New 6-Handed Limit Holdem Bot at Harrah's Las Vegas

[The Shrink]

http://www.uspoker.com/blog/limit-ho...t-vegas/12818/

John Mehaffey wrote this article about a new 6-max limit hold'em machine at Harrah's in Vegas. Bot play is horrific but rake is outrageous (up to 25%). Thoughts on this from the limit players? In a 2+2 thread the author estimated that it would take about 150 hours grinding this thing to make Seven Star.

[Dan Druff]

http://www.uspoker.com/blog/limit-ho...t-vegas/12818/

John Mehaffey wrote this article about a new 6-max limit hold'em machine at Harrah's in Vegas. Bot play is horrific but rake is outrageous (up to 25%). Thoughts on this from the limit players? In a 2+2 thread the author estimated that it would take about 150 hours grinding this thing to make Seven Star.

Pretty good report by Mehaffey.

I agree with his conclusions that the game is likely unbeatable due to the awwwwwwwwwwful rake.

Even a 10% rake game tends to be unbeatable, though according to Mehaffey, the bot play is so bad (and is somewhat exploitable once you get used to it) that you can win far more than you would against human opponents.

Still, I can't imagine overcoming a 25% rake. As he mentioned, this 25% rake basically gives an opponent in a 4-way pot a free chance to suck out on you.

This still might be worth looking into just in case the rake can be overcome (probably not though), or that it might be the cheapest way to Diamond or Seven Stars.

Recall that the Texas Holdem Heads Up machine (which had no rake, but got increasingly tougher to beat as time went on) was initially the fastest/easiest way to Seven Stars. Now that machine is gone from all CET properties, and has been for awhile.

Mehaffey isn't totally clear about the tier credits earned. He wrote that you earn "$1 in comps or 50c in freeplay for $1000 wagered". This is an overly simplified (and a little bit inaccurate) way of saying 1 Reward Credit (RC) per $10 wagered, which each RC being worth 1 cent. You can trade in RCs for freeplay at varying rates, depending upon your tier credit (0.5 cents per RC at Gold, all the way up to 0.8 cents per RC at Seven Stars).

But he doesn't explain the tier credits earned. I am assuming it is 1 tier credit per $10 wagered, which would be the same as video poker. I'm assuming this because the RC accumulation he described is the same as video poker.

This was also the same accumulation initially offered on Texas Holdem Heads Up, which is why it was possible to earn Seven Stars so quickly at the time. This was NOT a bug or glitch, but they simply over-tiered the game because they must not have understood limit holdem action very well. Eventually they degraded it to one tier & one RC per $60 wagered, which was still worth doing. Then they got rid of the machines entirely.

The difference here is that you will be playing $2/$4 at the maximum, whereas you could play $20/$40 on Texas Holdem Heads Up.

However, due to apparently earning 1 tier per $10 wagered, Mehaffey estimates that you can earn 1000 tier credits per hour, which is about equivalent to what most players would earn from playing $5 per credit video poker.

The people on 2+2 saying that this would take 150 hours for Seven Stars are incorrect -- at least for the remainder of 2015.

This is because you will earn bonus tier credits for a certain amount played per day, which basically tripled your tier credits if done optimally.

If you play 2500 tier credits , you earn 5000 bonus tiers.

If you play 5000 tier credits, you earn 10000 bonus tiers -- and will make diamond in a day.

Both are very doable even at the less variance $1/$2 level (50c credit level).

So to get to Seven Stars optimally, you need to play 10 separate sessions (that is, 10 separate days) of exactly 5000 tier credits (or a tiny bit more if you can't be exact), and you will make Seven Stars.

Keep in mind that you can also play "time games" with the Total Rewards days. Most casinos restart their Total Rewards day at 6am (though some at 4am or 5am, so always check!)

This means you could accomplish THREE days of play in fewer than 48 hours. For example, let's say you live in Los Angeles and want to play one of these machines in Vegas.

Monday: Drive up to Vegas at 6pm, arrive 10pm. Start playing at 11pm for 5 hours at $2/$4, earn 5000 base tier credits + 10000 bonus, finish at around 4am. Go to sleep.

Tuesday: Wake up whenever you feel like it. Play 5 hours at $2/$4 again, earning 5000 base tiers and 10000 bonus tiers again. Go to sleep fairly early so you can wake up in the morning.

Wednesday: Get up at 8am. Play 5 hours at $2/$4 one more time, earning another 5000 base tiers and 10000 bonus tiers. It is now 1pm. Check out and drive home. You will be back by 6pm, 48 hours after you started!

