Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

Help settle an argument, assuming a standard deck, which is more rare: 5 of a kind with 4 wild cards or a Royal Flush, playing a five card game like draw or stud? a seven card game? what about with 8 wild cards?

We play lots of Dealers Choice and dispute often whether 5 of a kind 'should' beat a Royal, so which is more rare (and therefore would win)? I think it is common for players to play 5 of a kind beats everything, but is getting a Royal Flush 'harder' to do?

Thanks for the help.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

Question do you mean getting 5 of a kind while there are 4 wild cards in the deck, or do you mean getting five of a kind consisting of 4 wild cards (and one other card obviously)? If its the latter case how many cards are wild in the deck?

Lets assume you mean any 5 of a kind and dueces are wild. And order to get 5 of a kind you must have one of the following:

1 Wild card together with 4 of a kind - there are 48 combinations of this.

2 Wild cards together with three of a kind -- There are 72 combinations of this.

3 Wild Cards together with a pair -- There are 288 combinations of this.

4 wild cards together with anyother card -- There are 12 combinations of this.

Total ways to make 5 of a kind -- 420

Now to Make a Royal Flushithout any wild cards in the hand there are 4 combinations to make a royal.

with one wild card There are 80 comibinations to make a royal.

With 2 wild cards there are 240 combinations to make a royal

With 3 wild cards there are 160 combinations to make a royal

There are a total of 484 ways to make a royal with dueces wild.

So 5 of a kind is in fact more rare than a royal in a 52 card deck with dueces as wild.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

stop playing with wild cards.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
stop playing with wild cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with playing with wild cards. Especially in a home game.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
stop playing with wild cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
stop playing with wild cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
stop playing with wild cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
stop playing with wild cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with playing with wild cards. Especially in a home game.

[/ QUOTE ]

there is nothing right or wrong about it.
It is just annoying as hell.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

When did this new generation of poker players become such a bunch of nits? Variety is the spice of life.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

No "Beef's" yet in the games? [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
stop playing with wild cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Especially four of them.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
When did this new generation of poker players become such a bunch of nits? Variety is the spice of life.

[/ QUOTE ]I know. I have been hosting weekly card games for 8 years, and we never played Hold'em until about 3-4 years ago. Now, we have to play hold'em, usually a tournament, then those interested (usually 1/3, 6-8 players) stick around for a few more hours to play DC. Wild cards are present in about 1/3-1/2 of the games called and we only allow 1 card (4) to be wild, unless it's Midnight Baseball which has 8.

So, 5 of a kind is technically ranked higher than a royal flush with dueces wild playing 5 card draw?

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
1 Wild card together with 4 of a kind - there are 48 combinations of this.

2 Wild cards together with three of a kind -- There are 72 combinations of this.
<font color="red">By my math, there are 6 ways to get 2 wild cards, and 48 ways to get three of a kind in non-wild cards. 12*48 is 288.</font>

3 Wild Cards together with a pair -- There are 288 combinations of this.

4 wild cards together with anyother card -- There are 12 combinations of this.
<font color="red">There are 48 non-wild cards in the deck.</font>

Total ways to make 5 of a kind -- 420
<font color="red">I get 672.</font>

Now to Make a Royal Flushithout any wild cards in the hand there are 4 combinations to make a royal.

with one wild card There are 80 comibinations to make a royal.

With 2 wild cards there are 240 combinations to make a royal

With 3 wild cards there are 160 combinations to make a royal

<font color="red">If we don't start from the assumpiton 5 of a kind beats royals, there are also 20 ways to make a royal with 4 wild cards. (These are, of course, double-counted with our 5-of-a-kinds.)</font>

There are a total of 484 ways to make a royal with dueces wild.

<font color="red">Or 504 counting the 4 wild card royals.</font>

So 5 of a kind is in fact more rare than a royal in a 52 card deck with dueces as wild.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this final statement--royals are more rare than five-of-a-kind with four wild deuces. (And even moreso with four wild jacks or queens, etc.)

I could be wrong, however.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1 Wild card together with 4 of a kind - there are 48 combinations of this.

2 Wild cards together with three of a kind -- There are 72 combinations of this.
<font color="red">By my math, there are 6 ways to get 2 wild cards, and 48 ways to get three of a kind in non-wild cards. 12*48 is 288.</font>

3 Wild Cards together with a pair -- There are 288 combinations of this.

4 wild cards together with anyother card -- There are 12 combinations of this.
<font color="red">There are 48 non-wild cards in the deck.</font>

Total ways to make 5 of a kind -- 420
<font color="red">I get 672.</font>

Now to Make a Royal Flushithout any wild cards in the hand there are 4 combinations to make a royal.

with one wild card There are 80 comibinations to make a royal.

With 2 wild cards there are 240 combinations to make a royal

With 3 wild cards there are 160 combinations to make a royal

<font color="red">If we don't start from the assumpiton 5 of a kind beats royals, there are also 20 ways to make a royal with 4 wild cards. (These are, of course, double-counted with our 5-of-a-kinds.)</font>

There are a total of 484 ways to make a royal with dueces wild.

