Would I have still hit?

[SaraTG]

  So I was up at the casino in Charles Town on Sunday and had been playing Double Double Bonus poker at 20 credits a hand on the 25 cent machine and not making any progress. I still had 200 credits on the machine so I decided to switch over to Dueces Wild just in hopes of winning back a bit to head off to another machine. I clicked the "More Games" button and then "Dueces Wild" and resumed my max 20 bet and on the very first hand I was dealt A-A-A-A-4!   I yelled out, "Oh my God are you kidding me???!!!" If I had kept the machine on DDB I would have just hit for $2000 but instead I just won $20 since the Dueces Wild pays that for any 4-of-a-kind.   Needless to say I was aggrevated all day because of it.   So what is everyones take? Would the A-A-A-A-4 still have come up if I had stayed on the DDB or did switching games bring up a whole new "next hand"?
 
  In any event I did hit a Royal Flush in the 3X Bonus Round on the "Triple Ace Poker" game the weekend before and won $3000 so I can't complain to much.

[Frank Kneeland]

The random number generator that creates the seed number cycles in the milliseconds until you hit the deal button. So unless changing games was instantaneous, then no, you would not have gotten the same hand. But your post raises a better question. Why were you changing games? On any multi-game machine, one of the games will have the highest return. You should always play the one with the highest return and never switch. At least I can think of no reason to.You said you were aggravated all day because of a random event over which you had no control. This concerns me. I try only to worry about things I can influence or control. I wouldn't say it has kept me sane. But it has kept me saner-ish.Don't worry, be happy!~Frank Kneeland, Author of The Secret World of Video Poker Progressives--A History and How-To of Video Poker Slot Teams in Las Vegas.  And co-host of the Radio Show--Gambling with an Edge--with Bob Dancer. More info: www.progressivevp.com

[New2vp]

But your post raises a better question. Why were you changing games? On any multi-game machine, one of the games will have the highest return. You should always play the one with the highest return and never switch. At least I can think of no reason to.Although I might personally follow your philosophy of playing the highest EV game that I could and your recommendation might be appropriate for a pro, it is fairly easy to think of reasons why someone would choose not to (and I know I'm not telling you anything you don't already know.)  One reason to play a game with lower EV is a difference in volatility.  Expected return on stocks is generally higher than expected return on bank accounts is generally higher than expected return on cash.  Yet people have cash and bank accounts.  And certainly some vp games are steadier than others even with lower EV.That might suggest that a priority would be lower volatility games.  Others may prefer higher volatility since in their limited amount of play, they would rather have a better chance of winning big.  People play the lottery all the time despite its having an incredibly low EV in most instances.Certainly the analogy to cash vs. stocks brings to mind convenience.  Not everyone knows the correct strategy for every game, so they may be more comfortable playing the game they know better in a pinch but be willing to experiment a little depending on their standing.  And, of course, there's no accounting for personal preference.  Some people love jokers and deuces and some hate them.Some people care more about whether they won tonight than the effect that tonight's play will have on their bank account 10 years from now.Many people don't play often, fast enough, or long enough to have a small difference in EV work for them.  If they are playing a negative game over a relatively short time, they may very well have a higher probability of winning with a lower EV game.I'm sure that after you think about this longer, you could add to these reasons why people why people would switch even if you wouldn't personally advocate that.

[SaraTG]

But your post raises a better question. Why were you changing games? On any multi-game machine, one of the games will have the highest return. You should always play the one with the highest return and never switch.


  
   I personally never go to a casino hoping to win big money or I might play the games with the highest payouts (Actually I did for 30 years and lost a HUGE amount of money) Maybe a year ago I decided to just play the game which makes me happiest and let me have fun for a few hours and if I broke even or just won my gas/food money back I considered it a winning day. Naturally it's nice to win money but that is no longer my driving force and I can say because of this change of thinking I am pretty much even for the past year despite an increase in trips to the casino.  Last Sundays venture onto the DDB game with 20 bets was my first time doing that in over a year and I quickly realized I was making a mistake going back to that and headed off to my Triple Ace Poker game with a max 5 credit bet and the little bonus rounds that keep me going.   I am a skeptic and although I know of the random number generator I often suspect a deeper darker computer secret drives these things and controls them.

[Frank Kneeland]

No, don't worry about any deeper darker secrets. I know programmers. It's all random. Companies like the one that hosts this site, Action Gaming, could lose their license and be fined ridiculous amounts of money, not to mention criminal prosecution for doing any funny business...and more importantly there's no motive. Between the gaming control board doing RNG checks and their lack of a reason to cheat, we have neither motive, nor opportunity.We're going to be having the Chairman of the Gaming Control Board on my show on March 3rd. You should check it out, we'll be talking about this topic.Radio Show Info: https://www.progressivevp.com/radio_show.php ~FK

[Frank Kneeland]