With the above plan, you spent 2 full days in Vegas (including travel time from LA), but earned 45,000 tier credits -- meaning you're already 30% to Seven Stars.

So you could make two trips like these, and one a day longer, and you will make Seven Stars.

It's easier than the 2+2 nerds make it appear.

However, this may not be the machine to do it. There are still a few CET casinos left with 99.54% or better video poker with full tier credits being awarded, so the expected loss will be likely lower than this new machine, and the time required to play will be the same.

[Dan Druff]

I should also mention that if you are going to play against Texas Fold Up, you should do it soon. If it is beatable, eventually it will be tweaked to where it is not.

This happened with the Texas Holdem Heads Up game. For awhile it had some exploitable tendencies, such as the fact that you could triple-check-raise it fairly easily in certain circumstances. I came to realize that it would usually bet when checked to if holding top pair on a board like Q44, even if you check-raised it on the previous street. So if you have A4 and it has AQ, you can check-raise the flop, turn, and river and get paid off each time. They eliminated problems like this with subsequent updates, which I believe pooled actual player data (legal) and closed its own loopholes via an algorithm.

[Dan Druff]

Also, I have been told that this Texas Holdem Fold Up bot only exists at Harrah's Las Vegas for now, and is on a trial run.

I don't believe it's anywhere else in the country.

[Dan Druff]

Brandon (Drexel) went and played it yesterday, and reported back to me.

He found a few things:

1) He wasn't able to earn anywhere near 1000 tier credits per hour at the highest limits. He likely didn't play as quickly as John Mehaffey did (especially because he didn't realize until part way into the session that he could "end hands" early once he folded), but he only earned a little over 100 tier credits in an hour of play. So this may not be a good way to reach 2500 or 5000 tier credits in a day. I suppose it's also possible that Harrah's decreased the tier credit earning power since John played.

2) Brandon ran badly and lost money (nothing huge, but a lot compared to how long he played and the $2/$4 stakes). However, he theorizes that it is unbeatable due to both the rake and the ante.

3) He agreed with Mehaffey's statement that the bots play like the fish on Party Poker circa 2001.

4) He described it as a "card catching contest', as the bots do not fold with any semblance of a hand or draw, so therefore they cannot be bluffed. Therefore, the best hand always wins -- which is different than normal poker we are used to playing.

Since then, I have done a bit more thinking about the rake and whether the game is beatable.

I decided to do this in terms of the number of big blinds won per 100 hands -- a common metric to determine how good cash players are.

First, I approximated that at the $2/$4 limits, your average total bet per hand will be about $10. The minimum bet is $2 (the ante), and the maximum bet is $48 (capping every street), but I figured the average will be around $10. Whether I'm correct or not on that is immaterial, because it can't be too far off, and its accuracy isn't that important for what I want to show.

Since there are 6 players in the game (you and 5 bots), and since bluffing is virtually impossible, the hands always go to showdown, which means that the winner is always simply the player who catches the best cards. If all players were identical, this would mean each player would average 16.67% winning hands.

However, due to different standards regarding playing hands preflop, as well as different standards for folding postflop, the tighter player will win a smaller percentage of hands than that, but will also lose less on the hands he doesn't win.

It is fairly certain that a competent human player will be tighter than the bots.

So let's say that the human player wins 12% of the time, and one of the bots wins the other 88% of the time.

Again, this is just a guess, and the accuracy isn't important.

In a hypothetical session of 5000 hands (which is what would be required to earn 5000 tier credits, assuming a $10 average bet per hand), this would mean the player would win 600 of them and lose 4400 of them.

Let's say that the pot size in those 600 hands averaged $50. That would mean $30,000 worth of won pots, before rake.

Now of course we have to look at the 4400 hands that the player lost. These are not raked, but the player loses a minimum of $2 each. Let's say that the player averages $6 loss per hand, making a total loss of $26,400.

So before the rake is considered, the player won $3600 ($30,000 - $26,400) in 5000 hands of $2/$4. That breaks out to a profit of $0.72 per hand -- which is 0.36 big blinds (which are $2 each) per hand. That means the player won 36 big blinds per 100 hands played, before rake.

BUT WAIT!

The estimated 20% rake on $30,000 comes out to $6000! So the player actually walks away having LOST $2400 after the rake is taken out!

This is absolutely insane, given that 36 big blinds per 100 is an EXCELLENT win rate in limit holdem. To give you a comparison, when I have an extended period of time where I run well in limit holdem on Bovada, I average about 7.5 big blinds per 100 hands! This is nearly 5 times my best medium-term win rate on Bovada, and yet still I would LOSE if I achieved that rate! Ouch!!

