Thoughts For Beginners

[Tedlark]

Typical of you - great post New.

I have a question regarding where you write that: "I got a little lucky here in that it only took 13 times to fail the test when the test is supposed to fail about 1 time in every 20."

If you perform the test again and it fails twice in 20 times wouldn't your "early" failure at 13 and my supposed failure of twice in 20 hands define true randomness?

[paco13]

Ted, Yes I do but he lives in Naples, Italy. Sadly I have never been over there to meet him or many other family members. I don't know if he enjoys taco's.

[New2vp]

Typical of you - great post New.

I have a question regarding where you write that: "I got a little lucky here in that it only took 13 times to fail the test when the test is supposed to fail about 1 time in every 20."

If you perform the test again and it fails twice in 20 times wouldn't your "early" failure at 13 and my supposed failure of twice in 20 hands define true randomness?Thanks, Ted.  To answer your question, you're right.  More precisely, these are examples of randomness.  And there is really no reason to expect a particular number of tries for the first time it fails.  Each time, it is 1 out of 20, no matter how long the string of passes has been.Think of cutting the cards in a well-shuffled deck of 52.  You would expect to cut a spade 1 time in 4.  But you wouldn't think there was anything fishy going on, if for example you cut it the first time.  You shouldn't think there was anything fishy if it took 5 or 6, even though we start getting impatient when we see this when we need that single spade to make a flush even though those odds are a little lower at 9 times in 47 (1 time in 5.2).  Now, if you didn't cut a spade the first 30 times, you might accurately think something was amiss.  Or, if your buddy cut a spade 6 times in a row, you might want to consider not letting him deal. 

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=ukaserex]My point was that as far as the risk of your cash, given the upgrade in
the Royal pay out with max-coins, you're better off playing Max coins
with nickels as opposed to single coin quarters (Unless, as you said,
the pay-table is high enough on the quarters to make it a slightly
better play. )[/quote]In my opinion the optimum words here are "risk of giving up your cash".  Many of us find ourselves in a position where we must play lousy games.  Let's say you are off to Murphy NC with the neighbors or you're on a cruise ship.  Your friends want to play slots and all you want to do is enjoy the day.   If you play a lousy game with max coins for an hour or two, no big deal.  If it goes into 4 hours or more, those negative odds could cost you more than I want to pay.  I hate playing terrible games, so I would play single coin to limit my loses.  If I hit a royal, I wouldn't be thrilled about it but I wouldn't have taken a shellacking either.  Some players feel like a short coin royal is too painful to bear. 
Personally, I would rather see one than play max coins all day on a game with a
huge house edge.[quote=Bob Dancer]Betting one coin works at its goal
of minimizing your loss while playing bad games.[/quote]As you can see in Bob Dancer's above post, he agrees this strategy limits losses.  Murphy NC and the Florida casinos don't have nickel VP.  If they did I suspect the nickel max coin odds would be worse than the single coin quarter odds.  If they weren't, I would play nickels.  I carry  a laptop with me in my car loaded with VPW software so I can find out if I need to.  Another suggestion that will help you conserve money when playing these game is cashing out often.  This has no effect on your long term results.  What it does is allow you to monitor your results as you play instead of dumping your whole bankroll into the game and playing until you either win big or it's all gone.  I play mostly quarters or 50 cents and I always play one $20 bill at a time.  I cash out whenever the counter reaches $50 and put the ticket in my wallet.  When my daily cash is gone, I count up my tickets and decide what to do from there.  Often I go home, sometimes I decide to play a little longer.  I practically never go home totally broke.  I don't know how anyone else feels about this tactic, but it works for me.

[wildman49]

The thing about Dancer to me was misleading beginners was he would say he will play a promo say JOB 9/6. We know long term its 99.54%. He would say his expected loss on say coin in of 100k would be  $460 but that's only if the royal comes in. Now for a beginner they think that is a great game and go play. We all know the royal is 2% so if it does not come in and it don't most every trip his real loss is $2460. That is misleading to many as they are beginners and will not play a lot of hands or make near the trips Dancer will make. I always found that misleading new be's.

[rapidbison]

1 out of 20 hands----"can fail"---5% this, 5% that---New2vp....your circular statistical logic only proves more auto-response sophistication of how paytables/returns of vp games can be technically/legally manipulated.....With regards to you gobbledy-gooking an auto-defense of a commercial institution called Bob Dancer--undermines your credibility further....But, thanks for your unintended support for my legitimate concern with your circular input. Every time Dancer is put on the spot or negatively criticized, he historically becomes math-wonkishly belittling as well....

[billryan]

The thing about Dancer to me was misleading beginners was he would say he will play a promo say JOB 9/6. We know long term its 99.54%. He would say his expected loss on say coin in of 100k would be  $460 but that's only if the royal comes in. Now for a beginner they think that is a great game and go play. We all know the royal is 2% so if it does not come in and it don't most every trip his real loss is $2460. That is misleading to many as they are beginners and will not play a lot of hands or make near the trips Dancer will make. I always found that misleading new be's.

With 100k coin in,it's simply not true that you won't see a Royal most times. On average, you see one every 40,000 hands, or $50,000 coin on a quarter game.

[FloridaPhil]

If you are a beginner and have never hit one, a royal flush can seem like an impossibility.   They definitely do happen.   Depending upon the game, a royal happens anywhere from 40-45K hands.  They don't always show up on time, then you may hit 2-3 of them in a short period of time.  Assuming your strategy is accurate, all it takes to hit one is being in the right seat at the right time.  Play a lot of hands, see a lot of royals.  It's as simple as that.

[Carcounter]

If you play a 99.54%game like 9/6 JOB your long term results will always be dependent on whether you hit an average,below average, or higher than average number of royals. I have been keeping records for 12-15 years of my AC play and it is easy to see this is the case. You can't possibly hit enough quads or straight flushes to be positive for the year if you play about 120,000 hands per year which I do.

[rapidbison]

Always keep in mind that strategy/game--based on math--simply gives you the best available info....per play....
Statistics--1/40,000 hands for a royal:
Who's hands? Mine exclusively.....or the machines?.....or the total universe of play in the casino?....total vp universe nationwide??????

i.e.: If you only play once a month--9/6 JOB--and play perfectly at only one favorite machine.....you hit a royal and immediately cash out...woohooo!!!! But, then plan, prepay, travel the following month---after all headaches, excitement, math expectations---and expenses---sit down the following month at your only machine....to find the previous player left a royal on the screen.....do you still play???????????????????

Play for fun/hobby, but seriously/strategically; and only risk what you can seriously afford to risk/lose; and stop writing expectation checks that the multi-billion dollar casino industry absolutely---and in recent years, hostilely---do not want to cash.......for video-poker players.....[my conclusion is we've been unofficially categorized a mere 1 notch away from card-counting].