Odds vs. Denomination

[FloridaPhil]

Before I begin this discussion, I would like to make something clear.   If you live in Vegas or anywhere that has positive VP games by odds, cash back, bonus points and/or comps, by all means play them and play them as big as your bankroll allows.   If you can play accurately, you have the potential to make money playing these games.   That's a "no brainer".   Players outside these areas are faced with decisions.  Some of these decisions have serious financial consequences that need to be discussed on this forum.  Here's the issue.You walk into a new casino and check the VP odds.  Let's assume you are like me and only play single line deuces wild.  What we are going to talk about in this thread is applicable to all VP games, but we'll use deuces as it's the one I know the most about.  The quarter denomination odds are typical for the East Coast at 97%.    The dollar odds are 98.9%.   The decision you must make is, do you play the quarter game and give up 2% or do you play the better game game and risk more money?  VP players all across the country are facing this decision every day.  If you do the math, you find the cost to play the 98.9% dollar game is almost twice as much long term as playing the 97% quarter game.  You can figure this out yourself by multiplying the hands played per hour times the bet amount times the negative odds.  Regardless of what the math says, I can tell you from personal experience that playing a negative VP game bigger means losing bigger despite the odds.  As long as the overall odds are negative this fact is inescapable.First, why do you want better odds if it costs you more to play them?   Here's why.  You read all the VP books you can find and every expert says "play the best odds". Heaven help you if you buy a copy of "Million Dollar Video Poker" where playing bigger produces huge life changing jackpots.  You get excited and start following professionals who talk about risking $10-20-30K or more in one day and it pays off.  Sounds easy  doesn't it?    You ignore the fact that the games these guys are playing are positive either due to odds, comps or a progressive.  You think "I can do this" and charge full speed ahead.   There are professionals making money playing VP, but the games they play are not the same as you find in Biloxi or Cherokee.   These guys aren't any smarter than you, but they have spent years honing their skills and are willing to do whatever it takes to win including assuming the risks.Buying better odds by playing bigger creates other issues.  For sure the jackpots are bigger.  Hitting a $4,000 royal is quite a thrill for a recreational player.  I've hit a number of them and when I do it's always a special moment.   It's not the winning that's the problem, it's the cost of losing in between jackpots.   To play bigger you must be prepared to lose bigger as well.  I can tell you from experience it is possible to lose $5,000 a year playing quarter VP.   Playing dollars can make this loss five (5) times bigger.  Is playing VP worth losing $20-50K a year or more?  For me, it's not.Most VP players are playing negative games.  If you only go to the casino a few times a year, anything can happen and you can count the cost as part of a vacation.   If you want to play a lot of VP like I do, you must get a handle on the cost to play these games.   The most financially advantageous way to play negative VP games is to play them as small as possible.  In truth, the cheapest way to play these games is to play single coin quarters or smaller if you can stomach it.  I don't advise this as hitting a single coin royal is far too depressing for most players.  Finding the right balance between the cost to play and the enjoyment you get is the key.  Currently, max coin quarter deuces wild is working for us.  You may choose to play something different.  Whatever you do you can't change this fact "Playing negative VP games always comes with a long term cost and playing bigger increases that cost".I am totally confident that Bob Dancer if he were here would agree with me on this.   I wish he were back, but as it is we'll have to discuss this among ourselves.  If this discussion is applicable to your game, let's hear what you think.

[FAA]

Harrah's AC has forced me to confront this dilemma. They just spiked the cozy quarter 9/6 carousel from quarter to dollar. I beat the system yesterday by playing single dollar and hitting four quads, two at max. Harrowing Harrah's. Time to stroll over to Borgata, which AFAIK still respects low rollers. I prefer the Harrah's set up and dining deals. They forced a separation, if not divorce.

[FloridaPhil]

It does seem to be the trend these days.  We got lucky and they put in 3 quarter 98.9% DW machines in Tampa.  They're way in the back and have a goofy font making them somewhat harder to play.  I think they're Bally machines not Game King.  They're blue and yellow instead of red.  I played them for 4 hours yesterday, hit one quad deuce and came home even.