So in our hypothetical above, the player would have to win $33,000 in those 600 hands before rake -- meaning a $6600 profit after losses are subtracted, in order to break EVEN after the $6600 rake is collected. This would be $1.32 per hand overall, and a staggering 66 big blinds won per 100 -- just to walk away even.

No matter how bad the opponents, I don't believe it is anywhere near possible to win 66 blinds per 100 (or anywhere near it) in limit holdem in anything but the super-short term.

Therefore, I declare this machine to be wholly unbeatable.

Even if my calculations are off and you simply need to win 30 big blinds per 100, that again is not possible to do for any extended period of time.

So what is the game's hold?

Well, even taking my first example (a good player beating it for 36 blinds per 100 before rake), that still equates to $2400 lost per $50,000 wagered after the rake. That's a hold of 4.8%, which is far more than most video poker machines in Vegas.

And if the player instead only manages to beat it for 10 big blinds per 100 (which may be more realistic), he would lose $4480 using the figures above. That would be a hold of almost 9%, which puts it on par with slot machines.

In other words, this looks like a sucker's game from my early calculations.

The rake is too damn high.

Also, developing a strategy to do better is tough. If you play tighter, you are costing yourself money because of the $2 ante per hand (there's no such thing as "folding a free hand"). If you play looser, you are going to have issues with having your weaker hands rarely hold up against the ever-chasing bots. That is, don't expect middle pair or ace high to win at showdown too often (whereas these hands are frequent winners at normal 6-max games, where people chase much less). Looser play also means that you will get raked more, as you will be entering more hands.

Therefore, playing tight has a downside, and playing loose has a downside. This will make it tougher to develop a play style which could negate the huge rake advantage that the house has in this game.

Conclusion: This machine looks like a waste of time and money.

[BeerAndPoker]

So you're saying I'd be better off degening at blackjack?

[Dan Druff]

So you're saying I'd be better off degening at blackjack?

You'd be best off playing the highest return video poker game you can find (also making sure it gives you one tier credit per $10), and playing perfect strategy (which isn't hard -- or at least very close to perfect isn't hard).

That still looks like the cheapest and quickest path to Diamond and Seven Stars.

[Hockey Guy]

So you're saying I'd be better off degening at blackjack?

You'd be best off playing the highest return video poker game you can find (also making sure it gives you one tier credit per $10), and playing perfect strategy (which isn't hard -- or at least very close to perfect isn't hard).

That still looks like the cheapest and quickest path to Diamond and Seven Stars.

But degening at blackjack is more fun.

[Forum Wars]

Brandon (Drexel) went and played it yesterday, and reported back to me.

He found a few things:

1) He wasn't able to earn anywhere near 1000 tier credits per hour at the highest limits. He likely didn't play as quickly as John Mehaffey did (especially because he didn't realize until part way into the session that he could "end hands" early once he folded), but he only earned a little over 100 tier credits in an hour of play. So this may not be a good way to reach 2500 or 5000 tier credits in a day. I suppose it's also possible that Harrah's decreased the tier credit earning power since John played.

2) Brandon ran badly and lost money (nothing huge, but a lot compared to how long he played and the $2/$4 stakes). However, he theorizes that it is unbeatable due to both the rake and the ante.

3) He agreed with Mehaffey's statement that the bots play like the fish on Party Poker circa 2001.

4) He described it as a "card catching contest', as the bots do not fold with any semblance of a hand or draw, so therefore they cannot be bluffed. Therefore, the best hand always wins -- which is different than normal poker we are used to playing.

Since then, I have done a bit more thinking about the rake and whether the game is beatable.

I decided to do this in terms of the number of big blinds won per 100 hands -- a common metric to determine how good cash players are.

First, I approximated that at the $2/$4 limits, your average total bet per hand will be about $10. The minimum bet is $2 (the ante), and the maximum bet is $48 (capping every street), but I figured the average will be around $10. Whether I'm correct or not on that is immaterial, because it can't be too far off, and its accuracy isn't that important for what I want to show.

Since there are 6 players in the game (you and 5 bots), and since bluffing is virtually impossible, the hands always go to showdown, which means that the winner is always simply the player who catches the best cards. If all players were identical, this would mean each player would average 16.67% winning hands.

However, due to different standards regarding playing hands preflop, as well as different standards for folding postflop, the tighter player will win a smaller percentage of hands than that, but will also lose less on the hands he doesn't win.

It is fairly certain that a competent human player will be tighter than the bots.

So let's say that the human player wins 12% of the time, and one of the bots wins the other 88% of the time.

Again, this is just a guess, and the accuracy isn't important.

