Bankroll for single JoB vs 10 line JoB Super Times

[jim18]

Good Morning New2vp and ShadowmanI feel guilty talking about a subject that seems to have drifted from the intent of the original poster.  At least I hope this person can gain some insight into VP from the comments that you two have made.And just maybe this person, as well as others will find common ground with me concerning such aspects as bankroll, likelihood of going broke, taxes and volatility.Since I have no idea what kind of gambling experiences you two have had, it is sort of hard for me to fully understand where you are coming from.  Certainly, both of you seem to use statistically analysis.  This seems fine, except for the small fact that such data does not reflect reality for most people, most of the time.Somehow, when I think of VP, I think that I am looking at a puzzle, in which one or more pieces are missing from the box.  I have a general idea of what the final picture should look like, yet the picture that I see is not clear.  Am I the only player who is lost or confused?Reading books on VP strategies is more that I am interested in doing.  However, talking to people who are successful, or who share my confusion, well, that is something I am up to doing.Yes, I understand that coin in will produce a much greater number than the size of my bankroll.  Perhaps theoretical returns for each VP game are based on coin in.  But for me, and most players, I think that they do not look at coin in, and then calculate their return.  They look at their bankroll when they start playing, and when they are done.You have made the statement that if a player does not hit a RF, then that person will not pay any taxes for that day’s activities.  This is not a true statement.  Each day that you show a positive result on your win/loss statement is a day that you must add to your gambling winnings when doing your tax return.  Perhaps what you mean is that without hitting a RF, it is almost impossible to have a positive outcome by days end.Over the years I have been seduced by gaming experts that contrast the lower payback percentages of traditional slots with VP slots.  The gap is tremendous.  The implied or stated claim has been that if a player can ride out the volatility of the game, that such a person, under ideal conditions will come very close to break even, or even be able to make a living from VP.The reality of my experiences, and I suspect the reality for most VP players is that no matter the size of their bankroll or their skill level that they are destine to lose.  And if they stay at it, playing hour after hour, with the belief that this game has a high pay back to it, that this will only increase their almost certain downfall, by spending/risking far larger sums of money that they ever would do at traditional slots.  These people are generally wise enough to know that traditional slots will ruin them financially.  But, through statistics quoted to the reader they are convinced that with ideal conditions their risk is a mere $5 or $10 per hour loss of bankroll.  And other experts on table games will quote similar losses per hour.  But, who is experiencing such small losses?  The theoretical coin in touted by the experts, combined with high pay back claims make it sound to gamblers like myself that gambling is a low cost entertainment for most players, and a way of life for a few lucky ones.  However, what actually occurs is not a reflection of the theoretical.  What does occur is that casinos make huge profits, then build more casinos, because casino operation is so profitable.  So much for a theoretical return of 99.5 percent plus comps.  Earlier this year I exchanged some emails with a writer for “Casino Player” - Basil Nestor.  He called my emails provocative!  One of the points that he made was that if a person had a bankroll of $30,000 ( I think) and that person was playing JOB at five cents per credit, that this person had a 99% chance of not losing all of their bankroll.Would anyone reading this comment from Basil Nestor see anything wrong with it?  I mean, that based on theoretical returns, I am sure his numbers are accurate - maybe to four decimal places. (Smile) In my opinion, what is wrong with his argument is why would anyone risk $30,000 to play video poker at the five cent level?  So, I am going to win $200 every time I hit a RF.  And for the privilege of doing so, the nice casino operator is not going to take all of my money.  Just most likely most of it!  If that is what gambling really looks like, as opposed to what some experts try to tell you, then why bother to gamble at all?  As someone on this site once said, VP is not their idea of good entertainment.  To that I will add that the cost per hour to gamble is way beyond theoretical return rates.Hopefully, others will read my words and this will encourage them to share some insights with us.  I am not using mathematical logic to present my case.  I am not attacking anyone who believes in theoretical returns.  All that I am saying is that my reality is not likely to come into balance with theoretical returns, due to some factor (s) which are not explained or visible to me.Finally, without naming names or pointing fingers I will add this.  Casinos want to take the money of players.  Players want to take the money of casinos.  Around this is a big time industry dealing with selling books, writing training software, and giving classes or providing a web site like this one.  How does a player like myself know who to trust in the struggle over money?  I think the people that are giving way free help and advice like the two of you are doing are the most trustworthy.   And doing the most to promote VP gaming.   What do others think? 

