Horseshoe In Tunica for video poker??

Who has your favorite video poker games? Who should have more?
notes1
Video Poker Master
Posts: 3143
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:18 am

Re: Horseshoe In Tunica for video poker??

Post by notes1 »



i tried to end this debate on a cordial basis, but obviously you want to continue. fine with me. when you say 'many' would be interested, are you searching for supporters? this is exactly what you accused me of in your first attack post. as far as regulation, it is all the same to me. why would tunica regulators/regulation be perceived as more ethical or strict. over my 10 years of gaming, i have had exactly three cases where i required help from casino authorities. one was at CET-vegas and the other two were at an indian casino. the indian casino problems were solved in my favor, the vegas problem, i was basically told, tough luck.    my problem with the machines started a couple of years, after the onset of the recession. it was very simple. the cost of gambling increased more than just the change in paytables. i had a history of play over the long term, i had a history of expected losses. this history was developed over many sessions of play. i may not be a math expert, but i am a money expert. i know the cost of things i spend money on and i know when they change. and, i will remind all, the paytables did not change right away and it was a gradual change, for the worse.   so, the games i play did not change, the way i play did not change, my bet did not change and when i began noticing the increase cost of gambling, the paytables had hardly changed. and yet, the cost of playing had increased. so, either i have been on a very long bad streak (other than this year) or the machines changed. got it! 

case
VP Veteran
Posts: 831
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 7:37 am

Post by case »

Geez, don't get mad. I will not reply to you no more in this thread if that is your wish. Sorry, I was just (and still) trying to understand how the machines have "changed" but yet not rigged. Have a good one buddy.


notes1
Video Poker Master
Posts: 3143
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:18 am

Post by notes1 »



don't start acting like you are some innocent victim. YOU began this series of posts, by accusing me of 'looking for someone to agree with me', when i refrenced my belief that the machines had changed. you further stated i had 'got my ass handed to me'. that was your first post to me, up to that post, there had been no communication between us. i addressed each and every point/question you brought, while you have avoided some of my questions. on my earlier post today, i stated we were unlikely to agree with one another. you believe what you believe, and i the same. but, you came back again. and, again i responded with what i believe is the logic i used to determine the machines 'had changed'.  you want to continue the discussion in a cordial manner, fine with me, but you were the first to bring the flame thrower. if you think you can make insulting comments to me and i will not respond, you got the wrong guy.

ko king
VP Veteran
Posts: 670
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:13 pm

Post by ko king »

In Vegas the vp machines have to be closer than 84-99.99% range. They check millions of hands and machines have to be much , much closer to RTP norms.

A question for both of you. If as you say smaller quads come out more than bonus quads...why?? I mean IF machines are not rigging games then why do they care what quads come up as long as the RTP remains constant. Would not a casino want to see people get excited by hitting say 4 aces? It just does not make and sense to me that they would "change" something in a machine to do what you say. OR is this maybe where you guys play and as you said RTP can be any where 16% of the norm. Regulated casinos have way to much to lose by changing anything.

Yes Notes maybe I am naive and believe things are on the level in "some" of the gambling world. I don't know what Indian casinos do and try not play there. But casinos have way to much to lose by nt offering a fair game. They don't need to change anything as they have the edge (in most games). If it got out to the general public that casinos were doing something to a machine it would be the end of them. 

                                                                                                                                                                        
 
First off I said "the smaller quads pop like clockwork, maybe a little above norm". Now I've never stated that I was anywhere near 16% off, my RTP was best I can remember was 95.3 and 95.6 for those two years I brought up. My records along with the players account summary made it easy to see why I fell short of the 98.98% pay tables. I know that a lot of people might think 3.68 and 3.28% off isn't that bad but when you play as much $2 denom at max play as I did it can add up to some serious dollars. For both years I well short on every single premium hand Aces w/k, 2's, 3's and 4's w/k, quad aces and quad 2's, 3's and 4's, it was all easy to see and plain as the nose on my face, those hands had nowhere to hide. I've seen and watched some "really" bad vp players, it almost caused me pain to see the cards they were holding or throwing away. As crazy as may seem I see people walk up and play vp that haven't the slightest idea about even basic poker, they just want to hit a royal flush. These type of folks have always been around, I haven't the slightest idea how many of them there are but they don't have a clue about RTP, odds or stattistics. I didn't drink, made very minimal mistakes and made all the correct holds, the best RTP I could get was 95.6%. I have no idea what RTP the other unimformed and uneducated players get, they've been around since gaming came to this area and I don't think they even care. Could they drag a machine down to 84% RTP, I don't have a clue, but I was told that only a couple of the lower denomination machines were operating slightly below the curve. I don't know what the answer is when it comes to hitting my smaller quads on target but falling short on the larger ones but it would get very, very ugly if I feel well short on the small quads also, at least it gets me some playing time. I still get an occasional big hand and I see other folks get them also, maybe the answer is someone else is getting what I consider to be my share, I just don't know. One thing I can assure you is that people in this area aren't playing the vp machines like they used to, I'm one of them, can't afford to play like I did in the past because it cost way too much money. Regulated casinos in this area have already lost to much, players just aren't there, revenues are dropping every single year, they're just trying to hang on. Casinos are pretty much all they have and some have already closed down, it's crazy to walk into some of these casinos and see only a handfull of players, I don't know how they're keeping the doors open. Case, i don't know what else to say, it just ain't like it used to be, don't know how they do it but I sure understand why they might need to.

