It took the worst machine to break the streak

The lighter side... playing for entertainment, less concerned about "the math."
olds442jetaway
Video Poker Master
Posts: 9262
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 9:08 pm

It took the worst machine to break the streak

Post by olds442jetaway »

36,000 hands without quad deuces is not impossible but too much for me to take so I settled in on the worst paytable in the casino on a nickel game determined not to play quarters or dollars again until it broke. Well it broke as you can see. While playing this machine on regular deuces wild for the half hour it took, the machine gave up 7 quads without deuces, 3 wild royals, 3 five of a kinds and quad Aces without deuces 3 times. The Mrs who usually plays just DDB and was playing next to me just shook her head in disbelief.
E128E55A-C095-4F93-86B2-065606016E0D.jpeg

Player422738
VP Veteran
Posts: 516
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2018 7:05 pm

Post by Player422738 »

Assuming accurate hand holdings, playing 36000 hands without a quad deuce is very unlikely (the probability is only 0.25%). I doubt if you have made playing errors like discarding the deuce by mistake.

Code: Select all

(1-1/6000.0)^36000 = 0.0024775
However I remember someone mentioned playing 100K hands without hitting a royal flush, that is actually a legit statement. The probability is 8.2%.

Code: Select all

(1-1/40000.0)^100000 = 0.08208

olds442jetaway
Video Poker Master
Posts: 9262
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 9:08 pm

Post by olds442jetaway »

If you look way back on my posts, you will see that I had 2 sequences of 600,000 hands in a couple of years witout a Royal. Almost all of that was single line play. Almost impossible to believe. In addition, most were on 99 percent games. I play a 40 hour week in the casino. About 2 million hands a year. These two sequences cost us a couple of new Mercedes Benz. The play was a combination of quarters and dollars. These bizarre events were offset just a tiny bit by hitting 2 great hands with sizeable bets in for exactly 18,000 dollars each in a 12 hour period. This is why I believe video poker to to rely so much on luck and that short term results can even be a lifetime and long term results to conform to the percentages that should come out to be infinity.

olds442jetaway
Video Poker Master
Posts: 9262
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 9:08 pm

Post by olds442jetaway »

One day, just for the heck of it to reduce variance, I played max bet on a penny machine Deuces wild A 97 percent game and 100 hands a deal. I played 6 hours. Lots of quad deuces, but not one Royal. In round numbers, that would be 10 deals a minute x 100 lines x 60 minutes X 6 hours of play equals 360,000 hands. I almost broke even that on top of not hitting any Royals.

tech58
Video Poker Master
Posts: 1369
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:21 pm

Post by tech58 »

Hop,would you mind interpreting the formula in your last post for the math. challenged.
This is a thing i have been looking for, but was lost right away at 1-1/40000.
Ninth Grade level if possible,thanks in advance.

FloridaPhil
Video Poker Master
Posts: 6229
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 11:28 am

Post by FloridaPhil »

Video poker is a game where one hand out of many thousands can make the difference between winning and losing. Is it any wonder there is so much variance in individual results? Like you, I have played both good and bad games. I have never detected any discernible difference in the results between the two extremes. What I do see as a benefit of playing better games is they allow you to play more hands with the same money. This is beneficial as it allows you to build comps and gives you a better chance of hitting a result changing hand.

What happens in video poker is winners credit their wins to something they did themselves. They believe losing is the fault of players who lack skill or intelligence. The truth lies somewhere in between.

onemoretry
Video Poker Master
Posts: 2833
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:00 pm

Post by onemoretry »

FloridaPhil wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 5:57 am
What I do see as a benefit of playing better games is they allow you to play more hands with the same money. This is beneficial as it allows you to build comps and gives you a better chance of hitting a result changing hand.
But, you do not see this as a discernible difference?

tech58
Video Poker Master
Posts: 1369
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:21 pm

Post by tech58 »

OMT: (1) FP: (0)
Come-on FP you gotta give him this one, we will all still be friends, right? :) :up:

FloridaPhil
Video Poker Master
Posts: 6229
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2008 11:28 am

Post by FloridaPhil »

onemoretry wrote:
Sat Feb 15, 2020 7:07 am
But, you do not see this as a discernible difference?
A difference in hands played per dollar, Yes. Jackpots per dollar, No. Significant jackpot hands in video poker are rare events. Olds442jetaway reports going 35,000 hands without a quad deuce playing 99% games. I doubt I have ever gone more than 15,000 hands without one playing 96% games. Some of my best days have been playing bad games and some of my worst have been playing near positive games. If given a choice between a 99% game and the same game at 96%, I would play the better game to give me more chances. I wouldn't count on my results being any better or worse.

tech58
Video Poker Master
Posts: 1369
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:21 pm

Post by tech58 »

More hands per $ equates to more jackpots per $ . In the long run of course.
You said it yourself, "...gives you a better chance of hitting a result changing hand."
Look it up, apx. 8" above.

Post Reply