Move Rule

[FAA]

Congratulations. You were certainly well bankrolled! Almost $500 to hammer with when you hit pay dirt.

[onemoretry]

I meant per session/day

Really, what's the point? So, if you hit a royal early in the day, you take most of a day off. If you hit late in the day, you take a couple of hours off.

Do you have different timeout periods for different denominations? Does a nickel royal merit a full day of inactivity just like a quarter one, or do you reduce it? And, if you're playing dollars and hit a royal, what then - several days off?

[FAA]

Nickel RF must be like reeling in a shoe while fishing.

[stevel96a1]

Lol so right Faa, have you been playing at ballys or caesars ac lately Faa? I kinda want to try their harrah joker poker machine 99.29 do you know if they have it at quarter level?

[FAA]

No Joker interest. Harrah’s has usually meant bust. Will not play there period.

[FloridaPhil]

Do you have different timeout periods for different denominations? Does a nickel royal merit a full day of inactivity just like a quarter one, or do you reduce it? And, if you're playing dollars and hit a royal, what then - several days off?

This is an excellent question. Here is my opinion. You may find it controversial.

If the odds of the game you are playing plus the comps are negative, you are going to have a cost to play. The smaller your session coin-in, the less it costs. For example, two players are playing the same 98% video poker game side by side. One is playing quarters. The other is playing dollars. The math does not foretell which player will win or lose in any one session. Basic math will tell you the dollar player will have a higher long term cost assuming the odds and comps are the same.

If the quarter player plays 70% of his hands at quarters and 30% at dollars, his coin-in is a little less than a 50 cent player playing the same game. This requires a bigger bankroll. What he gains is the ability to profit from being at the right place at the right time. A $4,000 royal becomes a possibility. If he stays with quarter play, he will need to hit four $1,000 royals to make up this jackpot.

I have been fortunate enough to hit a number of $4,000 royals this way. I don't stop play. I switch back to playing quarters 70% of the time and dollars 30% of the time.

It is my belief that playing smaller on the majority of today's video poker games costs less long term. There is a cost to play all the video poker games I have to play. If I play dollars all day, my cost to play will increase four fold. By playing 70% of my hands at quarters and 30% at dollars, I gain the entertainment value of dollar play at a reduced cost.

There is no possible methodology that will turn a negative video poker game into a long term profit maker. I decide what I what my entertainment to look like and adjust my play accordingly.

[wildman49]

I am a mover as well, $25 on $2.50 bets, $50 on $5 bets.

[onemoretry]

This is an excellent question. Here is my opinion. You may find it controversial.

Your post that followed was in the category of "same old, same old".

And, it had absolutely no relevance to my rather whimsical question asking if different denomination royals prompted varying pause periods before resuming play.

[Tedlark]

Yes, OMT did post a "whimsical" (by his own account none the less) comment about changing denominations. This comment however should not be enough in and of itself to steer away from the original topic of switching machines and not switching denominations.

Why would a poster say that a "quarter player" played 70% of THEIR (let's not forget about the female players FP) hands at quarters and 30% at dollars? If they played 30% of their play at dollars they then would not be considered "quarter players."

[FAA]

My last two dollar excursions have been pretty good: +$283 and +$59. But I had my heart in my mouth today at Ocean. I had lost my $41 FP win plus $110. I did leave +$20. Ten dollar bet splurging didn’t yield jack.