<font color="red">Or 504 counting the 4 wild card royals.</font>

So 5 of a kind is in fact more rare than a royal in a 52 card deck with dueces as wild.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this final statement--royals are more rare than five-of-a-kind with four wild deuces. (And even moreso with four wild jacks or queens, etc.)

I could be wrong, however.

[/ QUOTE ]

No i think you are right. When I did this I kept thinking something was wrong but couldn't figure out where I mad ethe mistake. Now I see. Thanks

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree with this final statement--royals are more rare than five-of-a-kind with four wild deuces. (And even moreso with four wild jacks or queens, etc.)

I could be wrong, however.

[/ QUOTE ]

Without the time to go through the math, logically it seems that your statement should be incorrect.

When you start adding wild cards, you immediately have 5K hands as the rarest hand. That's why 5K hands are ranked first, over straight flushes (including royals).

As you add wild cards, it shouldn't knock out THAT many combinations of the natural hands. Also, you're removing a rank of 5K hands as a possibility- with four deuces as wild, there are no deuce 5K hands that you can make.

I'll have to walk through the math again, similar to the above, and see if I can recalculate this.

ONE OTHER POINT- separating royal flushes, which are merely Ace-high straight flushes, as a "special" ranking category seems as foolish as making King-high flushes a separate category.

Also, 6-4 razz hands are rarer than straights, flushes, possibly full houses. Do we rank them "higher" in poker? Where does it stop?

If we'd stick to ranking 5K vs. SF vs 4K hands, I think it removes a pointless distinction on the straight flush category.
Straight flushes are straight flushes; Ace-high straight flushes are just the highest, by rank. That's how all of the other poker hands work. We don't compare the odds of getting a King-high flush vs. a 7-high flush and say the 7xxxx flush is ranked "higher" due to lower odds.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
ONE OTHER POINT- separating royal flushes, which are merely Ace-high straight flushes, as a "special" ranking category seems as foolish as making King-high flushes a separate category.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would agree with this, but the initial poster asked which was more rare, Royals or 5 of a kind so that was the question I addressed.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ONE OTHER POINT- separating royal flushes, which are merely Ace-high straight flushes, as a "special" ranking category seems as foolish as making King-high flushes a separate category.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would agree with this, but the initial poster asked which was more rare, Royals or 5 of a kind so that was the question I addressed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know, it was a general statement

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

Thanks for the help. I've decided to post official rules ranking the Royal Flush (or the Ace high straight flush) as a better hand than 5K, then SF then 4K.

I know that the RF is just a type of SF, but I like the novelty of it, and if you have the RF you should NEVER have to worry about losing with it. Thanks again.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the help. I've decided to post official rules ranking the Royal Flush (or the Ace high straight flush) as a better hand than 5K, then SF then 4K.

I know that the RF is just a type of SF, but I like the novelty of it, and if you have the RF you should NEVER have to worry about losing with it. Thanks again.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's fine, it's your home game rules. Just be aware that you might be going against the odds of getting one hand vs. another (just like the old days, when they thought that straights should be ranked higher than flushes).

Oh yeah, be sure to explain that rule to new players, so they aren't surprised.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for the help. I've decided to post official rules ranking the Royal Flush (or the Ace high straight flush) as a better hand than 5K, then SF then 4K.

I know that the RF is just a type of SF, but I like the novelty of it, and if you have the RF you should NEVER have to worry about losing with it. Thanks again.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is dumb. AAAAA is much harder to get than an ace-high straight flush, why should an ace-high straight flush beat it? Just because it has a special name?

You should NEVER have to worry about losing with AAAAA because it is the best possible hand. Go ahead and give it a special name if it makes you feel better, but don't rank a worse hand higher than it.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

"This is dumb."

Any dumber than adding wild cards in the first place? It is what it is.

"You should NEVER have to worry about losing with AAAAA because it is the best possible hand."

That's what the RF people were saying when wild cards were added. The beauty (and pain) of home games is you can do whatever you want.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

What about not allowing 5 of a Kind? That is an idea that some of my players like. Is that heard of anywhere?

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
What about not allowing 5 of a Kind? That is an idea that some of my players like. Is that heard of anywhere?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I've been to games where you can't create "fake" hands with wild cards.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
stop playing with wild cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]not good poker. might be fun, but it's not good poker.

Re: Which is more RARE in a poker game...
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
stop playing with wild cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Especially ONLY four of them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only half kidding there. I tend to dislike our wild card games, but only if the whole night is round after round of them (it happens with some crowds). We simplified this argument by stating a natural royal is the pure nuts no matter what, then five of a kind, then, any wild royal or other straight flush.

We've got a couple games (one is sixty-nine burn: sixes, nines, and lowest card in hand wild) where I flat out fold five card pat royal flushes without a good shot at five a kind draw.

Also, we say that in a tie between five of a kinds (it happens) whoever has the most natural of the rank wins, if same number of that rank, then it's a split.