Chase the Flush features head‐to‐head play against the dealer and an optional Same Suit Bonus wager. Ranking of hands are based upon the number of cards of the same suit (a flush) in the player or dealer’s hand. Players and the dealer each receive three cards. The object in Chase the Flush is to make the longest flush among seven available cards. You start by making ante and X-tra Bonus bets of equal size. Players and the dealer each receive three cards face down, and four community cards also are dealt face down.
Thread Rating:
| 13 votes (46.42%) | |
| 3 votes (10.71%) | |
| 7 votes (25%) | |
| 9 votes (32.14%) | |
| 1 vote (3.57%) | |
| 2 votes (7.14%) | |
| 4 votes (14.28%) | |
| 1 vote (3.57%) | |
| 3 votes (10.71%) | |
| 5 votes (17.85%) |
28 members have voted
Please, think of Dan's health. Just kidding!!!
Of course you kid.
I couldn't care less about the AP vulnerability of a game designed by someone who didn't do their homework, and with collusion, you got four or five fools wasting their time and looking for trouble. I also have little sympathy for the Table Game manager and the designer if they didn't check and review this.
Both an AP report and a strategy determination should be done for any new game by its game designer or distributor, and I'm confident CTF isn't particularly vulnerable. Mike will tell us the poop on CTF soon enough, I believe.
Administrator
Mike will tell us the poop on CTF soon enough, I believe.
I will hit that ball to Eliot and Stephen How. My educated opinion is that a table full of colluders, perfectly sharing and using the information, could probably overcome the house edge. However, I would file it in the very full folder of games with a theoretical vulnerability but are very difficult to exploit and for a thin reward.
I will hit that ball to Eliot and Stephen How. My educated opinion is that a table full of colluders, perfectly sharing and using the information, could probably overcome the house edge. However, I would file it in the very full folder of games with a theoretical vulnerability but are very difficult to exploit and for a thin reward.
Good point. AP play has to be real-world based for real money, and as discreet as possible.
1. I can't picture five guys saying 'Let's all get together and risk money just to break even, using monstrously complex signaling, and stand out like a sore thumb to surveillance.'
2. High Card Flush I can see as a tricky collusion play with seven cards per player; that, as is, is a bit much of a real-world challenge. CTF with three cards per player I would think is de facto impossible.
Curious to see what the gurus say.
But I wonder if the attraction and growth of HCF is the simplicity of the Ante/Play 3 CP betting mechanism combined with the increased pool of possible results due to 7 cards being used vs. three cards in 3CP.
I look at HCF as targeted at 3CP players...and Chase the Flush is a more challenging multi-stage/multi decision game like UTH.
I query who the target player group is for Chase the Flush? The 3CP crowd will go more towards HCF with its single decision. I don't see the UTH/Texas Hold'em crowd wanting to 'dumb' down their Poker game play to only count Flush hands. So who picks up this as their go to game vs. the other poker offerings out there (Crazy 4/MS Stud/LIR/PGP)?
Played this game to death 10:30PM to 1AM at the Luxor. Bought in for $260, left with a thousand, a good night.
Dan, would you play Chase The Flush vs. UTH or Heads Up Hold'em? I guess the question is a bit unfair because I doubt you would play HCF over Pai Gow Poker (I put those together because you get your 7 card hand packets all at once in both games).
The dealer's hand is closed and unknown until the player finishes all his strategy decisions, so it would be impossible to have a strategy based on dealer distribution. On a full table filled with 5 colluders, 17 cards are still out, true, and it wouldn't be very definitive. It would also be quite a busy auction to convey all this info, an 'Ocean's 14' maneuver to pull off.
The better basic strategy for High Card Flush that I developed was based on taking into account the ranks and flush distribution of the other (non-flush) cards in the the players 7-card hand when holding a hand with a s-card flush. To illustrate with some extreme examples: Given that you have a 3-card Q-High Flush:
- If the other 4 off-suit cards in your hand are all Aces and Kings, it significantly reduces the chances that the dealer's 3-card flush will be higher than your own.
- If the other 4 off-suit cards in your hand are all 2-8, then it reduces the probability of the dealer not qualifying.