notes1
Video Poker Master
Posts: 3143
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:18 am

Post by notes1 »



KK, i/m/o, and i am biased, you have made your point as well as you can, without having a smoking gun. you have kept records for years and you went as far as to actually talk to gaming control. their answer to your questions can best be described as disturbing. the way you reported the conversation, that the VP machines fall within acceptible 85-99% range and the way they dismissed your inquires with legal action threats, cannot make even the most ardent believer in casino randomness feel good. i have not kept the accurate records you have, i just know the cost of gambling has increased, beyond the downgrade of paytables.   how could 85-99% be within range, when the advertised paytables state the range should be no less than 95% and higher? why would they use legal threats when you are simply asking legitimate questions? the other poster is a true believer, which is his right. but, we have not only have the right, but an obligation to question. why would GM not pay less than $5 for a car part that they knew might save lives, why would someone stand up and tell the public (many times on tape) that they could keep the doctor, keep their plan and the average household would save $2500, knowing all along, it was a lie. and, there are many more. i have a difficult time understanding how one could not see the possibility that some jurisdiction might allow a legal method to insure casino profitability, for the sake of retaining an essential employer.      i remember when the truth came out about the online poker cheating scandal. it wasn't some regulatory body that discovered it, it was a number of conerned players that discoverd the fraud. when the bernie madoff ripoff was brought to light, it had nothing to do with regulators, they had missed it for nearly 20 years, even after investigating him i am not sure there is anymore that can be said. we may be wrong, we may be right. we may never know.

ko king
VP Veteran
Posts: 670
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:13 pm

Post by ko king »

KK, i/m/o, and i am biased, you have made your point as well as you can, without having a smoking gun. you have kept records for years and you went as far as to actually talk to gaming control. their answer to your questions can best be described as disturbing. the way you reported the conversation, that the VP machines fall within acceptible 85-99% range and the way they dismissed your inquires with legal action threats, cannot make even the most ardent believer in casino randomness feel good. i have not kept the accurate records you have, i just know the cost of gambling has increased, beyond the downgrade of paytables. 
 
 
how could 85-99% be within range, when the advertised paytables state the range should be no less than 95% and higher? why would they use legal threats when you are simply asking legitimate questions?
 
the other poster is a true believer, which is his right. but, we have not only have the right, but an obligation to question. why would GM not pay less than $5 for a car part that they knew might save lives, why would someone stand up and tell the public (many times on tape) that they could keep the doctor, keep their plan and the average household would save $2500, knowing all along, it was a lie. and, there are many more. i have a difficult time understanding how one could not see the possibility that some jurisdiction might allow a legal method to insure casino profitability, for the sake of retaining an essential employer.     
 
i remember when the truth came out about the online poker cheating scandal. it wasn't some regulatory body that discovered it, it was a number of conerned players that discoverd the fraud. when the bernie madoff ripoff was brought to light, it had nothing to do with regulators, they had missed it for nearly 20 years, even after investigating him
 
i am not sure there is anymore that can be said. we may be wrong, we may be right. we may never know.

                                                                                                                                                                
 
To be clear it wasn't the gaming control that told me to back off. I think I'm at the point now that I'm about ready to either drop down to playing quarters or try Phil's method. As for the "range" or "curve" I can almost understand that being pretty flexible because I've seen some really bad vp players, toss in all the people playing drunk and you never know how low they could drag the actual payback percentage on a machine. I never thought of myself as a bad vp player though but it's starting to look like that may be the case.

djc32
Senior Member
Posts: 114
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 5:58 am

Post by djc32 »


To be clear it wasn't the gaming control that told me to back off.
As for the "range" or "curve" I can almost understand that being pretty flexible because I've seen some really bad vp players, toss in all the people playing drunk and you never know how low they could drag the actual payback percentage on a machine. .

