 for the low hand. WTF? My Q in the low hand being beaten by a K in the dealer's low hand. In all my years of playing this game I had nearly seen the splitting of 3 Ks. Still, it is possible that Standford Wong's strategy splits 3 Kings. Alas, it was not to be and the strategy, as with most others used by Microgaming and Rival only splits Aces. If this is not cheating by RTG what is?

Anyone wants to counter this. RTG operators are welcome to chime in and refute my allegations.

**Scooter7** · 5th August 2009, 06:30 PM

I've looked at the published house-way for a dozen casinos and have never seen a rule indicating that three kings should be split. When I dealt the game years ago (which was like watching dry paint peel

), I often theorized that IF I was allowed to make decisions instead of following a script, I would give serious thought to splitting three kings if the rest of the house's cards were so small that there was no real chance of winning the low hand versus the players. Of course, there is no dealer decision making involved, so my theorizing was moot.

The reluctance of the casino to give you a list of the house-way rules (which every casino in the universe seems to be fine with handing out to players) is a red flag to me. I'm now suspicious that they've put conditional logic in that will allow what you've described to take place if it is advantageous for the house. I would write off this casino until they are more open and communicative.

**spearmaster** · 5th August 2009, 08:44 PM

That is the correct way - though it may seem very strange. With a 10 in the front pair, and 3 Kings in the back, the house has a very high chance of losing the front hand. You would also do the same thing with three Aces, but with three Queens you would keep them all in the back hand.

If you look at the Wizard of Odds site, you will find the following power ratings for the house:

K 10 front hand: 0.405186
Pair of Kings, back hand: 0.65305
Power rating: 1.05921

10 9 front hand (best case scenario): 0.104313
Three Kings, back hand: 0.890772
Power rating: 0.99585

When I used to play a lot of pai gow poker, we would call this a "gamble hand" - as two kings or aces in back is generally considered to be strong enough.

**Scooter7** · 5th August 2009, 09:05 PM

Hey Spearmaster,

As a player, I understand that the KKKxxxx scenario is a choice (or gamble) based on the stats and as such it's fine for a player to choose one way or the other. As for the house, have you ever seen a rule set that defined splitting 3 Kings as the house-way strategy?

**KasinoKing** · 5th August 2009, 09:37 PM

Originally Posted by chuchu59

If this is not cheating by RTG what is?

It seems a little unusual for sure, but I have done the same myself as a player a few times.

However, I have to say that if RTG (or any other software) wanted to "cheat" in PaiGow, they would just rig the software to give the dealer a superior hand in the first place, not do it by dealing random cards then changing the way the hand is split.

KK

**spearmaster** · 5th August 2009, 10:06 PM

Originally Posted by Scooter7

As a player, I understand that the KKKxxxx scenario is a choice (or gamble) based on the stats and as such it's fine for a player to choose one way or the other. As for the house, have you ever seen a rule set that defined splitting 3 Kings as the house-way strategy?

It's been a long time since I've played pai gow poker, though I played it where/when it was invented (Commerce Casino), and even won their first ever Pai Gow Poker tournament.

As noted elsewhere, most house ways only split Aces. But as also noted elsewhere, there are many different house ways. Splitting kings would most certainly be one of the variations and I definitely would have no problem with RTG or any other software using that as their house way.

Also, most casinos don't really publish their house ways, so you'd have to see a lot of hands before you knew what their house way was - though the Wizard did manage to get the house ways for a few different casinos. Needless to say, if you knew what the house way was, you could potentially alter your playing strategy to be more aggressive or more safe depending on the circumstances.

I personally have never asked to see the full house way strategy anywhere, so no I haven't seen a house way rule set that defined splitting 3 Kings.

**aka23** · 6th August 2009, 09:04 AM

Originally Posted by chuchu59

Now Club World has managed to tell me that RTG follows Stanford Wong's strategy in setting the House Way. Now, wonder of wonders. I play at an RTG and had a Hand comprising a pair of 4's, a Queen and 8,5,3 and 2. The dealer had 3 Kings a 10 and severl other small cards. The result was the Dealer splitting the 3 Kings into a pair for the High Hand and a K and 10 for the low hand. WTF? My Q in the low hand being beaten by a K in the dealer's low hand. In all my years of playing this game I had nearly seen the splitting of 3 Ks. Still, it is possible that Standford Wong's strategy splits 3 Kings. Alas, it was not to be and the strategy, as with most others used by Microgaming and Rival only splits Aces. If this is not cheating by RTG what is?

Anyone wants to counter this. RTG operators are welcome to chime in and refute my allegations.

KKK10 is an extremely borderline hand. It's so close that the optimal decision depends on how large the remaining 3 cards are. RTG probably did make the optimal strategy decision. I haven't heard of a house way that splits 3 kings (like they do for 3 aces), as they are simple enough to memorize easily. In contrast, I wouldn't be surprised if Stanford Wong's strategy was more precise and specified when to split and keep three kings, depending on the values of the remaining cards.

**spearmaster** · 6th August 2009, 09:52 AM

Originally Posted by aka23

KKK10 is an extremely borderline hand. It's so close that the optimal decision depends on how large the remaining 3 cards are. RTG probably did make the optimal strategy decision. I haven't heard of a house way that splits 3 kings (like they do for 3 aces), as they are simple enough to memorize easily. In contrast, I wouldn't be surprised if Stanford Wong's strategy was more precise and specified when to split and keep three kings, depending on the values of the remaining cards.

Actually, the 3 remaining cards are irrelevant. With a 10, the hand is already of very low quality. It is both safer as well as more aggressive to split the kings.

Strategy-wise, I'm pretty sure Stanford was very precise as you pointed out - but from a house standpoint, they need to keep the rules as simple as possible so that dealers can remember them. It is likely that some of the other software platforms either picked up one of these simplified house way strategies, or decided that too much code was required to program the optimal house way.

**Scooter7** · 6th August 2009, 09:59 AM

Preface:

The house and an individual player have different goals and thus have different strategies when setting their hands. The player is playing against one hand while the house is playing (at a brick & mortar) against six hands.

Question:

How does the difference in focus between player and house affect what the optimum strategy should be?

Thanks, I'll hang up now and listen to your answer

**aka23** · 6th August 2009, 10:03 AM

Originally Posted by spearmaster

Actually, the 3 remaining cards are irrelevant. With a 10, the hand is already of very low quality. It is both safer as well as more aggressive to split the kings.

According to the power rating method you listed, with KKKT9 it's higher EV to keep the 3 kings to make KKK and 10/9. However, with KKKT7, splitting to form KK and K/10 is higher EV. This indicates that the remaining cards are relevant.