- the worst ranks to have in your off-suit cards (when holding a Q-High 3-card flush) are 9-J -these reduce the chance of the dealer having a qualifying 3-card flush that your Q-High can beat and also increase the odds that the dealer will not qualify.
I found that those kind of considerations affect the HIT/Fold decision for certain specific 3-card Q-High flush holdings.
I also took a look at collusion strategies for HCF but only based on the player peeking at one or two other hands at the table and utilizing the observed information on high cards vs low cards in those hands ('High vs low rank' info seemed to be more important than suit distribution info when only viewing 1-2 hands.) However, I found that I was not able to overcome the HCF house edge with that level of collusion information.
On first look, I would agree with Zcore & PGD, this is AGS's best version of a Flush based game.
But I wonder if the attraction and growth of HCF is the simplicity of the Ante/Play 3 CP betting mechanism combined with the increased pool of possible results due to 7 cards being used vs. three cards in 3CP.
I look at HCF as targeted at 3CP players...and Chase the Flush is a more challenging multi-stage/multi decision game like UTH.
I query who the target player group is for Chase the Flush? The 3CP crowd will go more towards HCF with its single decision. I don't see the UTH/Texas Hold'em crowd wanting to 'dumb' down their Poker game play to only count Flush hands. So who picks up this as their go to game vs. the other poker offerings out there (Crazy 4/MS Stud/LIR/PGP)?
Dan, would you play Chase The Flush vs. UTH or Heads Up Hold'em? I guess the question is a bit unfair because I doubt you would play HCF over Pai Gow Poker (I put those together because you get your 7 card hand packets all at once in both games).
Not true - I love new and interesting games (Chase the Flush, yes, Color War, NO)....
As mentioned, I had a good two to three hour session on Chase The Flush at the Luxor, hit a Royal (for a $500 SF), and found the game both fascinating and challenging in a way that HCF simply is not. It is like 'Professional High Card Flush,' for lack of a better description. Like comparing Ultimate Texas Hold 'em to Three Card Poker, I loved it. But it is for the more serious thinking gambler....the HCF player ready to move up, or the astute playing public should take to this game well.
1. A good basic strategy must be followed to play: at the hole cards, hope for a two-suited or one suited hand, not a rainbow hole card hand. Raise 3x Q-9 with a jack+ kicker, any K-x/A-x suited, or a flush hole card set, else check. Hands like Ks-4s-Ah are super raise hands.
2. If checked, then on the flop Raise 2x holding three to a flush where you have two to it, or a face card+, a 'top touch' to a three-flush. Also raise 2x if having two 2-card flushes holding a face card to each of the two 2-card flushes. Also 2x raise if hole cards plus flop is 100% two suits.
3. Call 1x if having a three card suit touching your hand if your hand holds a ten or higher. I disagree with Mike where it is not enough to just have three of a suit to call, you need strong holdings to the three (a ten+ in your hand, or holding two of the suit.) The call decision gets trounced if holding one low card to three of a suit or two cards. Fold with three suited on the board if not touching it, holding a lesser straight, as with three cards the dealer will probably touch it and the best you can do otherwise is push.
The board's composition is important (rainbow, two suited, three suited, overcards, etc.) and affects strategy, but if overly considered, makes for an awkward/impossibly difficult strategy and won't give that much more when you seek to get going on CTF. Looking at your hand's support to any flush is more important in play, and simplifies things for the gambler playing it. I feel this three-step strategy should be on the rack card: you want the playing public to play your game fairly well - to support it.
In my discussion of CTF, I will refer to the FLOP (1st 2 cards on the board) and the RIVER (2nd pair of cards on the board).
The mathematics and framework for analyzing CTF is very different than High Card Flush because:
- there are four COMMON cards between the dealer's and players' hands -so the probabilities for the dealers hand cannot be rigorously calculated without specififying the ranks and suits of the four cards on the board.
- the X-TRA Bonus BET is entangled with the outcome of the ANTE/All-IN bets, because the X-TRA Bonus does NOT pay-out according to the Pay Table when the player's hand ties or loses to the dealer's Hand. There are times when the player may have a 4,5,6 or even 7 card flush and not get the payout because of a higehr dealer card. (I can see that Steve Howe calculates this correctly.)