New to vp said: That might suggest that a priority would be lower volatility games. 
Others may prefer higher volatility since in their limited amount of
play, they would rather have a better chance of winning big. I understand that. What I don't understand is switching. If you decide a game is better for you, because of volatility and bankroll, then it becomes the better choice and stays that way until the equation changes. It would take weeks or months for bankroll change significant enough to alter the numbers. No amount of daily fluctuation would be significant enough to alter the equations enough to warrant a change in games.Then we have the logic:Scenario 1: You begin by playing the best game for you.A. If you switch, it means you are deliberately choosing to play something you know to be inferior.Scenario 2: You start out playing an inferior game (for you)A. Then you switch to a better game.  Creating the screaming question, "why didn't you just play the better game to begin with?"B. You switch to a worse game. (I'll refrain from any comments about that)These are the only possible scenarios for game switching, and none of them are logical or in the players favor. I cannot create an equation to model this as ever being the best choice. And I can't accept that people deliberately choose not to do the best thing.This really stumps me. I would appreciate it if someone could explain the logic behind choosing inferior over superior??? I would rest better knowing.I was raised to believe that people always act in their own best interest, unless they are self destructive. That's why this confuses me so much. And by the way, I'm not preaching here, I really don't understand why anyone puts a coin in a machine if they're not getting paid to do it. It's extremely hard work, long hours, hard on the body. The only thing that makes it bearable is knowing you're getting paid a lot to do it.~A man with one watch knows the time. A man with two is never sure.~FK

[New2vp]

This really stumps me. I would appreciate it if someone could explain the logic behind choosing inferior over superior??? I would rest better knowing.I was raised to believe that people always act in their own best interest, unless they are self destructive.Hey Frank, You can create a quote box like the one above by hitting the quote button on the message from which you want to quote.  Then you can delete some words and leave the words on which you want to focus.  You probably shouldn't add any words in...some people don't like others putting words in their posts.Your response begs the question as to what is inferior or superior.  I agree that people should do what they consider superior.  But different people will find different things as superior and can think of different things as superior at different times.  It is superior to take an umbrella with you when you expect rain, but not so much at other times.I gave you a hint in the previous message of when the max EV play is not superior, but you totally chose to ignore the word "volatility" in your response.If a game has a lower EV but lower volatility, it may indeed be a better play depending on how long you plan on playing.  Your reference to Risk of Ruin in other posts when you're recommending Paymar's or Dancer's products, indicates an understanding that volatility is an important consideration and that there are other things besides EV on which to make decisions.You say you don't get why anyone would ever choose anything other than max EV, though you cite instances in your book when your team didn't maximize EV.  You might choose lower cost of your target jackpot at some times; you might choose lower expected time to hit your target jackpot at others.Plus you say it is a better suggestion to "Just not play" on a positive progressive play if you cannot stay until the jackpot is hit.  It is clearly a higher EV strategy to play a 102% game for a couple of hours than to pass on it completely.  But I understand in this case that volatility considerations might have caused you to make that suggestion.And certainly on some complicated strategy plays it is "superior" to ignore the max EV play and make the play that is more convenient to remember.  (I understand your buddy Paymar likes to recommend this more often than your other buddy Dancer.  By the way, do they get along with each other?  I've seen some contentious dialog posted in the past on that subject.)Other people, who don't make a living by playing vp or recommending products, will have different goals.  I understand your radio partner, Bob Dancer has a degree in economics, so he could help you with this.  People have different preferences and those preferences are subjective.  I have no problem with presuming that all should prefer higher EV...other things equal (economists like to say ceteris paribus; but, since that phrase has more syllables than "other things equal," I don't know why.  Maybe they have a higher preference for showing erudition rather than exercising oral efficiency).But "other things" are rarely equal, so there's room for other things besides EV to aid in making the choice as to what is considered superior.For vp (or investments):  some prefer lower volatility and some prefer higher volatility.  And if you have a goal to tell your partner in life whether you won or lost today (that might be more important to having a nice evening than short-term fluctuations in cash on hand), you may follow up losses on low volatility machines early in the day with high volatility machines to increase the probability of marital good will in the evening.  Or with early wins on higher volatility machines, you may want to lock up the chance of winning for the day by finishing play on lower volatility machines.  Some might quit, but others might have a preference to kill more time on a machine.Of course you could lie to your partner, but some might have a higher preference for telling the truth. 

[shadowman]

One of the "other things" that influence many people is a word called fun. If they are in a losing mode then changing to another game can be a method of giving them hope for better results. Sometimes it backfires. Since VP is random we will see varying results from the first hand being really good for the previous game (better known from the Forest Gump movie as "it happens") to the first hand being really good for the changed to game. I've seen both situations occur.  Same goes for people who love to switch denominations. Now for a rather poor analogy ... I play a lot of golf. I know I will never be a pro. That doesn't stop me from playing and enjoying what the game does provide.

[Eduardo]

If I ordered the enchiladas instead of taquitos, would it have been more filling? Who cares, it was delicious either way!

[damule]

 

What I don't understand is switching. If you decide a game is better for you, because of volatility and bankroll, then it becomes the better choice and stays that way until the equation changes. It would take weeks or months for bankroll change significant enough to alter the numbers. No amount of daily fluctuation would be significant enough to alter the equations enough to warrant a change in games.



 
Frank, overwhelmingly, most of us on this forum are recreational players. That means most of us don't live in Vegas and most of us are not in casinos on a daily basis or even several times per week. In my opinion I believe most of the video poker players on this board probably take somewhere between 2-4 trips a year to a gaming mecca like Vegas or Atlantic City and maybe frequent a local casino 2-4 days a month.
 
Most of us do not have a huge gaming bankroll that would take weeks or months to change significantly enough to alter play choices or goals. I know what you're going to say: if the bankroll didn't last long enough to play your game the bankroll was too small. However, recreational players for the most part aren't in this for the long haul. They just want some value out of their play. Some want high volatility games like TDB and try for those big, fast hits. Some like JOB which give them more staying power.
 
All in all, depending on how one's luck is going on a short 2-3 day stay in Vegas or a several hour stop into the local native american casino may dictate in the short term how the equation changes.