Objective in playing VP

[Lucky Larry]

[QUOTE=Lucky Larry] Hey, we make part of our two hour drives enjoyable by counting the number of hawks on the fence posts and telephone poles as we drive through the back roads and rice fields to the casino.
 
For a varied experience, try counting tractors. [/QUOTE]

We may have to give that a try but counting tractors would probably make it a long trip. Once we leave the Interstate to take the back road, half the trip is along a Wildlife Management Area and the rice fields are huge but few pieces of equipment except during harvest time. We've used to count   alligators but after Hurricane Ike most were killed by the salt water storm surge.

[Lucky Larry]

[QUOTE=faygo][QUOTE=Lucky Larry] Hey, we make part of our two hour drives enjoyable by counting the number of hawks on the fence posts and telephone poles as we drive through the back roads and rice fields to the casino.
  Actually, LL, the wife and I point out hawks to each other on our drives too. I think they are radar detectors for the police to catch speeders. [/QUOTE]

billyjoe,
You may be right. Along one 20 mile section of Interstate 10 the Public Safety officer often out number the hawks covering the rice fields but they could be detectors.

On the back road though there is rarely an officer but during the winter frequently 50 plus hawks in a 18-20 mile run.

[Frank Kneeland]

At a modest clip of 700 hands per hour on dollar machines you be expected to get about 8 full houses per hour. That's -$40 per hour compared to a machine that paid 1 more for the Full House and was in all other ways similar. Assuming 8 hours of play in a day that comes to $320 in extra loses per day.So you'd be losing 5.5 times American minimum hourly wage, and more than double the Average Daily income of U.S. citizens each day you played.In one week this would cost you over $2,000.I believe the point you were making was that if you got 1 bonus 4k it would make up for the difference. Sadly, the math doesn't work that way, because you have to add the extra 4K to both sides of the equation for comparison. Certainly a $400 4k would make up for $320 in losses, but you still be down $320 more than you'd have been playing on the better return machine with the same hands. Imagine these results:8/6 Machine result without extra 4k = -$3209/6 Machine result without extra 4K = $08/6 Machine result with extra 4k = +$80
9/6 Machine result with extra 4K = +$400Getting lucky doesn't wipe away the difference, it just makes it harder to notice.If you compare running good on a bad machine to running bad on a good machine you aren't making a fair comparison. Imagine identical hands played on each and then the choice is clear.~FK

[royal flush]

well put for newer players so they can have more play and more shots at the big royal

[BillyJoe]

At a modest clip of 700 hands per hour on dollar machines you be expected to get about 8 full houses per hour. That's -$40 per hour compared to a machine that paid 1 more for the Full House and was in all other ways similar. Assuming 8 hours of play in a day that comes to $320 in extra loses per day.So you'd be losing 5.5 times American minimum hourly wage, and more than double the Average Daily income of U.S. citizens each day you played.In one week this would cost you over $2,000.I believe the point you were making was that if you got 1 bonus 4k it would make up for the difference. Sadly, the math doesn't work that way, because you have to add the extra 4K to both sides of the equation for comparison. Certainly a $400 4k would make up for $320 in losses, but you still be down $320 more than you'd have been playing on the better return machine with the same hands. Imagine these results:8/6 Machine result without extra 4k = -$3209/6 Machine result without extra 4K = $08/6 Machine result with extra 4k = +$80
9/6 Machine result with extra 4K = +$400Getting lucky doesn't wipe away the difference, it just makes it harder to notice.If you compare running good on a bad machine to running bad on a good machine you aren't making a fair comparison. Imagine identical hands played on each and then the choice is clear.~FK
Shockingly , I think you missed my point, Frank. I would prefer to play a 9/5 TDB (97.02%) at a large Strip casino, with comps, than a a 9/6 JOB (99.55%) at an off-strip casino. TDB yields 4K for AWAK, while JOB yields 125. In my view, "getting lucky' is getting the right hand on the right game within a playing session. That's all.

[Frank Kneeland]

Shockingly , I think you missed my point, Frank. I would prefer to play a 9/5 TDB (97.02%) at a large Strip casino, with comps, than a a 9/6 JOB (99.55%) at an off-strip casino. TDB yields 4K for AWAK, while JOB yields 125. In my view, "getting lucky' is getting the right hand on the right game within a playing session. That's all.

And unless you increase your understanding of probability math your opinion won't change. I've been playing VP professionally for 24 years, and I can say for me that luck has had almost nothing to do with it.

[Frank Kneeland]

Riddle me this:
Most people that aren't good at math at least know their limitations and
defer to those with superior math skills for anything math related....except gambling. (I'm
not talking about anyone specific here, this is a general comment.)

