The myth of playing 5 coins in video poker.

[ajs1956]

"It's already been shown several times, but once again. Playing full coin JOB returns 99.54. Using your figure that single coin with your strategy pays 97.8, just do the math.
Plug in $100,000 coin in.
Plug in $1,000,0000 coin in.
Hell, plug $100 coin in.
What you will see is the more money you pout into the machine the bigger the gap with Max coins paying more than anything else.
Once more- number of hands played doesn't matter, number of hours played doesn't matter. All that matters is coin in."

You are 100% right that if you bet $100,000 (or any amount), you would do better with max bet to reach that amount than 1 coin, but that is only because to reach it betting 1 coin would take 5 times more hands. If only the total amount bet is what is relevant, betting max has a smaller loss.

Maybe my point can be better illustrated with this example ( I'll use Jacks or Better - my prior example was Bonus Poker): in my lifetime I played 1,000,000 hands on a dollar machine, or $5 per hand making a total bet of $5,000,000. Total loss is .46%, or $23,000.

If in retrospect I had bet only 1 coin instead of 5, my total bet would have been $1,000,000. The perfect play return on full pay JOB is 98.335, so my loss would be 1.665, or $16,650. So if in my lifetime I had bet only 1 coin instead of max I would have lost $6,350 less than by playing max.

I'm not sure that I can explain it any better than that. For every bet you make the loss is less if betting $1 than $5, even though the loss percentage is greater on the $1 bet. That is the math.

I understand the argument that only the total amount bet is what matters, but I have to respectively disagree.

The difference isn't as great as I initially posted. I shouldn't do math in my head.

   

[markinca]

"It's already been shown several times, but once again. Playing full coin JOB returns 99.54. Using your figure that single coin with your strategy pays 97.8, just do the math.
Plug in $100,000 coin in.
Plug in $1,000,0000 coin in.
Hell, plug $100 coin in.
What you will see is the more money you pout into the machine the bigger the gap with Max coins paying more than anything else.
Once more- number of hands played doesn't matter, number of hours played doesn't matter. All that matters is coin in."

You are 100% right that if you bet $100,000 (or any amount), you would do better with max bet to reach that amount than 1 coin, but that is only because to reach it betting 1 coin would take 5 times more hands. If only the total amount bet is what is relevant, betting max has a smaller loss.

Maybe my point can be better illustrated with this example ( I'll use Jacks or Better - my prior example was Bonus Poker): in my lifetime I played 1,000,000 hands on a dollar machine, or $5 per hand making a total bet of $5,000,000. Total loss is .46%, or $46,000.

If in retrospect I had bet only 1 coin instead of 5, my total bet would have been $1,000,000. The perfect play return on full pay JOB is 98.335, so my loss would be 1.665, or $16,650. So if in my lifetime I had bet only 1 coin instead of max I would have lost $29,350 less than by playing max.

I'm not sure that I can explain it any better than that. For every bet you make the loss is less if betting $1 than $5, even though the loss percentage is greater on the $1 bet. That is the math.

I understand the argument that only the total amount bet is what matters, but I have to respectively disagree.

   

Sigh, you really don't get it.

The reason why it's pointless to compare returns by the number of hands played is because you can literally get the amount lost to as close to 0 as you want. You want to lose even less than $16,650? Play $0.50 single-coin instead. You want to lose even less? Play $0.25! Even less at $0.10!

Man, 1c single-line video poker must be the best game in the house - you lose hardly anything after 1,000,000 hands!

[ajs1956]

I understand that completely, unless you find a positive return machine.

Also, as I have said repeatedly but you have ignored, once you factor in the comps the benefits of betting max can greatly exceed the benefit of betting one. Is that hard to understand?

[markinca]

I understand that completely, unless you find a positive return machine.

Also, as I have said repeatedly but you have ignored, once you factor in the comps the benefits of betting max can greatly exceed the benefit of betting one. Is that hard to understand?

It wasn't ignored - billryan already alluded to it - comps are based off of total coin-in.

