CS 2.0

[New2vp]

Phil, I hope you continue having fun however you choose to play and no matter how many times you switch. The part of my post that had the figures was to ensure that you knew you were in for a rude awakening when 60 to 70% of your sessions using fifteen $20-bill mini-sessions ended up negative at the end of the day, including the calculation that more than 25% of the time with your dollar strategy, you will lose your entire daily bankroll once you have cycled through the fifteen $20s. This was in contrast to your statement that the methodology had consistently produced winning (or breakeven) sessions in your recent experience.

No argument from me that there are always multiple ways to play ... especially until you can pin down and express your precise goal or set of principles. Simply stating after the fact that a strategy "works for me" because it gives one the proper amount of entertainment is self-fulfilling. It is also vague and may be a bit dangerous, particularly if one is in the habit of giving in to the thrill of chasing the huge but rare jackpot while fibbing to others or oneself about the inevitable losses that will occur as a result of the chase. In March, you so much as stated that you had conquered those demons. If your current strategy is actually being employed, at least you will limit your daily losses to no more than $300. If memory serves, the average loss will be in the $64-$65 range. I know you can afford that, but that is the net average loss even after including all the $1000 and $4000 wins.

In your response above to me, you thought there was confusion to be cleared up. I demonstrated in my post that I was not confused about the strategy that you expressed. I showed precisely what outcomes you can expect and with what frequency they will occur. These are not feelings nor simulations, but direct calculations. You often state that you are human and not an automaton, so I presume your results will be a bit worse than the average if one was to play computer-perfect strategy 100% of the time. And, of course, if you change your mind and follow some other strategy, there will be a different distribution. The main purpose of what I wrote was to help people understand that losses will occur with at least the same frequency as with a less complex strategy, including playing max coin without switching denominations. 68.4% of the dollar sessions and 72.4% of the half-dollar sessions will end in a loss.

Any confusion that arose is due to your dueling posts, which both were based on the same premise that video poker pay schedules (not odds) are being reduced. Inconsistencies remain that are not cleared up by your latest post.

My theory about your conflict is that you rely on recent experience too heavily, which makes you overly optimistic when things have gone well recently and overly pessimistic and looking to change things when they haven't. You appeared to adopt a strategy in March that was the following (check to see if I'm misquoting you):

1. Ditch Deuces Wild due to its difficult strategy and higher variance and adopt Jacks or Better or Bonus Poker due to their easier strategy and lower variance. You mentioned 8/5 JoB and 7/5 Bonus Poker, which are NOT 99% games, contradicting your explanation to try to deny that your two posts seriously contradict one another.
2. Always play max coins.
3. Don't change denominations.
4. Stay with quarters. Changing denominations and staying with quarters would not seem to be be dependent upon the presence of of 99% games.

You said it took you 10 years to get to this understanding. But you felt the need, perhaps for partial justification, that you had recent success in the form of "$4,000 worth of royals" since adopting this strategy.

Clearly this list (with the exception of quoting recent results) was a denunciation of pretty much everything you had previously espoused. And if you had always had this understanding, I would imagine that much of what you had written previously, including your spats with Dancer and Bill Ryan would not have occurred. The poster who has argued the most vociferously over the years against the last 3 points has been you (if memory serves). Years earlier there were some others taking that perspective, but that is a different story.

Now, in this thread, you have chosen to break each and every one of the four things that you vowed took you 10 years to learn.

I'm fine with you playing large, small, switching denominations, switching games, inserting bills one at a time or 50 at a time. I hope that you can in fact at least see and learn from your own stated inconsistencies whether you care to acknowledge them here or not.

Good luck, I hope you beat the odds and enjoy your upcoming casino visits.

[FloridaPhil]

You brought up some very good points. I realize my VP strategy varies all over the place and Yes I do rely on recent results to determine which one I use. However, I don't believe this is a fault.

Last fall I decided to go back to playing max coins all the time. It had been a long time since I did this and I felt the need to do something new for a change. The best quarter game in Tampa is 7/5 Bonus Poker. It's an easy game to play, so I changed over. Within two weeks I hit a hand pay royal for $2,000. I was playing quarters and had a good day, so I moved to 50 cent play. Two weeks later, I was dealt a royal for $1,000. We went to Biloxi for my birthday. The best game there was 6/5 Bonus Poker. I was dealt 4 to a royal on this game and hit the fifth card for my third royal. After I returned from Biloxi, I hit two more royals at $1,000 each in Tampa. Five royals in four months for $6,000.

After that things went bad and I started to lose. Before I gave all the money back, I switched to the old CS to keep the money I had won. The old CS had some flaws, so I changed it slightly. CS 2.0 works much better at protecting your bankroll. This is due to the fact that you play many more single coin hands and only play max coins with house money. I realize some members will say there is no house money, but there is as far as I am concerned.

Right now I am switching between strategies. If a casino wants me to play max coins, they have to give me half a chance. That means 99% games or better, decent decent free play and comps. If they don't provide what I want, I switch to CS and take up a seat in their casino and play for nearly nothing. There are two casinos in Florida that will give me what I want. Unfortunately, they are in South Florida 200 miles away.