In a hypothetical session of 5000 hands (which is what would be required to earn 5000 tier credits, assuming a $10 average bet per hand), this would mean the player would win 600 of them and lose 4400 of them.

Let's say that the pot size in those 600 hands averaged $50. That would mean $30,000 worth of won pots, before rake.

Now of course we have to look at the 4400 hands that the player lost. These are not raked, but the player loses a minimum of $2 each. Let's say that the player averages $6 loss per hand, making a total loss of $26,400.

So before the rake is considered, the player won $3600 ($30,000 - $26,400) in 5000 hands of $2/$4. That breaks out to a profit of $0.72 per hand -- which is 0.36 big blinds (which are $2 each) per hand. That means the player won 36 big blinds per 100 hands played, before rake.

BUT WAIT!

The estimated 20% rake on $30,000 comes out to $6000! So the player actually walks away having LOST $2400 after the rake is taken out!

This is absolutely insane, given that 36 big blinds per 100 is an EXCELLENT win rate in limit holdem. To give you a comparison, when I have an extended period of time where I run well in limit holdem on Bovada, I average about 7.5 big blinds per 100 hands! This is nearly 5 times my best medium-term win rate on Bovada, and yet still I would LOSE if I achieved that rate! Ouch!!

So in our hypothetical above, the player would have to win $33,000 in those 600 hands before rake -- meaning a $6600 profit after losses are subtracted, in order to break EVEN after the $6600 rake is collected. This would be $1.32 per hand overall, and a staggering 66 big blinds won per 100 -- just to walk away even.

No matter how bad the opponents, I don't believe it is anywhere near possible to win 66 blinds per 100 (or anywhere near it) in limit holdem in anything but the super-short term.

Therefore, I declare this machine to be wholly unbeatable.

Even if my calculations are off and you simply need to win 30 big blinds per 100, that again is not possible to do for any extended period of time.

So what is the game's hold?

Well, even taking my first example (a good player beating it for 36 blinds per 100 before rake), that still equates to $2400 lost per $50,000 wagered after the rake. That's a hold of 4.8%, which is far more than most video poker machines in Vegas.

And if the player instead only manages to beat it for 10 big blinds per 100 (which may be more realistic), he would lose $4480 using the figures above. That would be a hold of almost 9%, which puts it on par with slot machines.

In other words, this looks like a sucker's game from my early calculations.

The rake is too damn high.

Also, developing a strategy to do better is tough. If you play tighter, you are costing yourself money because of the $2 ante per hand (there's no such thing as "folding a free hand"). If you play looser, you are going to have issues with having your weaker hands rarely hold up against the ever-chasing bots. That is, don't expect middle pair or ace high to win at showdown too often (whereas these hands are frequent winners at normal 6-max games, where people chase much less). Looser play also means that you will get raked more, as you will be entering more hands.

Therefore, playing tight has a downside, and playing loose has a downside. This will make it tougher to develop a play style which could negate the huge rake advantage that the house has in this game.

Conclusion: This machine looks like a waste of time and money.

This is probably pretty close to reality...here is the public IGT .pdf brochure about the game:

http://www.igt.com/~/media/05ed32177...50e362e05.ashx

You'll notice that they give the payback for the machine at 96.5-99.91%



I know that John Mehaffey, in the original USPoker.com article said this:

Bonus bet

There is an optional bonus bet on the machine that may be placed before the hand is dealt. It is irrelevant to the poker action.

The payouts are listed on the screenshot to the right based on two credits. The bonus bet pay table can vary with a range of 96.50% to 99.91%, according to marketing material distributed by IGT. The casino determines which pay table is used.

...but I think there's a chance that this is the payback to the casino for the main game (not the side bet), as the brochure seems to be talking about the main game.

Druff would be quite close with his analysis if the 96.50-99.91% payback listed is correct, since these would probably be the payback rates for PERFECT play against the machine. It would be pretty difficult to know how to play perfectly, so most players would probably be in the 90-95% payback range.

[John Mehaffey]

I wrote the article in question. I based the points formula off the published rates for Seven Stars and Diamond in a Day. Todd has more info there and I trust that he is more of an expert on Total Rewards that I am. I have experienced little reason to research Total Rewards as a Las Vegas local.

1) He wasn't able to earn anywhere near 1000 tier credits per hour at the highest limits. He likely didn't play as quickly as John Mehaffey did...

I know what I earned, but I can play VP at lightning speed. I used to prop 6-max games and I played the heads up bot for a living for a few months.

especially because he didn't realize until part way into the session that he could "end hands" early once he folded

I didn't realize this for a while either. Once you do, and do it correctly, the speed of the game goes up astronomically.