I'd love to understand this phenomenon of non-deferment, even in areas where someone else clearly has more knowledge.In gambling related matters people seem to hold their own opinions in higher regard than anyone else's, regardless of their own level of knowledge. It's really bizarre if you think about it.If you weren't a surgeon yourself, you would not tell your doctor how to operate on you. But if it's gambling advice, everyone's an expert. Any thoughts???

[shadowman]

Frank, I think this is more of a male thing. I don't see females operating that way.
 
The only thing I can say is most males figure they are expected to understand gambling and will not defer to anyone else. I find the same thing happens for other male related activities. Picking winners in sports, playing sports, driving, etc. For some reason the male ego makes it difficult for them to accept the opinions of anyone, including professionals.

[Frank Kneeland]

Frank, I think this is more of a male thing. I don't see females operating that way.
 
The only thing I can say is most males figure they are expected to understand gambling and will not defer to anyone else. I find the same thing happens for other male related activities. Picking winners in sports, playing sports, driving, etc. For some reason the male ego makes it difficult for them to accept the opinions of anyone, including professionals.Now this to me is an interesting discussion. Are you saying that a recreational driver would not accept the advice of a "Dale Earnhardt"? Or that a recreational baseball payer would not accept the advice of a "Joe Dimaggio"? I think they would. I think they would defer without question.I believe the disconnect has to be more complicated than mere ego.Perhaps there is a lack of comprehension in how wide the gap is, or because of the inclusion of randomness people have a hard time seeing the difference good advice makes in a time scale their minds can comprehend and detect.It's well known that we humans tend to be ridiculously short-sighted unless we are very proactive about fighting our inherent deficits.I also think cognitive dissonance must be playing a huge part since most normal people often seek gambling knowledge AFTER they are already engaged in gambling. What they are looking for is justification of their already existing patterns. Evidence that what the have been doing was not in their best interest is therefore summarily dismissed, since to accept it they would also have to admit to themselves that up 'till that point they had been in error.Sunk Cost Bias would seem to be in play. If given a choice between admitting a personal failing or justifying their behavior, a lot of people are choosing justification proportionate to how much they have sunk into the activity. The more their lifetime losses the less likely they are to take advice and the more they cling to their habits, because admitting they were wrong becomes worse emotionally proportionate to how much they have lost.I'm not telling anyone anything here. I'm asking. I do not know the reason for sure. I have only conjecture.I know that newbie gamblers tend to listen more. And I have had personal experience with several gamblers that by their own admission have been losing every year for 30 years and won't change a thing.It is bizarre and counter-intuitive.~FK

[BillyJoe]

[QUOTE=billy joe]

Shockingly , I think you missed my point, Frank. I would prefer to play a 9/5 TDB (97.02%) at a large Strip casino, with comps, than a a 9/6 JOB (99.55%) at an off-strip casino. TDB yields 4K for AWAK, while JOB yields 125. In my view, "getting lucky' is getting the right hand on the right game within a playing session. That's all.

And unless you increase your understanding of probability math your opinion won't change. I've been playing VP professionally for 24 years, and I can say for me that luck has had almost nothing to do with it.

[/QUOTE]
OK .  Can you tell me, then, why do you have a "team" of players playing a progressive bank of VP machines, trying to get the RF progressive jackpot?  Isn't the reason being to increase the probability of one of them hitting an RF through more hands being played? That is my point - the odds on hitting an RF by any one member of your team does not change, but the probability of the team  hitting an RF increases because more hands are being played. 
 
Translate that to the individual VP player, and the probability of reaching the expected return on a given machine's pay table is DIRECTLY related to how many hands they play, keeping in mind that exceeding the paytable's expected return with a (GASP!) LUCKY HIT on a premium hand in the short run, is ALSO a miss.
 
So from an individual's perspective, reaching EXACTLY the expected return as dictated by the pay table is virtually impossible, while from the casino's perspective, it is far more likely the machine will perform MORE profitably  for the casino than the paytable's expected return, through RFhits with less than max bets and non-perfect playing strategies from all the players.
 
For the casual player, putting themselves on a strong pay table game may help increase their personal return, and having the knowledge to play in a fashion that increases their returns is a big component. But knowledge of how to play will not guarantee a winning session, or even a session that will approach the machine's expected return, since they are not playing enough hands. A long odds hit of a premium hand, (dare I say, a LUCKY hit) in the short run, makes a much bigger difference in their return on any given session.  
 
I'm sorry, Frank, but your being a professional for 24 years does not change that, and I am comfortable with my understanding of probability.