Does this math work?

[FloridaPhil]

I keep coming back to this question and I think it's worth a discussion.  Let's say you are a recreational player with only negative expectation games available to you.  You make the decision to play DDB 1 coin dollars instead of 5 coin quarters.  This reduces your cost-to-play by approximately 20%. Of course, this also reduces your winnings by 20% and cuts your Royals from 4000 coins to 250. 
 
I have been told the Royal is worth about 1%.  But, when playing DDB all the non-royal jackpots remain intact and are not penalized. 
In this scenario, the math seems to say it's a better strategy to play one coin dollars?  You get all the DDB jackpots except the Royal (1% loss) without penalty and your cost to play is 20% less.  Not only that, if the machine goes totally crazy (it happens) you can reach up and play 5 coin dollars and take a pot shot at a nice payout. 
 
I really enjoyed playing this way and did quite well until I hit two Royals a week apart last summer.  I'm over it now and I'm thinking about giving it another try.
 

[onemoretry]

I really enjoyed playing this way and did quite well until I hit two Royals a week apart last summer.  I'm over it now and I'm thinking about giving it another try.
Isn't this sort of strange?  You were doing quite well UNTIL you hit two royals?
 
In most video poker games, the royal is the ultimate result.  You don't think it odd that your "strategy" makes you view hitting a royal as a negative?

[shadowman]

The difference in return is about 1.3%. You didn't list the pay tables so I don't know how much better the $ machines are for you.

[New2vp]

Isn't this sort of strange?  You were doing quite well UNTIL you hit two royals?
 
In most video poker games, the royal is the ultimate result.  You don't think it odd that your "strategy" makes you view hitting a royal as a negative?As you said...in most games...but not this one.  In this game, AWAK is 60% better than a royal in terms of coins won and more than 3 times more likely.But I do see your point.  It is a common one.  If someone has just switched from DDB to Jacks or Better, say to chase a progressive royal, hitting 4 aces often might make them a bit more frustrated than happy, though it is one of the better outcomes possible on the current game.It has to do with the feelings behind a strategy that is different from maximizing expected value.  In a MINIMAX strategy, you minimize the maximum regret.  Of course, Phil's strategy is not MINIMAX, but it may feel like it when he does NOT hit the royal.  Certainly, we can all see the regrets when the "dreaded" one-coin royal is hit, regardless of the fact that it is likely one of the best possible outcomes...even when it is not the very best. 

[FloridaPhil]

"In this game, AWAK is 60% better than a royal in terms of coins won and more than 3 times more likely." 
 
I don't think a $250 Royal is a bad thing, it's all money.  I've hit enough Royals to where I'm not all that excited about them anymore.   The above quote is what's causing me to think one coin DDB is a better strategy.  Even a no-kicker 4A pays $160. 

[Frank Kneeland]

My head nearly exploded after you opening comment, " Let's say you are a recreational player with only negative expectation games available to you."So let me see if I understand this correctly? You know you have only negative expectation games to choose from and that if you play them you are expected to lose and you'd like advice on how to lose the least or slowest???~FK

[BillyJoe]

I think I understand Phil's point. Since you are LEAST likely to get an RF in any one hand with a 52-card deck versus any other result, not playing for it, and accepting the lower payout for a non-max bet if you happen to hit it, may be a viable approach.
 
I have actually used that approach in at least one casino with no TDB available, and the DDB pay table being significantly stronger on the $5 single line than the $1 single line with the same game. I chose to not play for $25/hand on max bet versus a $5/hand single coin bet, since I knew I was not going to play a lot of hands in that session. The "possibility" of hitting an RF did not change with each hand played, but the "probability" of hitting one in that session was a function of the number of hands I played in that session (sorry, Frank).  I did not hit an RF, but did hit some nice 4 OAKs, and some better paying FHs and Flushes, relative to my bet, along the way. Overall, it was a winning session, due in part to the stronger pay table, and of course, some good luck. Even though I eliminated, somewhat, the RF return opportunity, putting myself in position to benefit from some short-term luck on premium hands provided a better return relative to my bankroll within that session.    

[backsider]

Frank, please tell me why he is expected to lose if hes only playing infrequently? How much can a portion of a percent make in such a case? I seem to have my best days and results when I just pop into a casino with some friends for a quick beer or two and Im playing wherever machine they roll me up to, and most times its a piss poor paytable.

[FloridaPhil]

Frank is absolutely correct in his assessment of my motive.  Although it may be hard for him to understand that people play VP for lots of other reasons than to make money.
I fully realize I am guaranteed to lose money long term playing these games.  We could find other money losing diversions like golf, travel, boating, antique cars, whatever; but my wife and I like the casino atmosphere and the excitement of winning once in a while.  We could also move to Vegas or fly around the country looking for 100% games (not).  For us, Video Poker is strictly entertainment .  I suspect the vast majority of recreational VP players in the world are just like us.

Our goal is to "play an exciting game as long as possible with the least amount of long term loss and have a chance of walking away with money once in a while".  If the pay schedules are the same, do you think playing DDB one coin dollars meets this goal better than playing DDB 5 coin quarters? 

[shadowman]

Let's use 9/6 DDB for an example. The return of the full pay version is 98.98%. The return of the one coin version is 97.83%. For simplicity let's round them off to 99% and 98%.
 
For every 100 hands of quarter full pay you will spend $125 and expect to lose 1% or $1.25.
 
For every 100 hands of dollar short pay you will spend $100 and expect to lose 2% or $2.00.
 
Looks to me like the full pay game is quite a bit better and I rounded up the short pay situation more.