- there are 3 decision points -the 1st and 3rd appear to be the most critical. Rigrorusly calculating the correct basic strategy for the 3rd decision - after the river - is extremely difficult because when the player has a 3-card flush hand, the correct river decision will depend not only on the strength of the 3-card flush, but on the ranks and suits of the other 4-cards (and on which cards are on the board vs in the players hand.) Without a rigorous river decision strategy, it is problematic whether a rigorous strategy for the first decision can be calculated.
Let me illustrate, again with some extreme hands to illustrate the point. If I specified that that the player holds a 7-card hand with two 3-card flushes, one is AKQ-suited and the other is AT8 suited, I suspect that most people would automatically say that this hand should be bet on the river rather than folded. But that's not always optimum.
Problem 1
You are dealt T-8 spades and 9 hearts. You check. The Flop is K-c, Q-c. You check. The River is A-h, A-c. What do you do?
Chase The Flush Payouts
Answer
You will never win this hand because the dealer also has an AKQ of clubs. The best you can do is tie, which pushes.
You will lose this hand whenever the dealer's 3-card hand contains one club (giving delaer a 4-card club straight) or is exactly 3 spades (giving dealer a 4 card spade straight. Your hand is AKQ of clubs, AT8 of spades and a 9 of hearts. Despite this, it is optimum to fold this hand (abandoning the ante bet) rather than bet one more unit for a showdown with the dealer.
The 4 common cards are: AKQ of clubs and A of spades.
Chase The Flush Ags
If you Fold on the river, you forfeit you Ante BET for an EV = -1.0If you BET on the River, you never win. You TIE only 45.53% of time -that's the probability that the dealers hand does NOT have 1 or more clubs and also does NOT contain 3 spades. The EV for BETTING one unit on the river is EV= -1.089.
Problem 2
You are dealt: 3,2 of spades and a 3 of hearts. You have checked twice and the board has come rainbow, but 4 high cards: A-d K-c, A-h, K-s
You have made a King-high 3-card flush: K-3-2 spades. What do you do?
Answer
You should Fold. You will never win. You are beaten anytime that the dealer's 3 cards contain 2 or more spades, hearts, clubs or diamonds (except for those trivial instances when the dealer's hand has exactly a 2,3 of diamonds or clubs - which would result in a tie.) On the rest of the possible dealer's hands, the dealer will fail to qualify, resulting in a PUSH. The EV for folding is -1, the EV for Betting 1 unit on the river is approximately -1.2.
So, as I hope you can see, this game has a few subleties.
What often tricks people is a false sense of strength from the board in this game; any three-card flush where you're holding a low singleton to it is typically, if not impossibly weak: Board has Ah-Kh-7s-7d. You hold 2d-2h-4s. Your three-card Ace-high flush (AK2) is really a 2-high three-card flush, and with the dealer's three cards to be revealed, - odds on the dealer has a heart to cream you, even with the 7s-7d weak for him. The board is even worse for the player if it is something like Ah-Kh-As-Ks, as any spade or heart higher than a 2 for the dealer is death to the player's hand. You really need a rank (face-high) card or two to the flush to be in a good position.
To consider a hand 'reasonably and hopefully made' in the game is a Q-x-x suited or better; this is why my short strategy says Q-x-j-kicker+. You need to hold flushes headed by either a face card, or two to it, to be in a reasonable position. Think of it as a strong touch to the board. Sneaking that into a simple strategy is key, without a forming a treatise on over-cards to consider, in order to play well on CTF off the bat.
Most games can produce a rack card strategy with a few simple steps that can get a player up and running on a new game and play reasonably well; but a few games cannot be made easy to play.
'14. If the player and dealer tie, then the Ante*, All In, and X-Tra Bonus bets shall all push.'
Now, according to the Pay-out table for the X-TRA Bonus bet, the player loses the X-TRA Bonus Bet when the player's longest flush is 3 cards or less.
However, according to the rule, in the singular case when the player's 3-card flush is identical to the dealer's (qualifying) 3-card flush, then the player not only pushes on the Ante and All In Bets, but also pushes on the X-TRA Bonus Bet! That is weird but my casual inspection of Steve Howe's table seems to bear this out -the X-TRA Bonus Bet appears to push whenever a TIE occurs on a qualifying 3-card flush.
