Roadhouse Tunica

[wildman49]

[QUOTE=FloridaPhil] I may be crazy, but I think the newer machines are bunching up the quads.  They seem to go forever with dead hand after dead hand, then once in a great while (days maybe) they catch back up.  The old machines seem to me to be a lot less volatile.  If you think about this, it busts more players which benefits the casino.  What do you think?
I think I agree with your first four words. [/QUOTE]It all depends on where you are playing at what casino that is. You come up to Michigan and play where I play you better bring a very large bankroll. The single line poker machines are going empty without players sitting in them seats. The VP players seem to be getting less and less over the last 5 months. If I did not play some kind of system (not max bet) I would give up the casino all together. I can only go by what I see and hear from what few players that still play a lot. Don't matter what game on the machine you play, it is very tough to play even on any trip playing max bet. I have a few banks of machines that will let one play for the day with a system, but max bet good luck.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=onemoretry]I think I agree with your first four words.[/quote]Me too!  

[ko king]

I may be crazy, but I think the newer machines are bunching up the quads.  They seem to go forever with dead hand after dead hand, then once in a great while (days maybe) they catch back up.  The old machines seem to me to be a lot less volatile.  If you think about this, it busts more players which benefits the casino.  What do you think?

I'm pretty certain I've used the word "dependable" in reference to the old machines. For around 20 years I played those old style machines and we seemed to trust each other, I grew fond of them because we had an understanding. The old machines were patient, not in such a hurry to clean your pockets and send you on your way. The new style machines are just so darn aggressive and in a rush to break you. I'm 99.99% sure there is a difference in the machines, I'd say 100% but I want to leave a little wiggle room in case I'm ever proven wrong.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=ko king]The new style machines are just so darn aggressive and in a rush to break you.[/quote]99.99% is pretty good odds. In my opinion you need a bigger bankroll to play the new machines.  No conspiracy here, they just work differently.  You can deny this if you want, but some day this will be common knowledge.   Even a crazy person can tell the difference...   

[Mr.Dawes]

Okay, I am new here, sorry if this question has already been asked and answered. What are the new machines? When did they go into service and how can they be visibly distinguished from the old machines?

[alpax]

I've only played VP recreationally in a serious manner for about an year now. I would like to know the answer to the question Mr. Dawes is wondering as well.

The part that I do agree with about the new machines needing a higher bankroll is that new machines obviously should have more powerful CPUs (central processing units) to allow you to play faster 800-1000 hands an hour at the 3 speed setting where the old machines frequently stall during card deals and you can play 600 hands an hour even trying to play as fast as possible.

More hands on a negative expectation game equates to a bigger loss?

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=alpax]More hands on a negative expectation game equates to a bigger loss?[/quote]You are on to something here.  I time myself with VPW and I normally play 900-1,000 hands an hour.   My wife plays at about 500.  I see a lot more jackpots, but I need a much larger bankroll to last as long as she does because I cash out all royals and quad deuces.

[FAA]

the new machines needing a higher bankroll
obviously should have more powerful CPUs (central processing units) to
allow you to play faster 800-1000 hands an hour at the 3 speed settingI've also only been playing a year. I hate the ridiculous 3 speed setting with a passion. I'm not in any hurry whatsoever and always adjust it to one. Anything faster is too intimidating. Why be in a hurry to lose? 55% of JOB is dud hands! Thanks for nothing. Let me crank up my rate of loss for you, CET.

[FloridaPhil]

If I was waiting 40,000 hands for a Jacks or Better jackpot, I would play like Rumpelstiltskin...  A DW quad deuce happens about once every 5,000 hands and I seem to get more than my share.  I would play 10,000 hands a day if I could. I love playing video poker and would play it without money.   If it  costs me a little to enjoy the game, I think I'm getting my money's worth and that's all that matters.

[Vman96]

More hands on a negative expectation game equates to a bigger loss?

Definitely. And playing on anything higher than one
arrow is asking for trouble if you care about minimizing expected loss. I wouldn't doubt if I could play close to 800 hands per hour on two arrows if I tried at least for a small time frame. I always play on one arrow. As for the newer machines dealing faster than the older ones, meh maybe a bit, but I haven't noticed a huge difference as a whole. Video poker isn't overly complex.