Gold Exclusive
My Favorites
This thread has devolved into the reason why I rarely post in the forum any longer. The RNG in all class III video poker machines has been certified to be fair and random by various gaming commissions throughout the country. Some games, such as Ultimate X and Hot Roll (especially when playing double double or triple double variants) have astonishing volatility.
Most pay schedules on video power usually favor the casinos by at least 1-2%, sometimes by as much as 6-8%. Factor in poor play strategy skills and mistakes, that number increases. And keep in mind, that casino edge factors in that at times the player may get a large hand such as a royal flush or quad aces with a kicker. So, on those high volatility games, if don't get a big hand (especially in games with multipliers) your results may be awful.
The last point I'll make is if these games are so unfair and burning money is a slower way to lose, why do you play these games if they suck so bad? Just don't play them!
Well... It finally happened.
-
roveer
- Senior Member
- Posts: 458
- Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:20 am
Well, Very rough calculations
2010-2017 I figure I've earned (very roughly) 3 million tier credits
If I take into consideration tier bonus (5k & 10k bonus's) I'm thinking 800k points of the 3 million were bonus points that would leave me with 2.2 million tier credits that were actually played.
I earn 6 tier credits per deal on 10 handed STP, 3 credits on 5 handed and 1.5 credits on 3 handed. I'm ignoring .50 & .25 but that would actually increase the number of hands played.
If I weight based on the following
10 handed 30% 110,000 hands
5 handed 50% 366,666 hands
3 handed 20% 293,333 hands
770,000+ hands
So If I factor in 50 cent and quarter play than I would have to think I've played between 770,000 - 1,000,000 hands.
Looking at it this way, and having a possible 20-30% error in my calculations above it doesn't look quite as bad as I thought.
I was thinking I was 3-4 times more than the 680k hands for dealt royals. I'm more realistically just over that point between 770-1 mil hands.
Interesting when you do the math.
Roveer
2010-2017 I figure I've earned (very roughly) 3 million tier credits
If I take into consideration tier bonus (5k & 10k bonus's) I'm thinking 800k points of the 3 million were bonus points that would leave me with 2.2 million tier credits that were actually played.
I earn 6 tier credits per deal on 10 handed STP, 3 credits on 5 handed and 1.5 credits on 3 handed. I'm ignoring .50 & .25 but that would actually increase the number of hands played.
If I weight based on the following
10 handed 30% 110,000 hands
5 handed 50% 366,666 hands
3 handed 20% 293,333 hands
770,000+ hands
So If I factor in 50 cent and quarter play than I would have to think I've played between 770,000 - 1,000,000 hands.
Looking at it this way, and having a possible 20-30% error in my calculations above it doesn't look quite as bad as I thought.
I was thinking I was 3-4 times more than the 680k hands for dealt royals. I'm more realistically just over that point between 770-1 mil hands.
Interesting when you do the math.
Roveer
-
roveer
- Senior Member
- Posts: 458
- Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:20 am
This thread has devolved into the reason why I rarely post in the forum any longer. The RNG in all class III video poker machines has been certified to be fair and random by various gaming commissions throughout the country. Some games, such as Ultimate X and Hot Roll (especially when playing double double or triple double variants) have astonishing volatility.
Most pay schedules on video power usually favor the casinos by at least 1-2%, sometimes by as much as 6-8%. Factor in poor play strategy skills and mistakes, that number increases. And keep in mind, that casino edge factors in that at times the player may get a large hand such as a royal flush or quad aces with a kicker. So, on those high volatility games, if don't get a big hand (especially in games with multipliers) your results may be awful.
The last point I'll make is if these games are so unfair and burning money is a slower way to lose, why do you play these games if they suck so bad? Just don't play them!
I don't mind the spirited conversation at all. It's the primary reason I post. Over the years I have called most games into question looking for a reason to say they aren't fair. My personal conclusion (including all of those long running dead sessions where at times I couldn't even get a pair) is --- Randomly Random.
Lord knows I've posted some amazing pictures over the years, yet I've also had staggering loss's. What I've learned through all that money 'spent' is money management and session control is of paramount importance.