2) Brandon ran badly and lost money (nothing huge, but a lot compared to how long he played and the $2/$4 stakes). However, he theorizes that it is unbeatable due to both the rake and the ante.

I agree. If you can beat this game, you are better off doing something else.

4) He described it as a "card catching contest', as the bots do not fold with any semblance of a hand or draw, so therefore they cannot be bluffed. Therefore, the best hand always wins -- which is different than normal poker we are used to playing.

+1

So what is the game's hold?

Well, even taking my first example (a good player beating it for 36 blinds per 100 before rake), that still equates to $2400 lost per $50,000 wagered after the rake. That's a hold of 4.8%, which is far more than most video poker machines in Vegas.

I think it is closer to 3% but Todd's math and explanation is so great that I'm not willing to bet anything on my opinion.

And if the player instead only manages to beat it for 10 big blinds per 100 (which may be more realistic), he would lose $4480 using the figures above. That would be a hold of almost 9%, which puts it on par with slot machines.

My loss was between these numbers but I made several errors early on. Again, this is a reasonable conclusion.

In other words, this looks like a sucker's game from my early calculations.

If you could choose between doing nothing and this machine, then you'll almost certainly win more doing nothing. If you want to gamble at Harrah's or nearby and your choices are 9/5 JOB in high limit and this game, I'd play this game, for no other reason than this game is more fun. If you play quarters at a reasonable speed your theo loss will not be too far from 9/5 JOB since you'll be playing $5/hand at it.

The rake is too damn high.

Yes, but if rake was 20% instead of 25%, it would become beatable for many players if the house edge is 3-4%.

Therefore, playing tight has a downside, and playing loose has a downside.

I feel that you have to get out of hands that will get you in trouble. You won't win a hand of no fold'em with offsuit king-rag.

I spewed quickly before I started going sideways and grinding up slowly with variance. The beats are bad along the way.

This game is not the same as the heads up machines that became ATMs in October 2010. This game is "I'm stuck at Harrah's and want to gamble." If your goal is to make tiers at Total Rewards then you have another reason to play. You shouldn't play this with the expectation of winning.

[Greek God]

This is how the original hold em machine should have been giving out comps/TCS. You were over comped on that machine from 2 years ago. You got away with it. Just admit that it was a glitch.

[Dan Druff]

This is how the original hold em machine should have been giving out comps/TCS. You were over comped on that machine from 2 years ago. You got away with it. Just admit that it was a glitch.

It was comping too much, but that's not my problem. They knowingly set it at that level. It was NOT a glitch, but rather poor judgment on the part of the person/people setting the comp levels for the machine.

They also re-rated it to comp 6x lower than it was initially, and I still played it at that point.

[delaware]

i find it hard to believe that you play any game other than poker.your post was great and done with a lot of thought. but you never built a casino by playing other games. i knpw you understand black jack but your to smart to risk to do anything to be bared from were your major money comes from.your rake is all you have to offer a casino. so you play a time game it cost you maybe 18 a hour to play or 180 for a 10 hour session. but iam sure you have alot of 2k to 5k+ days.they have nothing to offer you other than poker. bovado i think you said offered no information on other players.if so i will try it thier. you turned pro for 12 years now. you win because loseing is not a option for you. you would have stoped playing long ago.you dont play for fun or the love for the game. you play to win the money it offers and the freedommm it offers you to do other things. the casino we have 15 minutes from my home, a 10-25 cent online is about 5 times as big as the 1-2 no limit thats offered live here,now you can see why i dont play here,

[abrown83]

Druff

Did you play this over New Years?

[Dan Druff]

Finally got around to trying this.

The summary:

- Earned 1614 tier credits in about 6 hours, but didn't play as fast as I could have
- Was up as much as $200, but went into a tailspin at the end and finished $451.25 down (2.8% hold)
- Bot does not bluff!

The details:

I started out playing $0.25/$0.50, then moved up quickly to $0.50/$1.00, and again quickly jumped to the maximum level of $1/$2.

I modified my strategy along the way. Still learning as I go along, but I have figured out some important things.

Note that below I use the terminology "raise preflop" to mean the same as "bet preflop", as this game has a weird format where you can check preflop until someone bets. So I'm considering that first bet to be equivalent to a raise in limit holdem, because that's really what it is.

