Should You Play VP Bigger?

[FloridaPhil]

I rarely hear big time gamblers worry about taxes, yet small time players, who are almost invariably losing players seem to obsess over them

All small time video poker players aren't "losers" by choice. Playing long term winning video poker requires opportunity. Traveling like we do, we play the games that are available to the average small time player. These games are almost always negative. We don't have the time to research every slot club program in the nation or scout every nook in every casino we visit. We know in advance there is going to be a long term cost, so we balance our cost with the entertainment we receive.

We know the odds on every game we play and try to play the best games available with the best mathematical strategy for the outcome we desire. We limit our play in casinos where we consider the odds excessive or the machines questionable. We frequent casinos who are fair with us and offer us a quality experience. We do not expect to get "quality" for free.

I would like the Recreational Forum to be a place where small time players can ask questions and discuss playing negative VP games. Playing these games does not have to be expensive. Playing these games like you have an advantage when you don't is.

[FAA]

I get it. I can lose X or 5X. Without at least a quad, it will be 5X among the negatives.

[Chicagoan]

In Mississippi it is basically a 3% fee on a jackpot. The jackpot amount is not truly accurate because in reality it is 97% of the stated amount, due to the non-negotiable 3% "fee."

As someone who has done some developing, I would have to add a footnote to Bill Ryan's and Phil's comment about taxes. Yes, any profitable venture encounters taxes. Nonetheless, when considering your margin you ALWAYS have to factor in the tax burden. In the case of W2G's, it is not the tax on the actual jackpot as much as the possible jump in brackets due to AGI. Blindly pushing forward and accepting taxes as an "inevitable consequence" without considering the actual numbers is foolish.

[FloridaPhil]

The world is full of advice and information when it comes to playing VP with an advantage. Unfortunately, almost nothing when it comes to playing the negative games 99% of players play today. Playing VP without an advantage is a balancing act. To get the right balance when playing these games, you must know the cost vs. your motivations for playing the game.

If your motivation is profit, you are playing the wrong games. If your motivation is entertainment, you should try to get the most entertainment for your money. A half percent house advantage in a $5 video poker game costs a lot more than a 2% house edge on a quarter game. If you "need" to experience large jackpots when playing negative games, you are going to pay for the privilege. You will earn more and better comps. Rarely will these comps cover the additional cost.

This is important information that directly affects your bank account balance. It's fun to dream about beating the casinos, winning stacks of money and staying in the high roller suite on the house. For most of us, that dream is never going to happen. When you come to grips with this reality, you will be able to play VP on your terms at your cost.

[billryan]

As long as Phil keeps spouting nonsense about lower percentage games costing less than games with higher percentage, I have no idea why anyone takes him serious. Last I checked the laws of math don't change when one switchs forums. What is true in the real forums doesn't change in the voodoo zone.

[billryan]

In Mississippi it is basically a 3% fee on a jackpot. The jackpot amount is not truly accurate because in reality it is 97% of the stated amount, due to the non-negotiable 3% "fee."

As someone who has done some developing, I would have to add a footnote to Bill Ryan's and Phil's comment about taxes. Yes, any profitable venture encounters taxes. Nonetheless, when considering your margin you ALWAYS have to factor in the tax burden. In the case of W2G's, it is not the tax on the actual jackpot as much as the possible jump in brackets due to AGI. Blindly pushing forward and accepting taxes as an "inevitable consequence" without considering the actual numbers is foolish.

Ever turn down a raise because it was going to bump your income? Not cash in a lottery ticket in order to keep your income low?

[FAA]

It's more an observation. Suboptimal VP destination. Just glad it hasn't spread to NJ should lightning strike my poor soul.

[FloridaPhil]

As long as Phil keeps spouting nonsense about lower percentage games costing less than games with higher percentage, I have no idea why anyone takes him serious. Last I checked the laws of math don't change when one switchs forums. What is true in the real forums doesn't change in the voodoo zone.

I am convinced Billy doesn't read my posts. He sees a few words he doesn't like and fires off his rebuttal with no thought involved. Here are the figures. If they are incorrect, let us know.

The hourly average cost of playing a $5 video poker game with a .5% house edge is as follows.

$25 times 500 hands an hour equals $12,500 coin in. One half percent of $12,500 is $62.50 an hour.

The hourly average cost of playing a quarter video poker game with a 2% house edge is as follows.

$1.25 times 500 hands an hour equals $625 coin in. Two percent of $625 is $12.50 an hour.

As long as the game is negative the cost rises with the coin in. Actually, the cheapest way to play a negative video poker game is to play single coin nickels as slow as possible. Obviously, no one wants to play a game like that. I don't know anyone who wants to play a $62.50 an hour loser game either.

Can you earn comps equal to $62.50 an hour if you play $5 games? Maybe. Are those comps worth investing $12,500 an hour in a game with unknown results. Even if you did, according to the math you would just break even.

You need a lot more than video poker to live a nice lifestyle playing $5 games. What is it about this that is hard to understand?

[FloridaPhil]

What Billy doesn't get or chooses not to accept is small time players do not earn big comps. Many of these players don't even bother to get a player's club card. Is this a mistake? Yes. Does it change the fact that playing net negative VP games is a loser? No.

My posts are not about APs or playing positive VP in Vegas. That's Billy's world, not mine. My posts are about regular people playing small time VP games in places like Mississippi, North Carolina and Florida. Many small time VP players read what the experts tell them and ignore the parts they don't like. They read "Playing $5 games is profitable!". The truth is not all $5 games are. If you drive to Biloxi Mississippi and stay at the Beau Rivage, you can play $5 7/5 Jacks or Better in the high limit room. They would have to give you the keys to the hotel to make those games profitable. The fact is there are far more negative $5 games than positive. The bigger, faster or longer you play them, the more you lose.

[billryan]

I don't know. What is hard to understand?
Every knowledgeable player measures a video poker game by coin in. Phil measures it by hands played. Either everyone else in the world is wrong or Phil is.
Simple question. What does payback mean?
Is it measured by money- play $10,000 and your expected results are X, or does it say if you play 1000 hands, your result is X.
As best I know, your results on a 9-6 JOB game after $100,000 coin in will be the same whither it's done on a quarter machine or a $5 machine. Pretty sure the $5 player will reap far better comps.