KK,

As far as the "range or curve" , I think you are onto something. I believe the 85%- 99% range is just as you said, it's the RTP of the machine, and based on most of our experiences ,we have all seen some pretty bad VP players who can quickly bring that # down.

I may be wrong, but I believe the only thing the casino tracks on a individual basis is how much money in and out a player has put through the machines ,or there ADT.
If they were able to track the % of mistakes each individual player is making, and compare it to the RTP of the machines pay table, then maybe we could get a better understanding of what's going on?

But even if we keep accurate records , and we show the casino or gaming control our individual RTP, how could we prove to them that were always playing every hand 100% accurate?
I wish there was a better way for players like yourself to be able to hold the casinos accountable, and get answers to all your questions.



ko king
VP Veteran
Posts: 670
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:13 pm

Post by ko king »

[QUOTE=ko king]
To be clear it wasn't the gaming control that told me to back off.
As for the "range" or "curve" I can almost understand that being pretty flexible because I've seen some really bad vp players, toss in all the people playing drunk and you never know how low they could drag the actual payback percentage on a machine. .


KK,

As far as the "range or curve" , I think you are onto something. I believe the 85%- 99% range is just as you said, it's the RTP of the machine, and based on most of our experiences ,we have all seen some pretty bad VP players who can quickly bring that # down.

I may be wrong, but I believe the only thing the casino tracks on a individual basis is how much money in and out a player has put through the machines ,or there ADT.
If they were able to track the % of mistakes each individual player is making, and compare it to the RTP of the machines pay table, then maybe we could get a better understanding of what's going on?

But even if we keep accurate records , and we show the casino or gaming control our individual RTP, how could we prove to them that were always playing every hand 100% accurate?
I wish there was a better way for players like yourself to be able to hold the casinos accountable, and get answers to all your questions.


[/QUOTE]

                                                                                                                                                             
 
Here's what most people in this area may not know about this part of the country, we have some very dumb and uneducated folks. They don't have the slightest idea as to what cards they're supposed to be playing, some people play on hunches, some folks play for the royal flush almost disregarding all the other hands, I watched a guy once throwning away all of his 4 to the flush off the draw because he said he was only getting a flush about every 5-6 times he went for it, I told him that was the pretty much how often he should convert that hand. In all seriousness there's really only a handfull of folks around these parts that know what they're doing. As far is getting answers goes they seem really nice and eager to assist until you don't settle for their generic replys, I have to admit I got a little pushy and demanding that they explain how the numbers were so far out of whack for a player like myself. Maybe if I was little more polite it could have made a difference but I could tell they weren't interested in all my data and records and I become frusrated when they refused to take a closer look. They straighted me out quick and I took them serious enough to walk away. Like I said I didn't have a problem with the answer they gave me about the machines were operating witin an accepted "range" or "curve". I was more concerned about the fact that I had back to back years of almost identicle results and they were really bad. Both years I had come up short on aces w/k 3 times each year, I had come up short on 2's,3's and 4's w/k a total of 11 times, 5 for the first year and 6 on the second. I missed quad aces 8 times for the two years and quad 2's, 3's and 4's 13 or 14 times in those two years. My smaller quads (5-k) were pretty much right on pace. You know I get the idea everyone can have a bad run of luck but my bad luck was so consistant, to consistant in my mind to be just normal.

Vman96
Video Poker Master
Posts: 3288
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:49 am

Post by Vman96 »

As for the "range" or "curve" I can almost understand that being pretty flexible because I've seen some really bad vp players, toss in all the people playing drunk and you never know how low they could drag the actual payback percentage on a machine. I never thought of myself as a bad vp player though but it's starting to look like that may be the case.

Play 9/6 Jacks or Better with the intent to lose at all costs and see how you do. Math says a little over 2%. Minimum payback laws are based on optimal strategy usually.

Hell, I know what I am doing next Tunica trip. Putting in one dollar, playing the 9/6 JoB 100-penny game one credit at a time, with the intent to intentionally lose. Wagers on how many hands I'll last? My luck, I'll get dealt a royal I can't throw away.

Post Reply