- The bot does not bluff! This doesn't mean that it always bets with the nuts. Sometimes it will make some ill-advised value bets, so you still have to call it down sometimes. However, it absolutely never seems to bet the river with complete air. For example, let's say the board is 7s8s3h, you hold A6hh, and one of the bot players has 9sTs. Obviously it has flopped a gigantic draw, and will raise you on the flop. It also MIGHT (but not certainly) bet the turn if it misses. But let's say it bricks both streets and is holding ten high on the river. Many human opponents will still bet there, hoping you lay down your ace or king high. The bot WILL NEVER DO THIS. So if it's betting the river, it always has a hand with showdown value. In fact, for that reason, it is often correct to fold weak hands on the river when the bot has been betting the whole way.

- Do not bluff. The bot calls down way too much. It will just cost you money.

- A raise preflop means big cards or a pocket pair, and a 3-bet or 4-bet means AQ or better. So if the bot open raises, that means it's usually holding something like QT or better. If the bot 3-bets or 4-bets, it's very strong (as I said, AQ or better). Otherwise, it's checking preflop (remember, you can check preflop in this game until someone bets/raises), or calling an existing bet/raise. You will NOT see the bot raising pre with hands like T9 suited. Its checking preflop range is very wide, and it will often just call a single raise with hands as strong as KQo.

- It checks behind a lot on the turn heads up. It also will sometimes check behind a monster on the turn, such as a board like 3467 where it's holding the 5. I'm assuming it does this in order to induce action on the river (and prevent folds by weak hands on the turn).

- A turn raise in a multiway pot is serious business. Let's say you are holding QT and the board is Q45K, and the pot is 4-ways. If you still bet the turn, and get raised, the bot almost always has you beat. This is not true as often in heads up pots, but very true in multiway action.

- Bot opponents will collude against you if they hold mediocre made hands and suspect you have a draw. For example, let's say the board is Jh7s4s, and you are holding KsTs. If one bot has J6o and the other one has J2o, they will often go 4 bets on the flop and turn, provided the third spade doesn't fall. Why? Because it will notice you calling a lot of bets, and will assume you have a draw. Even if you attempt to play back at it by raising your draw, this won't do you a lot of good. It seems that two bot opponents with top-pair-weak-kicker, and sometimes even two bots where one has top pair and the other middle pair will raise endlessly on a drawy board, assuming they are charging you the max for trying to draw against them. This would be ILLEGAL at live card rooms, so I'm not sure why the Nevada Gaming Commission would allow such a thing, but indeed that's what I have observed happens. Note that I did not see this occur often on dry boards where 2 bots had such hands, as they figured that if you're sticking around, you probably have them beat already. I have noticed this happens more often on flush-draw boards than straight-draw boards (because they're easier to detect, as most boards have some kind of straight draw).

- Bots get paranoid when a draw hits. This isn't always true, but a bot will often slow down its crazy betting once a third flush card hits, or if a 1-card straight possibility hits. This again lowers the value of drawing, as you're not as likely to get multiple bets after hitting. Between this factor and the collusion thing, I am starting to believe that drawy hands aren't as good in this game, and you may be better off just playing big cards and pairs.

- Tight is right. John Mehaffey noticed this, as well. You don't want to take dominated hands like K3o into the flop for various reasons. First, you are likely to be dominated, and even if not, these hands can get sucked out and counterfeited more easily. Second, the best value in this game comes from confidently pounding the bot players back when they raise you. It is hard to do this with confidence when you only have top pair weak kicker.

- Dump all trash and semi-trash when there is a raise in front of you. This even includes weak aces, as a raise by the bot often means a stronger ace. Don't stress about losing the antes. You are better off making up for the antes by overcharging the bots on the good hands you play, and play those aggressively when you hit.

- You will rarely win without a showdown, so raising preflop and firing away isn't as valuable as it is in regular limit holdem. If you aren't holding big cards or better, don't bother raising pre. It does you no good, because all you're accomplishing is chasing out a few opponents preflop, but the ones that call won't all fold by the river, so you need to hit hands to win.

- Raising in early position is actually more valuable than raising in late position. You read that right. Conventional poker wisdom states that you have a MUCH wider opening range when in late position than in early position, because hands have already folded in front of you, and there's fewer players left to act. But not here! First off, if it's checked to you, no one has folded in front of you! If you raise, there's a (realistic) chance that everyone will still call! Second, when raising in late position, you are not buying any positional advantage, as you already have position -- especially on the button. On the flip side, open raising in early position is more likely to induce folds, and in some cases you can "buy the button" with such raises, which does help you postflop. Furthermore, raising preflop in early position gives you a better tell regarding the bots' hands, as you can get a much better read on the hands against you based upon whether they called or re-raised. Open raising in late position is simply likely to induce a lot of calls, which tells you little. So I found that raising hands like J9o is smart in early position, but it's better to check back in late position preflop.

