Open Video Poker Forum?

[alpax]

I will not argue about all the points regarding the potential losses since a large quantity of rounds are played with a bigger theoretical hold.

The time I have been following the Recreational forum, FP's local casino HR Tampa has started to offer better deuces wild games than in the past.

98% deuces wild for quarters (25-12-9-4-4-3-2-1)
98.91% deuces wild for 50cents / 1dollar (25-15-9-4-4-3-2-1)

That might equate to longer play on average than it used to be when it was Colorado Deuces 96.7% games for quarters.

As for the revised system, it has to consider how many 4 for 1 or better payouts there were while playing single coin quarters. So for 7 hours the player must count how they got. For the last hour, the player can play x amount of max bet quarters streaks (the streak stops until they lose). They must count how many 3 win streaks they get with the max quarter bets to count how many max dollar bets they get to bet. Then those max dollar bets are played off, it will be very few.

The jump is from single quarters to max quarters, not max dollars. Those max dollars are only attempted if a good streak of max quarters is achieved.

Some of those max dollar bets are the results of taking potshots by betting that directly from a $20 bill.

Still all the other parts of your theory holds true.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=Bob Dancer]If he
wants a truce, here’s all he has to do. 1.      
Stop misleading people by claiming CS is a good
thing

2.      
Stop talking about me[/quote]Nice job of explaining in detail how a strategy that took me from losing $10-$15K a year to winning $3,000 over the past three years couldn't possible work. I appreciate the effort, but I'm not convinced.  I will agree to stop talking about CS on the Regular Strategy forum. I will
only discuss it on the Recreational Forum.  CS always was and always
will be a recreational strategy and nothing else.  If you own this website or are being paid by the owners to police it, I guess you can do or say whatever you wish.   If not, I will let the forum members decide what's good or not. I propose the following rules to take things even further.I will not say anything on this forum about you or your strategy that could be construed as a personal attack of any kind.  I may point out where I think you are in error in an objective and professional way and let you respond without personal attack.  You are free to critique my statements in return and you will treat me as I have treated you.I will not call you a liar or question your reported earnings and/or results and you will not question mine.   You can post reasons why you think my statements are in error and I will do the same when I disagree with you, but we will not demean each other or get into personal name calling or insults.I will treat you with respect at all times and expect you to treat all the members of this forum likewise.I believe these rules should be enforced for anyone on this forum and for any subject.  I have no axe to grind and unlike you my style is not to verbally batter people into submission when I disagree with them.  I also believe the members of this forum will see that my offer is fair and reasonable.  We will see if you agree to stop your bullying and move on to fair and sensible discussions.  Bob, not everyone in this world who disagrees with you is stupid or an enemy to be crushed.  I actually agree with you more than you think, but you continue to harbor an elitist attitude toward small budget players and we have grown tired of it.  Small budget video poker players are paying your bills and we want to be treated as having value to the industry and not taken for granted or dismissed as being stupid. Believe it or not there are many other reasons people enjoy video poker other than wringing the last 10th of a percent from each hand.  Math is a good thing, but it is not the end all authority when it comes to recreational play.  If this works for you, say so.  If not, I guess we'll continue to fire at each other until everyone is driven off this website or dies of boredom.   Thank you.

[DougJ]

. . .

Bob, not everyone in this world who disagrees with you is stupid or an enemy to be crushed.  . . .



There isn't much more to add to that sentence.

Being smart is awesome.

However, some intelligent people repeatedly commit social mistakes, one of which is lacking the perspective that there are millions of other people in any given city who are just as smart.
Not everyone who is a "self-identified" intellectual wants to be intellectually competitive every second. It gets tiresome.

I stated in another post, FloridaPhil. that I respect your desire to gamble on a weekly basis, and that your playing strategy allows you to play the way you want to play with YOUR money. It isn't what everyone wants to do, but that's okay!
Because, after all, it is YOUR money.

I understand that some people think they are obliged to save the Newbies from certain ruin if they read, for example, your opinions. Well, that isn't giving very much credit to the intelligence of those Newbies. People can figure out on their own if one strategy works for them, or not.

In sum, FP, keep on posting!

[FloridaPhil]

What we have here is two players on opposite ends of the spectrum. Bob Dancer is a high stakes professional that plays strictly for profit.  He plays only when he feels he has an edge and he has worked a long time to build a large bankroll that allows him to weather most any financial storm.  In addition, his closeness with the gaming industry, his around the clock dedication to his profession and the money he makes from his products and services make him a good living.  I on the other hand am a typical small denomination recreational player, although I believe I play a lot more hands than most.   I only have negative expectation games available to me so I choose to risk as little as possible.  I limit my loses by playing single coin 90% of the time and use what's left to play max coins, often at the $1 or $5 level. This gives me the best of two worlds; I get a lot of bang for my buck and I still get the thrill of an occasional big jackpot.  This may not be the best strategy as far as math is concerned, but it works for me.  My winning over the past three years has been because I don't waste a lot of money chasing max coin royals and I have been very lucky.  Both players exist and the casinos and players are happy.There is no "right" or "perfect" way to play this game.  It all depends upon your circumstances and what you are trying to accomplish.   The only reason I posted CS was to offer a possible alternative to throwing your money away flat betting max coins on a seriously negative expectation game.  How is saving players money dangerous?  I did not attempt to overturn Bob Dancers strategy in the slightest.  I only pointed out how it may not work as well for the average player as it works for him.  Telling people to never play a negative game is not an answer to someone who doesn't have 100% games available.The real problem is I know nothing about Bob Dancer's world and he knows nothing about mine.   I think we would all be better off if we tried to understand this obvious fact.  I have always said that CS may not be for you and it's your money so play the way you want.  I also said many times that CS is a recreational strategy that will save you money and the fact that I have won using it is pure luck.  If that's not clear to anyone by now, they're not listening.