I've gotten much better but I still have a flaw about ending a session after achieving a reasonable degree of success. Why wouldn't I be happy leaving a session 1k ahead and doing that 5 times when instead I'm always looking for the big hit? I know why it happens, I have the conversation with myself every time I go to the casino, yet with few exceptions I can't seem to follow it. It's partially due to stress's in life, and party due to exhaustion after long sessions. I rarely drink when I gamble which is very different than years past so that is no longer a factor. As a control, I've decided to not go nearly as often as I used to, and now I have lowered the bankroll by almost 80%. Yet I still have success.
I'm just shy of even on the year which for me is pretty amazing half way through the year. Going at this pace and with continued money management control I should be able to turn a profit. That would really be great.
I'll probably not go back to Harrah's for a few more weeks. I've got 600 bucks in FP waiting, I'll go on a double awards night, that's another 250 and I'll put in 500 bucks of my own. That's a 1,300 bankroll. I can usually do something with that. This has become a good formula for me these days.
Roveer
Most pay schedules on video power usually favor the casinos by at least 1-2%, sometimes by as much as 6-8%. Factor in poor play strategy skills and mistakes, that number increases. And keep in mind, that casino edge factors in that at times the player may get a large hand such as a royal flush or quad aces with a kicker. So, on those high volatility games, if don't get a big hand (especially in games with multipliers) your results may be awful.
The last point I'll make is if these games are so unfair and burning money is a slower way to lose, why do you play these games if they suck so bad? Just don't play them!
I don't mind the spirited conversation at all. It's the primary reason I post. Over the years I have called most games into question looking for a reason to say they aren't fair. My personal conclusion (including all of those long running dead sessions where at times I couldn't even get a pair) is --- Randomly Random.
Lord knows I've posted some amazing pictures over the years, yet I've also had staggering loss's. What I've learned through all that money 'spent' is money management and session control is of paramount importance.
I've gotten much better but I still have a flaw about ending a session after achieving a reasonable degree of success. Why wouldn't I be happy leaving a session 1k ahead and doing that 5 times when instead I'm always looking for the big hit? I know why it happens, I have the conversation with myself every time I go to the casino, yet with few exceptions I can't seem to follow it. It's partially due to stress's in life, and party due to exhaustion after long sessions. I rarely drink when I gamble which is very different than years past so that is no longer a factor. As a control, I've decided to not go nearly as often as I used to, and now I have lowered the bankroll by almost 80%. Yet I still have success.
I'm just shy of even on the year which for me is pretty amazing half way through the year. Going at this pace and with continued money management control I should be able to turn a profit. That would really be great.
I'll probably not go back to Harrah's for a few more weeks. I've got 600 bucks in FP waiting, I'll go on a double awards night, that's another 250 and I'll put in 500 bucks of my own. That's a 1,300 bankroll. I can usually do something with that. This has become a good formula for me these days.
Roveer
-
Vman96
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 3298
- Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:49 am
Well, Very rough calculations
2010-2017 I figure I've earned (very roughly) 3 million tier credits
If I take into consideration tier bonus (5k & 10k bonus's) I'm thinking 800k points of the 3 million were bonus points that would leave me with 2.2 million tier credits that were actually played.
I earn 6 tier credits per deal on 10 handed STP, 3 credits on 5 handed and 1.5 credits on 3 handed. I'm ignoring .50 & .25 but that would actually increase the number of hands played.
If I weight based on the following
10 handed 30% 110,000 hands
5 handed 50% 366,666 hands
3 handed 20% 293,333 hands
770,000+ hands
So If I factor in 50 cent and quarter play than I would have to think I've played between 770,000 - 1,000,000 hands.
Looking at it this way, and having a possible 20-30% error in my calculations above it doesn't look quite as bad as I thought.
I was thinking I was 3-4 times more than the 680k hands for dealt royals. I'm more realistically just over that point between 770-1 mil hands.
Interesting when you do the math.
Roveer
Yeah, it takes quite a bit of time to play a million deals. And after a million deals you're only 78.5% likely to have seen a dealt royal.
