casino integrity

[olds442jetaway]

A few just have the luck of the Irish I guess. I'm just happy to be able to see the rainbow.

[pokerforme]

More than 90%. Part of trolling on the internet is getting response....just ignore it and it falls off like a wart.

[Tedlark]

More than 90%. Part of trolling on the internet is getting response....just ignore it and it falls off like a wart.
   And resonding to the one post wonders is like a wart too?

[gregorio]

[QUOTE=notes1]
i am not intersted in slots, i am only concerned about vp. Judging by the number of posts you have made, i am assuming you have been playing vp for years. My original question still stands, have you experienced any change in your personal vp payouts in the last 5 years? All things being equal are you winning/losing the same, more or less?   
The quick answer is - No Change. But, I need to put that in context. I prefer to play higher volatility games, like TDB, so my expectations are set accordingly. If I have a losing trip/session, I chalk it up to the type of games that I enjoy playing. I have been fortunate over the past few years to have hit some sizeable VP jackpots, like $72k and $64k, which will, of course, help skew overall results.

My other observation, though, is that there are fewer VP machines vs slot machines in every casino that I frequent. Add to that the number of players playing at low denoms and less than max bet, and you just don't see as many handpays. People could be sitting at VP machines playing single coin nickels, hitting RF after RF, and you would never know.

I believe that there are just so many good hands to be had in the universe of play on a VP machine over time. The math supports that. If those good hands are being 'used up' by folks playing at a low level, there is less for all the rest of us to go around.    [/QUOTE]Billyjoe.
The question was not about how many handpays one sees in the course of a
gambling session, whether it's your own handpay or observed by
others. The question is simply whether the cost of gambling has
increased for you since around 2009 despite hitting these big Jackpots. Since I am a betting man (obviously)  I am willing to bet your overall gambling dollar does not stretch nearly as far as 7-10 years ago. It's a fact! A million flies can't all be wrong! You are living in a total denial, although denial is the only reason we go back to gambling!

[gregorio]

But none of this explains in totum what I think we are all in agreement about: It is HARDER these days to either win or break even playing Video Poker over the course of exteneded time (say, per year/annum).....and I am talking about straight up results, NOT influenced by comps or promotional gimmicks or special rates, etc.     DaBurglar I wouldn't say that we are all in agreement here.

Mr. Tedlark and everybody that reads this.I have a very plausable resolution to this conundrum. Can't believe none of us never figured it out. Here it is. Seems to me the technology involved in  producing a new generation of  RNGs is making them spit out numbers in a much more "random" fashion thus making premium hands harder to obtain. Now, the regulations regarding randomness were put in play a very long time ago when RNGs were primitive compared to nowadays marvels of technology. So it is definitely not a level field, but who is going to question it when the regulators themselves can't figure it out because on the surface no rules are broken.

[onemoretry]

Seems to me the technology involved in  producing a new generation of  RNGs is making them spit out numbers in a much more "random" fashion thus making premium hands harder to obtain.
How does having the random numbers "more random", if that, in fact, is the case, make it harder to catch premium hands?

[rascal]

[QUOTE=gregorio]
Seems to me the technology involved in  producing a new generation of  RNGs is making them spit out numbers in a much more "random" fashion thus making premium hands harder to obtain.
How does having the random numbers "more random", if that, in fact, is the case, make it harder to catch premium hands?[/QUOTE]

It's either random or it's not. If it is influenced in any way, even to the very slightest degree, it is not random. Otherwise, random is random.

[BillyJoe]

[QUOTE=billyjoe] [QUOTE=notes1]
i am not intersted in slots, i am only concerned about vp. Judging by the number of posts you have made, i am assuming you have been playing vp for years. My original question still stands, have you experienced any change in your personal vp payouts in the last 5 years? All things being equal are you winning/losing the same, more or less?   
The quick answer is - No Change. But, I need to put that in context. I prefer to play higher volatility games, like TDB, so my expectations are set accordingly. If I have a losing trip/session, I chalk it up to the type of games that I enjoy playing. I have been fortunate over the past few years to have hit some sizeable VP jackpots, like $72k and $64k, which will, of course, help skew overall results.

My other observation, though, is that there are fewer VP machines vs slot machines in every casino that I frequent. Add to that the number of players playing at low denoms and less than max bet, and you just don't see as many handpays. People could be sitting at VP machines playing single coin nickels, hitting RF after RF, and you would never know.

I believe that there are just so many good hands to be had in the universe of play on a VP machine over time. The math supports that. If those good hands are being 'used up' by folks playing at a low level, there is less for all the rest of us to go around.    [/QUOTE]Billyjoe.
The question was not about how many handpays one sees in the course of a
gambling session, whether it's your own handpay or observed by
others. The question is simply whether the cost of gambling has
increased for you since around 2009 despite hitting these big Jackpots. Since I am a betting man (obviously)  I am willing to bet your overall gambling dollar does not stretch nearly as far as 7-10 years ago. It's a fact! A million flies can't all be wrong! You are living in a total denial, although denial is the only reason we go back to gambling! [/QUOTE]
As a recreational VP player, I, personally, use a "Win/Loss Stop" system for money management when I play VP. So, to measure 'success' by 'stretching my playing dollar', for me, at least, does not compute.

My playing sessions/trips are driven by success/failure within those sessions/trips. By taking this approach, if things are running very cold, I never lose my trip gaming bankroll, no matter how poor the results, until perhaps the last day of a gaming trip.

In contrast, when VP is running 'hot', I may not play as many hands that session/trip.

I don't know if this will help answer your question, but for me, personally, my VP play on my last four gaming trips (about as far back as I can remember ) produced sufficient VP winnings that I have not had to add to that VP gaming bankroll, and that even included some time in AC. That is not to say that other gaming, such as the $5-$10 slots or table games that I play, have not had an effect, because they have. That effect, however, has been some positive and some negative, so overall, I would have to say it is a bit of a wash. When you consider the comps received during those four trips, including one that was a cruise, I feel good about the results, in spite of no 'monster' payouts during that stretch.    

[Tedlark]

gregorio simply asking if a player's cost of gambling has risen since 2009 would not present an answer to what you seek.

A person's cost of gambling could increase merely by playing at a higher denomination and taking into account the ASSUMED standards of hitting royal flushes, 4oaks, etc. the cost would naturally increase. Granted, if a player hits a premium hand at the higher denomination it would work to the player's favor. Also consider a player who plays less than max coin in, such as the way Phil does. His cost of gambling this year has been dramatically reduced while his returns have dramatically increased.

[pokerpokerpoker]

I believe, for me at least, player habits change over time. In the "good old days", a VP session was single line JOB quarters with a good paytable. A hundred dollar bankroll lasted the evening.

Now, I find myself playing games like UX ddb 10 play, or 5 play Double Super times ect. Although the returns are similar over time, the swings are massive. That $100 bankroll might only last a couple minutes now. Seems I have 5 or 6 bad losing trips in a row, followed by a big winner.   Those good days never seem to balance out the bad ones though. The gradual decline in paytables sure don't help. And let's be honest, how many of us can say we play perfect strategy - especially on the more complicated games? Those little errors must add up over time.

Like I said, these thoughts are from my perspective. Fwiw, my gaming jurisdictions, Indiana and Nevada, seem like the machines are legit.