[billryan]

I understand that completely, unless you find a positive return machine.

Also, as I have said repeatedly but you have ignored, once you factor in the comps the benefits of betting max can greatly exceed the benefit of betting one. Is that hard to understand?

   Okay. This is the point where you have to decide.
Do you want to believe the experts and the math or do you want to continue believing in what is known as 'ploppie thinking".
I used to think the experts were wrong, and by limiting my play and my losses I could overcome the house edge. It actually worked for awhile, but then reality and math caught up to me.
If you want to believe in voodoo, just head down to the recreational section where Florida Phil will welcome you with open arms and he can tell you all about his ingenious cheap coin method. After he is done extolling it, ask him how often he plays it himself.
Or, you are most welcome to abandon your line of thought and embrace the knowledge of the experts, many who worked long and hard to get where they are and to do what they do.
Before you ask, I am not an expert. Just someone who believes in math., even though I'm not all that good at it.

[billryan]

[QUOTE=ajs1956] I understand that completely, unless you find a positive return machine.

Also, as I have said repeatedly but you have ignored, once you factor in the comps the benefits of betting max can greatly exceed the benefit of betting one. Is that hard to understand?

It wasn't ignored - billryan already alluded to it - comps are based off of total coin-in.[/QUOTE]

Just to make it crystal clear, comps are based only on coin in, not hands played. Nor on hands played, and generally not on coins lost, with a few exceptions.

[Vman96]

[QUOTE=billryan] [QUOTE=WVRadar] Closely examine the payout table on the machine you are playing. For example my favorite machine at the local casino pays out the same whether you are playing 1 coin or 5. One coin on a Royal Flush pays 500 while 5 coins pays 2500 instead of the usual 4000.

Other then short paying the Royal, what makes it your favorite?[/QUOTE]

I seldom play maximum coin. I play strictkly for entertainment and am more interested in playing longer. The proportional payoff for Royals still gives me a chance for a little better payback than playing a machine that only pays extra for the Royal on 5 coins. That said, I can't remember the last time I hit a Royal Flush and have never had a Royal on the machine I am talking about.

The other reason I like this machine is that its paytable is the best in the casino.[/QUOTE]

Probably 500/9/6 JoB (98.88%) is one of the best paying games in that whole state. Unfortunately, the argument that billryan and markinca are trying to make is much better suited in a market with more competitive video poker. But I just don't expect people to belong to the Dancer school of "if it isn't profitable, don't play at all."


If simply losing less money per unit of time is the most important thing for you, then just play max-coins at a rate 5x slower than your single-coin play. Now you have the same exposure AND you'll lose less per hour.

Have you ever played 5 times slower intentionally? Most people that you're trying to advise here would say "screw that".

[markinca]

[QUOTE=markinca]
If simply losing less money per unit of time is the most important thing for you, then just play max-coins at a rate 5x slower than your single-coin play. Now you have the same exposure AND you'll lose less per hour.

Have you ever played 5 times slower intentionally? Most people that you're trying to advise here would say "screw that".[/QUOTE]

ok, so don't do that then. I don't care. But the advice itself is sound mathematically.

[billryan]

I personally don't care how people play. I've tried to make that clear, but dimwits like Florida Phil intentionally or misconstrue it.
Sound mathematical strategy works on any machine, 99.54 or 97%. Falling for the lie that it only works in Nevada makes one almost as foolish as the person spreading that lie.
What I do care about is people unknowingly thinking a strategy is good, or even worse, constantly promoting said strategy while not playing it themselves.
If I said I'll pay you a dollar extra this hour, but over the next forty hours, I'm going to take away five dollars , would you do it?
If I asked you if you wanted to get paid 97.30 or 99.54, what would you say?

[WVRadar]

I feel that I should point out one more thing to consider while playing less than max coin on a machine: it is much harder to reach the level that you want to cash out when playing just one coin.

I play quarter machines and I find that I usualy have to get at least one four of a kind to reach that level if I am only playing one coin at a time. That is why I flucuate the number of coins I am playing.