It's a game with very dramatic ups and downs. You have to be prepared for that. Why do you think it's "not fair"?
Right, negative paytables will make the house money in the end while still running a completely fair game.
Run a million bucks through a 8/5 DDB machine and never make a mistake, you are expected to be down $32,100.
2010-2017 I figure I've earned (very roughly) 3 million tier credits
If I take into consideration tier bonus (5k & 10k bonus's) I'm thinking 800k points of the 3 million were bonus points that would leave me with 2.2 million tier credits that were actually played.
I earn 6 tier credits per deal on 10 handed STP, 3 credits on 5 handed and 1.5 credits on 3 handed. I'm ignoring .50 & .25 but that would actually increase the number of hands played.
If I weight based on the following
10 handed 30% 110,000 hands
5 handed 50% 366,666 hands
3 handed 20% 293,333 hands
770,000+ hands
So If I factor in 50 cent and quarter play than I would have to think I've played between 770,000 - 1,000,000 hands.
Looking at it this way, and having a possible 20-30% error in my calculations above it doesn't look quite as bad as I thought.
I was thinking I was 3-4 times more than the 680k hands for dealt royals. I'm more realistically just over that point between 770-1 mil hands.
Interesting when you do the math.
Roveer
Yeah, it takes quite a bit of time to play a million deals. And after a million deals you're only 78.5% likely to have seen a dealt royal.
It's a game with very dramatic ups and downs. You have to be prepared for that. Why do you think it's "not fair"?
Right, negative paytables will make the house money in the end while still running a completely fair game.
Run a million bucks through a 8/5 DDB machine and never make a mistake, you are expected to be down $32,100.
-
FAA
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 9166
- Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 11:58 am
Break even 9/6 JOB sessions seem rarer than ever. I'm near the end of my rope, just with this supposedly low stress game!
-
DaBurglar
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 4535
- Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 12:11 pm
There needs to be clarity in what I'm saying, what others are saying, and what is being criticized. First off, roveer did not take offense to my very honest and sincere initial post / question, mainly because none was intended and because he is reasonable, gambling habits not withstanding, lol. Second, while it is true that this forum often devolves into silly childish hostility, THIS particular thread is not in that category (not yet), despite rsanctuarys vague and unsupported eye-poke (endorsed by Ted, no surprise). So far this thread is pretty good and exactly what this forum needs more of....
I'm emphatic that what I call "gimmicks", namely games that offer multipliers and multi_line versions of standard video poker games, operate under different parameters and program logic than single line games AFTER the rng does its job of simply randomly generating random numbers. In other words it is not the RNG that is the issue....It is what happens before during and after the RNG does its thing that is what makes these gimmick games so obviously weird and detrimental to bankrolls. My only proof for having this perception is simply what I already stated, namely the consistently poor quality in general of initial dealt hands (and not simply "duds"), combined with overall obvious futility of multiplier s being married up with winning hands, and I don't just mean big winning hands like quads or even full house, but straights, flushes etcetc.
There is the most easy, simple, yet tedious way to verify or at least lend credence to what I'm saying...To compare starting hand strength/quality on a STP or UltX game, with a standard single line gameking VP game like BP or DDB, etc. Real easy....Also, compare overall final results, in this case look at the final hand results of 3, 5, or 10 line STP games with a non gimmick 3, 5, 10 line game of the same type (i.e. BP, DDB, etc). I would submit you only need to do this for about 5000 hands to at least show the first stipulation, about starting hand quality, has some legitimacy. The other stipulation requires more data, but still, you will see things become apparent if you look.
Something is in STP, UltX, and the rest, in the proprietary programming and operation/resolution of the results of the RNG to give the player the final result when playing these games. Now, are casinos required to divulge exactly HOW each games arrives at the result they display on the paytables they display? We all know casinos are required to tell the players payouts, odds and all relevant info...But with these games, with multipliers as high as 10-12x, even with the additional coins required to bet, something else is going on.... I just know it, and I've seen it, on my own screens and others, who have played them in AC ( and admittedly only in AC... I haven't played gimmick games in Vegas in many many years.)
