Can You Keep From Losing?

[FloridaPhil]

Here's a question. If you take away the royal flush bonus, is the game worth playing? The answer depends on the game played and the mind set of the player. If the game's odds plus the comps are anywhere near positive, I think you should always play the number of coins it takes to earn the royal bonus. In my case the combination of odds plus comps is never positive, but the cost is small enough to cover the extra cost of playing max coins. A good example are the six special VP machines in Hollywood. Those machines have quarter 8/5 Bonus Poker, a 99% game. Add in comped rooms, drinks and food and it's a great vacation at a great price. Compare this to playing 8/5 Double Double Bonus, a 96.7% game. If you are going to play this game, it is better to play it with single coin as small as possible.

If you are a casual player and have never hit a royal, by all means play max coins. I don't want to be responsible for anyone jumping off a bridge. I quit counting royals years ago. They don't hold any special appeal to me. I would rather lose less than overpay to see one.

You can't change the casino's odds, but you can change how you play. I enjoy playing 8/5 DDB one quarter at a time. I can't enjoy playing that game losing $100 an hour. Let's stop throwing stones at VP strategies just because they aren't long term winners. Losing less can be more valuable to more players that trying to turn them all into APs.

[Tedlark]

If the royal flush bonus were taken out of the equation then, to me, the game would not be worth playing. Because my play is predominantly TDB, I would obviously have other targets in my sights.

But my position on playing single coin will not change and I don't expect to convert any other players to my way of thinking if they are set on playing single coin. Many years ago I was playing at Hollywood Casino in Aurora, IL and I caught a royal (one of 4 that night) for $1,000.00. A man was playing the machine next to me and he too, caught a royal but for $62.50. He grumbled about mine being what it was and his being what it was, I pointed out to him that was one of the pitfalls of playing single coin. He played for a couple more minutes and left. I decided to switch too his machine and about 10 minutes later I hit my 4th royal of the night. Little did I know that this guy was standing a few feet behind me watching me play. When I hit this royal he then came up to me saying that HE should have hit that royal and I said: Oh well, you didn't and I did.

I would rather continue saying that it is smarter to play max coin in at a denomination a player can comfortably play at instead of playing single coin. Would a player rather hit a premium hand on DDB when playing max coin at the .05 denom or would they instead prefer hitting a premium hand on DDB when playing single coin at the .25 denom?

[Carcounter]

Royals count. I have always said that the years I have been over-royaled are winning years and under-royaled, losing years. I play 99.5% plus games and my results are within expectations. Agree with Phil that after a while there is nothing special about getting a royal, they are part of the experience.

[FloridaPhil]

I like hitting royals as much as anyone. They aren't special, they are just another hand to me. If I had invested three royal cycles at max coins and hit a royal at single coin, I would be justifiably upset. This is why I tell people to never play single coin when they are running out of money. If I played three royal cycles playing single coin quarters and hit one for $62.50, it would be just another decent paying hand.

When you are playing 96% games, every hand costs money. I have hit two single coin royals in one day a few times. Instead of beating myself up for it, I thought about how much I saved by playing single coin. Long term VP winning playing these games is nearly impossible. The odds are against you. Your body is against you. Your surroundings and the machine itself can be against you. Math and logic tells me I will lose. I play small so it doesn't cost as much.

Playing VP cheap is not for everyone. If you can accept the risk that the game will produce a profit, by all means do so. If you live down the street from Red Rock, playing single coin VP would be stupid. If you are forced to play 96% games or stay home, you should know your cost is flexible.

[onemoretry]

A good example are the six special VP machines in Hollywood. Those machines have quarter 8/5 Bonus Poker, a 99% game. Add in comped rooms, drinks and food and it's a great vacation at a great price. Compare this to playing 8/5 Double Double Bonus, a 96.7% game. If you are going to play this game, it is better to play it with single coin as small as possible.

Am I reading this correctly? Folks playing single coin 8/5 double double bonus are rejecting the option of playing 8/5 bonus poker?