I can't come close to understanding all the numbers you provided. You can tell me all day CS 2.0 is a loser. I will tell you my results show something different. CS 2.0 in dollars is not the way to go. You don't reduce your coin-in enough to make it worthwhile. I only use it when I am far ahead for the day. CS 2.0 in fifty cents is a better choice in Tampa because the better odds start there and you are reducing your coin-in by more than 50%. I appreciate all the work you did with your calculations. I base my decisions on what happens when I play and my results don't show the same thing.

So why am I posting about CS? That is a question no one is asking me. Right now there are members and visitors to this forum who are playing bad VP games with max coins. They are stuck in the cycle I spoke about earlier. They lose 9 out of 10 times they go to the casino. They win once in a while, but they never catch up and their losses continue to mount. They read all the books and try all the strategies. They come on this website to find the secret to winning. They will never win playing bad games, but they don't want to believe it. Other people win big, why can't they?

The only way to survive playing bad VP games is to limit your coin-in and consider the cost as entertainment. There are many ways to limit your coin-in. CS is the only one that does not limit the number of hands you can play. If you want the most efficient way to play bad VP games don't make the switch to max coins, stay with single coin and play as cheap as the casino allows. Playing single coin is boring. Switching a few times a day adds excitement and keeps open the possibility of a max coin jackpot.

Bad casino games are here to stay. How bad can they get? Only time will tell. I believe all video poker games will be 97% or worse some day. The next time you walk into South Point, check the odds and you may find out what I am predicting is true. It may not be today or tomorrow, but it's coming.

[FAA]

Question for FP. I have the coveted 99.5% odds. But comps are indeed worthless, a buck per trip. Should I simply concede that the hand pay is too much expensive an experience? I took a heavy loss last week and must considerably trim my sails.

[Webman]

This looks like a good place for the discussion of FloridaPhil's CS. Future posts on this subject will be moved here.

[FloridaPhil]

Question for FP. I have the coveted 99.5% odds. But comps are indeed worthless, a buck per trip. Should I simply concede that the hand pay is too much expensive an experience? I took a heavy loss last week and must considerably trim my sails.

In my opinion, there is no benefit to playing single coin in any VP game with those odds. If I had 99.5% games to play, I would always play max coins. That game isn't 100%, but it's close enough as far as I am concerned. If I needed to trim my sails as you say, I would take some time off and come back when I have recovered. Sometimes a vacation is what is required.

Playing single coin saves money by limiting coin in when playing VP games with a large house edge. The best way to play them is to not play them. If you are going to anyway, the second best way to reduce the house take is to play them as cheap as possible. A third option would be to limit the number of hands you play.

I prefer to discuss all VP strategy in a private message. We need to make this forum a pleasant place to hang out. Tying it up with arguments is driving away members and no one wants that.

[FAA]

Good reply; a lot to consider. Basically damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead. Entirely valid; player and house are essentially on even ground. I definitely plan on a Caesars hiatus. I'm just snakebit there. Even my recent RF came in a min coin fiasco. I'll go next door and pursue a higher percentage of max play. 80% sounds right.

[Waiting4RF]

Two weeks from now I will be playing in Murphy North Carolina where the best quarter game is 97% and there are no comps. I use CS when I play at Murphy.

This strategy works well for me. It could work for others as well. Some players believe there is only one way to play VP. As the odds change, I change.

So what happened in Murphy when you used CS 2.0? Did you you make a profit or break even? Have you used it anywhere else in the last 4 months?

[FloridaPhil]

So what happened in Murphy when you used CS 2.0? Did you you make a profit or break even? Have you used it anywhere else in the last 4 months?

I have done well in Murphy. The odds stink and the casino looks like a warehouse. Other than that, I'm ahead there.

The choice in Murphy is a common one. You can play 97% max coin quarters ($1.25 a hand) or 99% max coin dollars ($5 a hand). Both are negative games. The comps at Murphy suck and there is no way they could get me to spend the night there even for free.

Playing max coin dollar VP gets expensive quick. The odds when you play single coin dollars are actually a little better than the max coin quarter game. Playing single coin is all about stretching your money. You are sacrificing the royal flush bonus for the ability to play more hands in a day. It's a double edge sword. All goes well until you hit a royal flush. To an Advantage Player this is a total disaster because royals are what makes the game profitable. To someone like me who is playing for entertainment, it's not such a big deal. I realize this gives a lot of people a head ache and it should. Playing VP for entertainment is different than playing for profit. I am not entertained by paying five times more for a royal than it's worth.

I don't use CS anymore. Not because it didn't work for me. I don't use it because I got tired of watching my wife hit max coin royals for $1,000 when I did the same thing for $62.50. I upped my daily bankroll so I could comfortably play max coin quarters. I may lose more money long term, but it's worth see 4,000 coins on my screen.

[Waiting4RF]

I was only asking about your Nov 2018 trip when you used CS 2.0

[FloridaPhil]

I don't remember. My notebook says I broke even that day. I have no other details.