Beginning a dud hand analysis

[olds442jetaway]

As much as this will be a royal pain in the a.., I am going to begin a dud hand analysis. This sample will cover tens if not hundred's of thousands of hands. On job for example, 2 pair or better should hit roughly once in every 4.2 hands. If what I suspect happens, and I get numbers like 5,6,7 etc., I will be fully convinced that we are all playing nothing more than slot machines and the rng program is not really that. This may take a while, ( unless I go broke first), but in light of what most of us are finding, this needs to be done. I think DB is keeping similar records already and maybe others. Streaks of 20-40 dud hands in job are all to common now, and they were rare more than 5 years ago. We will see what happens. The dud streaks will be different for almost every game. I may keep one for deuces wild too which is my favorite game. I haven't checked recently, but I think the normal dud string for that game is 6 or so. Maybe by playing a little slower and keeping these records, I will lose a little less money too.

[FloridaPhil]

Let me make sure I understand what you are trying to prove with your analysis. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, I just want to make sure we are on the same page.  Are you saying you think the programs of the VP machines you play are programmed to deal more "dud hands" instead of dealing at random as we have been led to believe?  Thanks!

[olds442jetaway]

That is what it looks like to me Phil. If in my very large sample I come up with 2 pair or better at the end of the draw in less than once every 4.2 hands in job, I will be sure. For Deuces wild, you should get more than your money back on your bet roughly once in every 5.7 hands. I will try and check both. Also a short run sample won't be relevant. This needs to be done over hundreds of thousands of hands. Also, I don't think the duds are necessarily just on the deal. That is why I am checking the result of the play after the hands are finished. Just as one example, in my case now I haven't hit a Royal dealt or otherwise in over 450,000 hands. That does also not count multi line games or spin poker which I play too and have not hit a Royal on any line there either. So the real number on hands without a Royal is now approaching 1 million. On the single line games, I have had 4 to a Royal about 160 times dealt in that 450,000 number. Not one has hit. I should have hit almost 4. Too early yet to tell and I don't want the no Royal situation to be the only example. That is why I am making it simple and counting how many hands you play in the long run without getting more than your money back on a bet.

[spxChrome]

I'm not sure what it is but no doubt about it, when you play millions of hands its obvious to spot a shift in play. I'm still thinking its random pre-deal and controlled on the draw. 3 of my last 4 hand pays where dealt. You used to be able to get a lot more play out of your money in the past.

[FloridaPhil]

I'm no expert by any means, but I think I have an idea that may explain what we are seeing. It does seem to me that the machines have much longer bad streaks than they used to.  The payout probably hasn't been changed long term, but the variance is now so great that most players lose patience, go on tilt and bust before they hit the streak of good hands.  Maybe the timing of the new chips is different or some other technical issue.  It would be interesting to talk to a technician about this.

[olds442jetaway]

You may have something there Phil. They have probably calculated how many hours we can play before we drop and then jam the hits into a 5 minute cycle. I have seen this over and over again lately. Several people within ear shot hitting Royals, aces quads, deuces quads, and bunches of full houses lumped real close together. Then after a couple of minutes, it is back to silence and the murmer of some people hammering the keys, the not so rare 4 letter words, and the most famous line are you ready to eat yet?

[FloridaPhil]

It's obvious to me that the biggest enemy a recreational players has is busting or running out of guts before the good hands come.  I played 6 hours yesterday of 8/5 DDB single coin quarters, which for me was at least 5,000 hands.  I hit 4 sets of quad aces one with a kicker, a bunch of other quads and no royals.  I walked out even.  Because I hit no royals, my results would have been the same if I was playing $100 a point.  The difference would have been that I may have walked out of the casino at some point and declared myself a winner.  I think you can play 100% games perfectly for 20 years and if you unlucky enough to get less than your share of Royals you will lose more money than you win.  Let's face it, getting a Royal is pure luck and "No amount of skill or math will overcome bad luck!"  On the other hand, if you make huge bets and get more Royals than you are entitled to, you can write a book about it.  
 
P.S. No disrespect for Bob.  I still enjoy reading his book and by now the pages of mine are totally worn out.