[FloridaPhil]

A good example are the six special VP machines in Hollywood. Those machines have quarter 8/5 Bonus Poker, a 99% game. Add in comped rooms, drinks and food and it's a great vacation at a great price. Compare this to playing 8/5 Double Double Bonus, a 96.7% game. If you are going to play this game, it is better to play it with single coin as small as possible.

Am I reading this correctly? Folks playing single coin 8/5 double double bonus are rejecting the option of playing 8/5 bonus poker?

The Hollywood and Tampa casinos are 259 miles apart. Hollywood has 6 quarter video poker machines with 8/5 Bonus Poker. Tampa has 7/5 Bonus Poker and 8/5 DDB. You can get a comped room in Hollywood. You can not in Tampa. Points in both casinos accumulate together. When we stay for free in Hollywood, I play max coin 8/5 Bonus Poker. There is no such option in Tampa.

[markinca]

Am I reading this correctly? Folks playing single coin 8/5 double double bonus are rejecting the option of playing 8/5 bonus poker?

I see this kind of thing all the time - there will be two machines in the same bank (sometimes literally right next to each other) where one machine has a superior paytable to the other, and the worse paytable is being played and the superior paytable is vacant.

I get that no one is going to go through all the machines to see if the paytables are different, but vpfree is just a click away. It's just that most people just don't care.

[FloridaPhil]

I see this kind of thing all the time - there will be two machines in the same bank (sometimes literally right next to each other) where one machine has a superior paytable to the other, and the worse paytable is being played and the superior paytable is vacant.I get that no one is going to go through all the machines to see if the paytables are different, but vpfree is just a click away. It's just that most people just don't care.

You are right. Most players wouldn't know a positive VP game if they saw one. I carry a laptop with VPW software on my VP vacations and I know the odds on every game we play before we play them. I also have an Excel spreadsheet on that laptop that calculates a benchmark cost per hour to play these games at each denomination from quarters to dollars. Calculating comps is a lot harder, especially if we are playing on the road or at a casino where we haven't had time to get all the details.

I always play the best quarter games I can find. When I say I don't care, it means I don't walk away from a game because it isn't positive. If that game is 96%, I play it cheap. If I deem it playable at max coins (normally 99% or better), that's what I do. When you are on a VP vacation and have driven 600 miles to get to a new casino, you are going to play what they have. You don't have to play like you have an advantage when you don't. I adjust my strategy to match the odds I have in front of me at the time.

[Tedlark]

Phil where I find a flaw in your logic is where you write: "If I had invested three royal cycles at max coins and hit a royal at single coin, I would be justifyably upset."

I call this a flaw because there is no absolute guarantee of where a royal (or other hand for that matter) will hit. The rule of thumb is 40,000 hands, I know, but how about those times when a player may hit 1 or more royals in that same 40,000 hand stretch? A player needs to play at their advantage, every opportunity they get. On those occasions when I feel like playing craps; I adjust my pass line bet so that I can then take complete advantage of backing that bet up with as close to full odds bet as I can do.

[FloridaPhil]

A player needs to play at their advantage, every opportunity they get. On those occasions when I feel like playing craps; I adjust my pass line bet so that I can then take complete advantage of backing that bet up with as close to full odds bet as I can do.

All the VP games I play are negative. Some are more negative than others. When I play a quarter 8/5 Bonus Poker game at max coins, my spreadsheet tells me I am losing approximately $5 an hour. Comps can overcome that house edge. If I play a quarter Double Double Bonus game at max coins, my loss rises to over $20 an hour. If I play 50 hours of 8/5 DDB at max coins, I lost the equivalent of one $1,000 royal flush. I can't always play the games I want to. If I could they would all be positive. From experience I have learned that playing 96% games too long will build up my losses, making it hard to offset them with the times I can play better games. I learned this at the Beau Rivage in Biloxi. Try playing an entire week of max coin 7/5 Jacks or Better and see how far you get into the hole.

Playing negative games is tricky. They are all losers. There is a point in the odds where the hourly loss is so great, you are better off playing single coin. The smart thing to do would be to do what Bob Dancer does and only play when the odds are acceptable. I enjoy my weekly trips to the casino, so I adjust my coin in to make the games playable. Another option would be to save my money and play only 8/5 Bonus Poker in Hollywood. I am currently considering that option.