- Do not three bet light. First off, when the computer raises, it has either big cards or a pair. It's not folding any of that. It will often call you down with queen high! Therefore, three betting 98s is a waste of time. You are behind, and you are going to have to hit to catch up. Only three-bet with QJ or better.

- Bet your hand immediately. Don't get fancy. When playing live, you feel foolish just betting out when you hit a nice flop. That's often telegraphing your hand, and you will get much less action and value out of your hand than if you check-raise (or in some cases, wait until the turn to raise/check-raise). But not here. These bots will sometimes overplay their hands, but they are not always relentlessly aggressive. Often they will check back, even on the flop. This is especially true if it is holding a missed AQ/AK. Remember, these bots do NOT fold unpaired big cards often, so don't be shy about betting out. If you hit the flop, do NOT check-raise in heads-up pots. Just bet out, and then keep reraising if you have a very strong hand and run into opposition. DO NOT SLOWPLAY. You will make the most money when you come out firing on the flop, and keep firing. The check-raise can be more valuable sometimes against multiple opponents. For example, if you three-bet 77 and got 4-bet by the bot to your direct left, and the board came T74, you're better off check-raising a flop with 4 opponents, as you are likely to get at least 2 bets out of each this way. But otherwise, get out of the habit of obsessively check-raising top pair, as you are used to doing in limit holdem normally.

- The bots will get tricky. Sometimes the bot will bet the flop, and after you call, check-raise the turn. It usually has something big when it does that. Also, they will sometimes check back a monster on the turn and raise you when you bet out on the river. There's not much you can do about this, as it also will do the same pattern of betting the flop and checking the turn if it missed. So you don't want to hand it a free card if you think you can beat it. But remember, the bot doesn't fold, and it also doesn't 3/4 bet preflop with worse than AQ, so if you have AQ high yourself, don't bet the turn when checked to.

- Turn donk-bet is usually a weak hand. Let's say you have A8, and the board comes T84 rainbow. The bot bets out the flop, you raise, and it calls. Turn is 2. Bot fires out again. Most people would want to call here, fearing either a monster or top pair facing them. But in this case, you usually have the bot beat. It usually will have middle-pair/weak-kicker or third pair in this spot. So raise the turn and value bet the river. These extra bets are important to extract because of the horrendous rake you need to beat.

- Don't be afraid to make tight laydowns multiway. If a bot opponent is showing a lot of strength on the turn or river in a multiway pot, you are often behind if your hand isn't strong. Don't be fooled into calling because you are convinced you might still have the best hand. If you flopped top pair, weak kicker, and suddenly get raised on the turn in a multiway pot when an overcard hit, you are almost surely behind.

- Bot will rarely check-raise when obvious draw hits. What do I mean by an "obvious" draw? I'm talking about having a flush when there's 4 of one suit on the board, or a one-card straight. The bot realizes that most players are scared by such boards, and check when possible. Therefore, if you have 77 and the board runs out 74395, and you've been betting the whole way, you should still bet the river when checked to. It is unlikely the bot has the 6 here. Conversely, if a bot suddenly fires out in a multiway pot when the board looks like this, it usually has it. In a heads up pot, sometimes it will fire when it doesn't have it, though it's never an outright bluff.

- Don't be a river payoff monkey! Do you have A7-high and the bot has been betting the entire way? FOLD! You are definitely not winning this hand at showdown. Do you have 77 with AKT4 on the board, and the bot is still betting the turn? Again, fold! You are way behind. I'm not saying to fold constantly postflop, but I'm saying to give a consistently betting/raising bot the benefit of the doubt when your hand is weak. The computer expects you to be a payoff monkey, so save those bets, especially on the river!

- Value bet, value bet, value bet! The bot usually comes out firing on the flop if it has something. So if you flopped middle pair, or have 99 with a board of JT4 against two opponents, KEEP BETTING if checked to! Why? Because you are likely ahead here if the bots are in check/call mode, and you don't want to give up free cards. Also, because the bot rarely bluffs (especially on the turn and beyond), it is safe to fold if you are check-raised when holding a mediocre hand.

- Sometimes you will get called by nonsensical hands on the river, so especially don't be afraid to value bet there! Sometimes the bot will call with horrendous hands, even with 2 other callers. I'm talking hands like 6-high and others with absolutely no shot to win at showdown, even if there weren't already other callers. If the bot opponents have been showing weakness, bet the river, and don't fear running into better hands at showdown. If you do not value bet well in this game, you will definitely lose.