[jim18]

After making the above posting, I went for a walk, and the further I walked the harder it rained.  Kind of like my gambling experiences.  The more I play the more I lose.Unlike Buddha I did not find enlightenment.  But I opened my mind to theoretical returns and coins in.Using the example of the original poster: If a person were to play forty thousand hands of JOB at the dollar denomination. What would happen?Coins in, in the above example would be $200,000.  The player would lose $1,000 due to the 99.5 % pay back schedule.  And the player would lose an additional $1,000 for each .5% below 100% perfect play.In a bad case scenario, the player would I think go broke after the 40,000 hands if they were playing with 97.5% correctness.  In the more likely case, the player would loss $2,000 of bankroll, while on route to winning $4,000 with the RF.Since it has been stated that twice as many people will hit a RF as the number that go broke, doesn’t it sort of look like the casinos will be in trouble.The two above details show that there is a disconnect between what should be happening mathematically, and what happens in real time.  Casinos make money and players go home, legally robbed.I can say this with some certainty, as casinos are making lots of money.  Coins in x theoretical rate of return x level of accurate sould result in paying winners left and right.  So, what fine point, or piece of the puzzle are we missing?Lets see.  It can’t be taxes as that is such a small factor.  A casino will offer me three free nights, and of course food.  This is more than a $600 value in my market.  How can they do so, when twice as many people are getting a RF as not.  And the math, as illustrated above,  suggests that I will make a $2,000 profit.Life is great in the world of theory.

[New2vp]

After making the above posting, I went for a walk, and the further I walked the harder it rained...Unlike Buddha I did not find enlightenment... Since it has been stated that twice as many people will hit a RF as the number that go broke, doesn’t it sort of look like the casinos will be in trouble...Life is great in the world of theory.
As you ponder what is troubling you, I hope you find peace in looking for your missing pieces to understand what is going on.If you are having trouble with what I wrote, I'm not sure but it might be better to reread and re-process the posts rather than trying to restate them; it seems to me that many of your inferences do not follow logically from the analysis that I gave and I'm not sure that continual readdressing the problems will be productive.  You appear to be concerned with something other than what the topic starter was.  No problem there, but you might just want to start another thread to see if there is any interest.  Most of those off-topic concerns have been discussed elsewhere.None of my calculations suggest that people can beat the casinos playing 9/6 Jacks or Better or that investing $6000 for a chance to make a $4000 royal flush is a good use of time or capital.  It is hard for me to believe that any but a very few people would misinterpret this as an advertisement of a way to get rich or even make a meager living.  But the math involved in answering klockman's question is not trivial to most.  And I simply tried to see if I could solve the problem and in the process help him out.  He's apparently gone now. I also tried to answer most of your questions, related to the original poster's intent or not, plus a couple followups. Now, it looks like the math part has run its course and much of what is in your last couple of posts suggests that we are not connecting on what has already been stated...or perhaps I'm overlooking some prerequisite info that I am assuming but you may be a bit fuzzy on. I presume that you are not now or have ever tried to make a living at playing video poker, so it is not really crucial for us to come to a meeting of the minds or for you to have a complete understanding of everything in this thread.  If I am wrong in that presumption, I guess it may be more important for you to find your missing pieces...or simply look elsewhere for income. Best of luck in those regards. shadowman, I didn't want to speak for you, but since some of this was addressed to both of us, please let me know if you see any problems with what I've stated throughout this thread...so far, I don't really see the need for major clarificantions, but if you can think of some other way that I could help, I'm all ears...and keyboard strokes.

[jim18]

Thank you for your response.  I agree that we are off topic.  Perhaps I can review past postings elsewhere to find some "piece of mind".

[shadowman]

Let me add one little point before continuing. The reality the casinos exist in does not include a vast number of players that understand proper strategy. Generally speaking, even 9/6 JOB is usually played at 2% less than theoretical return. That is the reason casinos make big bucks, their real edge is often 5 times the edge that better players can achieve.

 
The math does not lie, the players however can rarely achieve the returns mentioned assuming perfect play.

[royal flush]

most of the actual return of casinos is from player whom in fpdw keep a lone ace. the other side is many tourists have the "dancer flash cards" so it is likely that the casino average return of 2% below optimum is decreasing that is why places like palms got rid of the good games

[SleazyRider]

klockman,

Shadowman and New2vp are VP experts, and they have attempted to answer your questions.  However, from my perspective, I wonder if you are asking the right questions?  You say that you are new to video poker.  Are you aware that there are video poker games available (but rare), that have a long term expected return of over 100%?  This is one of the main attractions of VP, IMNSHO.