But, now, let's go down the Rabbit Hole. Another rule says:
'11. If the dealer does not qualify, then the Ante bet pushes.'
This rule allows the X-TRA Bonus Bet to be paid off when a player has a flush that is 4-7 cards long even though the dealer's hand did not qualify. But what happens to the Bonus X-TRA Bet when the dealer's hand does not qualify but is still identical to the Players hand? A straight-forward reading of the rules seems to indicate that the Bonus X-TRA bet should PUSH
- when the dealer's and player's longest flush is 3-cards, 8-high or lower, and the dealer and player have identical 3-card flush hands
Chase The Flush
- more improbably, if the dealer's longest flush is 2 cards, say A-Q, and the player's longest flush is also 2 cards of the same rank, i.e., A-Q, and of a different suit.
7 Card Flush Game
Somehow, I don't believe that the intent of the CTF rules is to return (PUSH) the X-TRA Bonus bet when the both the player and dealer have a longest flush of 2 cards and the two cards are identical, resulting in a TIE. Could the Wiz or someone else assist me with a clarification of these rules?1set flush
набирать без абзацных отступов; набранный без абзацных отступовflush manhole — горловина без комингса
to set flush — набирать без абзацных отступов
English-Russian big polytechnic dictionary >set flush
2set flush
Полиграфия:набирать без абзацных отступов, набранный без абзацных отступовУниверсальный англо-русский словарь >set flush
3set flush
Англо-русский словарь по полиграфии и издательскому делу >set flush
См. также в других словарях:
Chase The Flush Practice
To set flush — Набирать без абзацных отступов … Краткий толковый словарь по полиграфии
flush — flush1 [ flʌʃ ] verb * 1. ) intransitive or transitive to make water pass through a toilet a ) transitive to get rid of something by putting it into a toilet and flushing it: flush something down the toilet: If any medicine is left over, flush it … Usage of the words and phrases in modern English
flush — I UK [flʌʃ] / US verb Word forms flush : present tense I/you/we/they flush he/she/it flushes present participle flushing past tense flushed past participle flushed * 1) [intransitive] if someone flushes, their face becomes red because they are… … English dictionary
flush — flush1 flushable, adj. flusher, n. flushingly, adv. flushness, n. /flush/, n. 1. a blush; rosy glow: a flush of embarrassment on his face. 2. a rushing or overspreading flow, as of water … Universalium
flush — I [[t]flʌʃ[/t]] n. 1) phl a blush; rosy glow 2) a rushing or overspreading flow, as of water 3) a sudden rise of emotion or excitement: a flush of anger[/ex] 4) glowing freshness or vigor: the flush of youth[/ex] 5) a reddening of the skin, as… … From formal English to slang
Flush (novel) — Flush is a young adult novel by Carl Hiaasen first published in 2005, and set in Hiaasen s native Florida. It is his second young adult novel, after Hoot . The plot is similar to Hoot but it doesn t have the same cast.PlotThe story is told from… … Wikipedia
flush out someone — flush out (someone/something) to force a person or animal to stop hiding. The military stormed the building and set it on fire to flush out the militants hidden inside. A hunting dog s job is to flush out whatever it is you re hunting. Etymology … New idioms dictionary
flush out something — flush out (someone/something) to force a person or animal to stop hiding. The military stormed the building and set it on fire to flush out the militants hidden inside. A hunting dog s job is to flush out whatever it is you re hunting. Etymology … New idioms dictionary
flush out — (someone/something) to force a person or animal to stop hiding. The military stormed the building and set it on fire to flush out the militants hidden inside. A hunting dog s job is to flush out whatever it is you re hunting. Etymology: based on… … New idioms dictionary
flush — I. verb Etymology: Middle English flusshen Date: 13th century intransitive verb to fly away suddenly transitive verb 1. to cause (as a bird) to flush 2. to expose or chase from a place of concealment < flushed the boys from their hiding place > … New Collegiate Dictionary
Flush toilet — A flush toilet or Water Closet (WC) is a toilet that disposes of human waste by using water to flush it through a drainpipe to another location. Flushing mechanisms are found more often on western toilets (used in the sitting position), but many… … Wikipedia