What would you do?

Discuss video poker programs for the home user
onemoretry
Video Poker Master
Posts: 2383
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:00 pm

Re: What would you do?

Post by onemoretry »



Assuming that you 'used up' only one kicker by discarding it, you still have 11 in the deck available if you are lucky enough to catch that 4th Ace. Having only one draw at the Ace, a 1 in 47 chance, is the tough part. I opt for the 1 in 47, plus a 1 in 46 chance instead. I will then take my chances with the 11 in 47 for the kicker.   
 It's true that around 25% of successful draws to three aces will result in the quad aces, plus a kicker.  So, over a cycle of four successful draws, there will be 3 payouts of 800, and one of 4000, for a total of 6400. If, over that same cycle, you drew to three aces and a kicker, with the same relative success rate, you would hit half as often, i.e., twice, but each time for 4000, and a total of 8000.  That looks a lot better to me. I have to confess that I'm somewhat surprised at your approach to this particular hand.  You have a stated preference for the higher volatility games.  Yet here you are making a lower volatility (and lower paying) choice within one of those games.

BillyJoe
Video Poker Master
Posts: 3198
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 2:00 pm

Post by BillyJoe »

[QUOTE=billyjoe]
Assuming that you 'used up' only one kicker by discarding it, you still have 11 in the deck available if you are lucky enough to catch that 4th Ace. Having only one draw at the Ace, a 1 in 47 chance, is the tough part. I opt for the 1 in 47, plus a 1 in 46 chance instead. I will then take my chances with the 11 in 47 for the kicker.   
 
It's true that around 25% of successful draws to three aces will result in the quad aces, plus a kicker.  So, over a cycle of four successful draws, there will be 3 payouts of 800, and one of 4000, for a total of 6400.
 
If, over that same cycle, you drew to three aces and a kicker, with the same relative success rate, you would hit half as often, i.e., twice, but each time for 4000, and a total of 8000.  That looks a lot better to me.
 
I have to confess that I'm somewhat surprised at your approach to this particular hand.  You have a stated preference for the higher volatility games.  Yet here you are making a lower volatility (and lower paying) choice within one of those games.[/QUOTE]
I am just a lousy 1-card drawer.
 
I do not question your math, but I challenge you to set up 8 consecutive hands on a trainer, playing 4 holding the kicker and 4 without the kicker. Tell me if you see the results that you state above.
 
My problem with 'the math' is the sample size. Anything can happen in a couple of hands, and the hand results will follow 'the math' in the long run. My VP sessions, and my gaming trips, occur somewhere in between. It is true that the results continue through the next session, the next trip and the next year. But, as I have stated, my primary goal on a gaming trip is to have fun. If I lose my gaming bankroll early in a trip by trying to make 'the math' work out, then I have failed my primary objective. I can only go get so many spa massages..    
 

shadowman
Video Poker Master
Posts: 3587
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 5:42 pm

Post by shadowman »

Billyjoe, you have claimed that it is better to play high volatility games to have a chance at winning (instead of games like JOB) and then you claim you need to make lower volatility plays in order to maintain a bankroll for a trip.
 
Sounds strange to me. Yes, you can play any way you want, but it sure is confusing. I guess you're saying there's a volatility "sweet spot" that works for you. Is that like a Goldilocks volatility?

BillyJoe
Video Poker Master
Posts: 3198
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 2:00 pm

Post by BillyJoe »

BillyJoel, you have claimed that it is better to play high volatility games to have a chance at winning (instead of games like JOB) and then you claim you need to make lower volatility plays in order to maintain a bankroll for a trip.
 
Sounds strange to me. Yes, you can play any way you want, but it sure is confusing. I guess you're saying there's a volatility "sweet spot" that works for you. Is that like a Goldilocks volatility?
You are right, Shadow, it may sound inconsistent. I do like games like TDB because they have a greater number of higher value hands beyond just the RF and AWAK. I do not claim that they are better for anyone to play - I just personally prefer them. But that does not mean that I am trying for that 4000 credit payout at every opportunity. With the higher values for quads in TDB, I am trying to put myself in the best position that I can to catch them.   
 
I play a lot of multi-line games, so if presented with a situation like 3 Aces and a kicker in TDB, I will frequently consider holding the kicker, particularly if I am playing 10-way. The relationship of the potential return (4000 versus 800) to my per hand bet (50) makes it seem more attractive.
 
I just seem to have very poor results on one-card draws, so more often than not, I choose to draw the two cards versus the one. I consider an 800 credit win as high value, compared to what is available in other games like JOB. This is especially true playing 3-way, a 15 credit bet.  Sure, I would love to have the 4000, but I am pleased to hit any quad.  

dbldbl scotty
Senior Member
Posts: 133
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 1:31 am

Post by dbldbl scotty »

couple of weeks ago i held a duece with three aces and caught the fourth ace. the machine was on fire, i normally wouldnt make that hold - but something told me to go for it. i had hit aces without the kicker twice, and about 6 quads all in about 30 minutes.

DKStoner
Forum Rookie
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 6:12 pm

Post by DKStoner »



I agree with billyjoe, I prefer the 2 card draw for the quad.  I sit beside my husband playing the same $, at about the same speed and stragey on TDB and I typically leave with $ and he does not.  It kills him that I throw the kicker, but it's my $ and my choice.  So, OFF WITH MY HEAD, but it works for me.  I still play for fun, I just prefer the challenge & thrill of VP over slots now.  PLUS, I do NOT have any serious coin in or play long hours to earn a living.  People playing this way should be playing as close to near perfect strategy as possible. 

Post Reply