I recentlly posted on a topic where a member asked what happened to the 9/7 DB machines that were supposed to be at Silverton.  Immediately people were jumping in and asking why not play where 10/7 DB (100.17%) machines were offered?

I see that you made a recent post on a multi-line game topic:
Frank - I certainly understand your point. Playing any game at a casino can be very boring especially the more you start to understand the odds.....it eventually just becomes a grind.
 
However at this point in my life here's what I like about playing blackjack or video poker:
I don't play to become a professional player or to make money....my goal is simply to play so that i break as close to even in the long run and in the mean time get to take all kinds of trips with my wife to fancy hotels and restaurants for free that we would not pay for normally. So basically I learn the games as best as I can so I can get free vacations.
 
Are you saying that the casinos who offer games with potential long term profits to the player won't comp you enough to make it worth your while?  Or is this something that you haven't considered?

If you are are aware of the 100%+ VP games and/or are not interested, I will gladly leave this thread.  We could also start a new topic on the subject of playing in 100%+ VP games in casinos.  I suppose that I am going to have to start a new topic where jim18 can get some of his questions answered.  One of the reasons that I had to stop and consider this thread is that I am still working on a response to posts that jim18 made on a different topic 5 days ago.  In reviewing jim's previous posts, I noted that 2 months ago, I responded to a post that he made about Daily Contests.  In his comments on my response, he raised a couple of new issues, which Webman ruled as being off topic for that thread and needing to be started as new topics. Jim, I don't suppose that you ever got answers to those questions either.

[jim18]

Good Evening SleazyRiderHonestly, I thought this topic was dead.I can not answer your question that you have asked me, as the answer relates to a topic not connected to this topic.  Our of respect to the original poster, I would rather that you start a new topic, dealing with whatever topic that you wish to discuss.Back on subject, while I may be mistaken, I do not think that 10/7 DB machines that you speak of are located in all gambling jurisdictions.  For example, I would feel satisfied if I could find a 10/6 DB machine.Yes, New2vp and Shadowman seem to be VP experts.  Although, I am not sure how another person knows when a posting is from an expert.  At least these two people seem to be will informed, and well meaning.  On the other hand, just because someone is an expert does not mean that their posting is in the best interest of other players.  It would not be logical to think otherwise.From comments made by New2vp, I have come to the conclusion that it is impossible to over come the house advantage that 9/ JOB has going for it.  My solution to this dilemma is rather wild so I will  say that either I should stop playing VP as it is no more than expensive entertainment for myself. Or I should rely more on luck, and less on playing hours upon hours until I hit a good pay off.  For example, I think that a player would be far more likely to hit a big hit, with a more volatile game, and playing multiple hands too.  Even playing at a higher denomination might help.If the bankroll remains the same in both my example, and the example of the original poster, then the maximum cost to the player remains the same.  I will end up playing far less hands.  And if I win, then most likely my pay off will be larger.

[Eduardo]

[quote]I will end up playing far less hands. And if I win, then most likely my pay off will be larger.   [/quote] But your odds of winning might be a lot less. But... one of my best trips was on a 50 play machine which pushed that approach to the limits for my bankroll. I got lucky. Big return, very hard odds to beat. Most people doing it would have gone broke very quickly, and I won't try the exact same approach again because I know I would probably quickly return all that I won. My personal approach is to split my bankroll between high stakes play (for fun and thrills) and the rest for more cautious play.  That way I get a chance at something big, while still having fun by not playing for 5 minutes and walking away broke. When it hits, it's sweet. But I do not have unrealistic expectations (always high hopes though of course!).

[jim18]

EduardoI think your approach makes sense.  If I were going to be playing for three days, I would of course choose a course of play that would allow my gaming to last that long.  But such a course of action would only be a guess, nothing based on facts.But, I think one of the points that I was trying to make is this.  If a player is playing a negative expection game, then that player will lose over time.  It may take some players 10 hours to lose their bankroll, while other players will take a number of sessions of 10 hour play.  In the end, the player will lose.  Are there exceptions to the rule?  Sure.Years ago, I can across a mathematical concept called mini/max.  It was supposed to be used for business decisions.  I have no memory of how this concept works, or how to use it in the realm of VP.  However, it sounds good and logical that a person could come up with a system that considers risks and rewards, denominations, number of hands per deal, variation of game selected, theoretical pay back, from there devise a formula for selecting the best course of action to take.