[billkuyk]

Hi Phil...

I live in NC but do not care for Cherokee or CET all that much so for the most part Vegas is it for me. I do not know how many hands you play yearly but you are correct that in the long run playing $1 vs. .25 is a losing deal especially if the flush never comes. So I think that your situation boils down to bankroll and attitude towards the game. My wife once got a single coin royal and was thrilled where as I would not have been pleased at all, that is attitude......If I were in your situation I would evaluate what my eventual goal was going to be....entertainment, comps, whatever. I would pick a dollar total that I would be willing to part with and pick my game denomination based on that total. I would not be interested in what others thought of my decision since it is not their money. Nor would I feel bad playing a small denomination if that suited my financial needs. I play for enjoyment so that is what counts for me....don't get me wrong, I much prefer winning    As far as the experts, I suspect many of them made a decent amount of money from writing books and sometimes personal wealth not related to VP. It's easy to give advice when you have very large bankrolls and play large denominations and play on teams and not be affected if you lose $5,000. I doubt any of them would feel very comfortable betting something extremely important to their situation if they had only $5,000 and HAD to make a profit. My point is their situation is far different from mine so I try to use the good they say but I do not relate to their situation at all. I relate to and understand guys like you very well.....anyway bankroll and attitude is it for me and I have fun with it...good luck

[FAA]

If I scout and scour the casino, I may still find full quarter. Yesterday's improbable win involved busting, a $6 ATM trip and a comeback of epic proportions! Good luck replicating that. I took a lot of $5 potshots at the premium hands, and low level ones hit. Very leery and uncomfortable about this. I'll be exercising more with the longish walk to the best casino in town. More's the pity. So much for throwing the low roller a bone. Now we are simply, well, you know.

[FloridaPhil]

I love come backs!   If I'm ahead for the day, I'll run a hundred through the dollar machines once in a while.  Haven't hit a good one in a while, but it's worth paying for the excitement.  The problem comes when you make a habit of doing it all the time. 

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=billkuyk]So I think that your situation boils down to bankroll and attitude towards the game.[/quote]I agree totally.  I can afford to play VP as big as I want, but for me the risk of losing big isn't worth it.  Before I invest in a stock or bond, I've done my research.  I know there's a chance it may not work out, but I don't invest in companies that don't fit my criteria.  This is the same thing Dancer does when he decides a certain VP game is profitable before he plays it.  The difference is we can't research the RNG and no one is in control.   Also the edge is so small in VP it's in the percentage of a percent.  I've got tax free bonds that are paying 6%, why would I want to play VP for money?  VP is not a good investment, so I play for relaxation and arrange it so my cost to play is minimal.

[pokerpokerpoker]

Do the fifty centers pay 98.9%? If so, that sounds like a good deal to double your stakes while cutting the house edge by two-thirds. If you have to go all the way to $1 for the better odds, maybe not.

IIRC, you switched up to halves to take advantage of the better odds. Smart move, even if it didn't work out for a few trips. But, you seem to gauge a strategy by how it worked out lately. If it worked, you did right. If it didn't, you did wrong.

I enjoy the game more realizing there is a cost to play. Realizing that in the long run, I will lose $5 an hour playing 99.5%+ for quarters. Some of that $5 can be clawed back with FP and comps. A couple bucks an hour to play in a casino, which I greatly enjoy, is worth it.

If I had a 100K bankroll, I think I could be profitable at one of my local casinos. The place has lots of good games and does a lot of promos. Being that the place is a low-roller joint, a heavy player could really "stuff the drum" in his favor. But, I can't afford to play like that. Risking tens of thousands for a 1% edge, no thanks.

[billryan]

Never argue with a fool. They will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

[FloridaPhil]

"As a dog returns to its vomit, so fools
repeat their folly."  Fools do not learn their lessons from the mistakes
they make. They continue doing the same foolish things over and over
again, to their own destruction.  Proverbs 26:11