One last thing, as a way to show I am at least "warm"....Try playing STP or UltX without, repeat, WITH OUT the extra coin/credit bet to essentially make it a normal game.....See what type of results, both starting, and final, you get compared to using the gimmick, and to other non gimmick machines.
I'm emphatic that what I call "gimmicks", namely games that offer multipliers and multi_line versions of standard video poker games, operate under different parameters and program logic than single line games AFTER the rng does its job of simply randomly generating random numbers. In other words it is not the RNG that is the issue....It is what happens before during and after the RNG does its thing that is what makes these gimmick games so obviously weird and detrimental to bankrolls. My only proof for having this perception is simply what I already stated, namely the consistently poor quality in general of initial dealt hands (and not simply "duds"), combined with overall obvious futility of multiplier s being married up with winning hands, and I don't just mean big winning hands like quads or even full house, but straights, flushes etcetc.
There is the most easy, simple, yet tedious way to verify or at least lend credence to what I'm saying...To compare starting hand strength/quality on a STP or UltX game, with a standard single line gameking VP game like BP or DDB, etc. Real easy....Also, compare overall final results, in this case look at the final hand results of 3, 5, or 10 line STP games with a non gimmick 3, 5, 10 line game of the same type (i.e. BP, DDB, etc). I would submit you only need to do this for about 5000 hands to at least show the first stipulation, about starting hand quality, has some legitimacy. The other stipulation requires more data, but still, you will see things become apparent if you look.
Something is in STP, UltX, and the rest, in the proprietary programming and operation/resolution of the results of the RNG to give the player the final result when playing these games. Now, are casinos required to divulge exactly HOW each games arrives at the result they display on the paytables they display? We all know casinos are required to tell the players payouts, odds and all relevant info...But with these games, with multipliers as high as 10-12x, even with the additional coins required to bet, something else is going on.... I just know it, and I've seen it, on my own screens and others, who have played them in AC ( and admittedly only in AC... I haven't played gimmick games in Vegas in many many years.)
One last thing, as a way to show I am at least "warm"....Try playing STP or UltX without, repeat, WITH OUT the extra coin/credit bet to essentially make it a normal game.....See what type of results, both starting, and final, you get compared to using the gimmick, and to other non gimmick machines.
-
roveer
- Senior Member
- Posts: 458
- Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 1:20 am
because he is reasonable, gambling habits not withstanding, lol.
That's it. How dare you. I'm... Oh, wait, your right.
That's it. How dare you. I'm... Oh, wait, your right.
-
Vman96
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 3298
- Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:49 am
I don't think you really could get statistically significant data from 5000 deals unless it's obviously rigged. I would think you would want enough data where at least one dealt quad was near a certainty. Something like 100k deals would be much better. But of course, that takes much more time.
-
Tedlark
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 8575
- Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 12:29 am
DaBurglar I won't come straight out and say that you are wrong but I will come straight out and say that you are not right. And the multiplier on these "gimmick games" can be as high as 20X.
-
damule
- VP Veteran
- Posts: 551
- Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 4:59 pm
Something is in STP, UltX, and the rest, in the proprietary programming and operation/resolution of the results of the RNG to give the player the final result when playing these games. Now, are casinos required to divulge exactly HOW each games arrives at the result they display on the paytables they display? We all know casinos are required to tell the players payouts, odds and all relevant info...But with these games, with multipliers as high as 10-12x, even with the additional coins required to bet, something else is going on.... I just know it, and I've seen it, on my own screens and others, who have played them in AC ( and admittedly only in AC... I haven't played gimmick games in Vegas in many many years.)
Well, I for one play "gimmick" games and have done a fair amount of research. The Nevada Gaming Commission requires when there is an increased bet on a game with base odds, that the outcome must geometrically increase with that bet so that the odds for the player are equal to or become better than the original odds. In other words, the "gimmick" games either have equal or better returns as compared to the base game with the same pay table. All you have to do to prove this is look at the pay tables available on the website. You will see the pay table percentages for base games are lower than those with the multipliers on STP, Ult X, etc across the board. The key is having the payroll to withstand the volatility of these games.