- Don't be afraid to go 4 bets on every street with strong, non-nut hands. So you have J9 on a 993 board, and you feel uncomfortable about going 4 bets on the turn AND river? Or maybe you have the nut flush on a paired board, and are afraid of a full house. Don't be! The bot will sometimes go 4 bets with you on the turn and river with something as weak as top pair or an overpair, especially if a draw exists on the board. Therefore, keep pounding, and if you run into a monster hand that beats you, feel confident that you still did the right thing.

- Don't feel weird about check-folding trash to one bet preflop. Let's say you have Q3o UTG, check, and the opponent to your left bets, and it comes back to you with 5 people having bet, and you just need to put in one bet to see the flop. It's tempting, but don't do it. This will get you in trouble postflop. Dump trash hands for anything that isn't free preflop.

- Do not pound your draws postflop, and don't try to raise for a free card on the turn. These tactics will not work. Only exception is a monster draw like 56hh on a Ts3h4h board.

- Do not attempt to play this bot if you aren't good enough to beat live 10/20 limit holdem. While this game differs from live limit holdem, you need to understand limit holdem well in order to have a chance here.

I didn't play as fast as John Mehaffey, and I don't understand how he managed to rack up 1000 tier credits per hour, but something like 500 tier credits per hour is believable if you really get used to it and can play quickly. I earned about 270 per hour, but again, I wasn't playing blazing fast.

Is it beatable? I don't know yet, but I am willing to go a second round with it to see how I can do, now that I have developed a better strategy against it.

[IamGreek]

Would you mind condensing this info to a wallet sized card?

[IAmProfessionalTalk]

It's mathematically impossible for this to be beaten with that ante and rake.

[nerakil]

Also, I have been told that this Texas Holdem Fold Up bot only exists at Harrah's Las Vegas for now, and is on a trial run.

I don't believe it's anywhere else in the country.

Drexel also mentioned the "maximum field test period" on the 1/6/2015 show, which, per Nevada gaming regulation 14.080, is a period not exceeding 180 days.

Regardless, I believe both of you are incorrect. The installation of this machine at Harrah's LV was... the summer of 2014 (and it was first unveiled at G2E in October 2012).

I was vacationing in Las Vegas in 2014, and visiting the casinos up and down the strip. At Harrah's LV, I stopped in to play $10 pai gow tiles by the high limit slots section. They just finished installing a bunch of new IGT machines nearby (I tried them all), including Texas Hold'em Fold Up, Stack 'em Poker, Multi-Win Draw Poker, etc. I believe they also put a Shoot to Win craps machine in that section (did not play). Obviously, the trial period has expired, so gaming must have determined Texas Hold'em Fold Up fits their minimum standards.

Just a minor correction, Mr. Witteles.

[Anyone else find that listening to the podcast on 1¹/₂ speed (iPhone) is more ideal?]

[Dan Druff]

Also, I have been told that this Texas Holdem Fold Up bot only exists at Harrah's Las Vegas for now, and is on a trial run.

I don't believe it's anywhere else in the country.

Drexel also mentioned the "maximum field test period" on the 1/6/2015 show, which, per Nevada gaming regulation 14.080, is a period not exceeding 180 days.

Regardless, I believe both of you are incorrect. The installation of this machine at Harrah's LV was... the summer of 2014 (and it was first unveiled at G2E in October 2012).

I was vacationing in Las Vegas in 2014, and visiting the casinos up and down the strip. At Harrah's LV, I stopped in to play $10 pai gow tiles by the high limit slots section. They just finished installing a bunch of new IGT machines nearby (I tried them all), including Texas Hold'em Fold Up, Stack 'em Poker, Multi-Win Draw Poker, etc. I believe they also put a Shoot to Win craps machine in that section (did not play). Obviously, the trial period has expired, so gaming must have determined Texas Hold'em Fold Up fits their minimum standards.

Just a minor correction, Mr. Witteles.

[Anyone else find that listening to the podcast on 1¹/₂ speed (iPhone) is more ideal?]

Wow!

I had no idea this thing has been here for 1 1/2 years. I guess its location at Harrah's and only one machine made it take a long time for a limit hold player (Mehaffey) to discover it.

[nerakil]

Wow!

I had no idea this thing has been here for 1 1/2 years. I guess its location at Harrah's and only one machine made it take a long time for a limit hold player (Mehaffey) to discover it.

You mentioned you were going to try it again because it was enjoyable, so good luck next time. Personally I didn't get a ton of utility from playing the base game; I think most of the excitement for a tourist/recreational player comes from the bonus bet. For example, I flopped quads once and got 500 credits from the side bet, and subsequently cashed out a winner.

Interesting forums TW, I've been a lurker for 3 years. Is there a Rob Singer equivalent in the PFA forums?