Double up or not

[case]

DaBurglar:

Fair enough. Just a question. In your last line to me you said "the human factor alone (for error and weakness, not to mention ill will or intent) dictates a healthy skepticism be employed every now and then.......

If this is true then you don't believe the machines are randomly checked for payback and accuracy. Is this what you believe?

I will say there could be a few problems with Indian casinos but state run casinos.....I don't believe that.

[DaBurglar]

DaBurglar:

Fair enough. Just a question. In your last line to me you said "the human factor alone (for error and weakness, not to mention ill will or intent) dictates a healthy skepticism be employed every now and then.......

If this is true then you don't believe the machines are randomly checked for payback and accuracy. Is this what you believe?

I will say there could be a few problems with Indian casinos but state run casinos.....I don't believe that.well I respect your "FAITH" in state run casinos and your belief that the Agencies responsible for overseeing the operation(s) of the casinos in the respective states are always on top of things and do not miss any problems or issues.   But that is your choice to believe and have faith in such agencies....as for me, here is what I think and believe, based on my own personal experiences, observations and investigating over the last 20 years or so.I believe that Video Poker and slot machines are SUPPOSED to be checked randomly in all casinos in all states.......that much is obvious.     But whether or not this happens everywhere exactly as it should with nothing getting overlooked or no mistakes being made.....or without ANY fraud or cheating (either with or without complicit state agency involvement) is something I would never state for sure one way or another......I firmly believe that somewhere, at sometime in some way, there are machines in which something is not quite right.......it just stands to reason there have been, or currently are, problems or things that get missed or overlooked.    Whether it is intentional, systemic or isolated random instances is also impossible to say for sure.......I believe that of all the states, Nevada has the most trustworthy and well functioning  regulatory gaming agency in the WORLD;  this goes without saying, they have too much experience, and too much at stake for them to be nonchalant or to put their entire state economy at risk.  It does not mean it is impossible for places like Vegas to have problems, but I believe that Nevada casinos are held to the most consistent and strident rules and regs out there, and if any state ACTUALLY regularly checks machines in more than a superficial or cursory way, it is Nevada.   On the opposite end of the spectrum is New Jersey and Atlantic City......I believe that it is VERY possible some machines in AC casinos (past or present) have either been not functioning properly or functioning out of established acceptable ranges or protocols (such as certain VIDEO POKER machines dealing far more busted or non paying hands than is normal.)   This is due to the sorry state of the regulatory agency(ies) in New Jersey and the state of the casino business in general.......the resources are just no longer there, the incentive to check casinos is no longer there (mainly because, "What if they find something" is a situation NO ONE WANTS to deal with now.)    As evidence that AC is ripe for some sort of shenanigans I simply point to the status prior to 2007 and after 2007 of the City's gaming industry:    Until 2007 the NJ gaming agency had permanent 24/7 presence in all casino floors, with a visible office on the casino floor and anywhere from 5 to 7 agents at all times roaming the premises in addition to casino security.    As the bottom fell out of the NJ casino market, by the end of 2009 these on site presences were gone, and soon after massive layoffs within the NJ Gaming AGency followed by a "merger" with the State Police left New Jersey with a highly suspect (in many people's eyes) ability to monitor its ever shrinking casino industry.    You see where I am going with that, no need to beat the horse anymore......I maintain such desperate times and such a depressed environment and market makes it RIPE for someone (either a casino executive, or a cabal of casino managers and workers, or perhaps someone from the outside like a state official, or any combo of such people) to TRY and pull some shenanigans to reap some ill gotten gains via cheating or fraud or whatever.     I am just saying it is POSSIBLE given all that is going on ....... too many other industries (finance, banking, MAnufacturing, Defense) that are highly regulated and monitored have all fallen prey to some crap at one time or another.

[case]

Your replies are well thought out and well written. I thank you for that. While your opinion and mine are different, I can't say you are wrong. My results have not changed much over the years (good days, years and bad days,years). I am retired and gamble across the country. Believe me when I say I gamble way more than most people.

I remember when the only place to gamble was Nevada and Atlantic City. Even back then people accused the casinos of cheating and saying things like they don't pay out like they used to. Things never change I guess.

Thank you again for giving me your point of view. I can respect that.

[DaBurglar]

Your replies are well thought out and well written. I thank you for that. While your opinion and mine are different, I can't say you are wrong. My results have not changed much over the years (good days, years and bad days,years). I am retired and gamble across the country. Believe me when I say I gamble way more than most people.

I remember when the only place to gamble was Nevada and Atlantic City. Even back then people accused the casinos of cheating and saying things like they don't pay out like they used to. Things never change I guess.

Thank you again for giving me your point of view. I can respect that.I for one would be very interested in hearing some of your stories and experiences, especially things that are too long or involved, or too sensitive, to share on this forum/website.     If you are planning any trips to AC please let me know here on this forum, perhaps we can get together and compare notes and stories.....?Also, if you are going to be in Vegas sometime this autumn (late September, early October) let it be known on this forum......I too recall during the early to mid 1990s (1992 thru 1998 or so) when Vegas/Reno and AC  were the primary gambling destinations, that certain people even then were chirping how the casinos were "messing with" the games and players, etc.      But the main difference, as far as I was concerned, was back then I was NOT one of those people.......once I mastered basic Video Poker strategy and learned my way around and thru various casino comp systems and how the game worked, from 1996 thru 2005 I honestly felt then that I was getting a decent fair shake with the games I played, and of course, looking back TODAY I KNOW I was getting a fair shake in terms of the results I had playing VP up thru 2005-2006 in Nevada......Comparing play results, and the ebb and flow of the games on most VP machines in TODAY's casinos in AC, there is NO WAY it is the same ...... NO WAY NO WAY NO WAY!   

[billryan]

Bump of an old thread, as I didn't find it the first search and started a new one.
Sadly, not a lot of good information. A couple of pearls, though.

[Vman96]

Like DaBurglar's claim of running so bad on double up that Excel can't even calculate the odds of it happening on a fair game? And he claimed it happened in Nevada!   

He claimed he only won or pushed on 35% of his attempts in 21,500 trials. FYI, the odds of winning or pushing 39.847% of 21,500 double up attempts on a "fair game" is:

1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

That's a one with 323 zeros after it. That's as far as Excel will go until they say, "Screw it, it's zero." So I couldn't calculate the odds of only winning or pushing 35%, but it's more unlikely than that number above. You should win or push 52.94% of the time on average.   

[DaBurglar]

Like DaBurglar's claim of running so bad on double up that Excel can't even calculate the odds of it happening on a fair game? And he claimed it happened in Nevada!   

He claimed he only won or pushed on 35% of his attempts in 21,500 trials. FYI, the odds of winning or pushing 39.847% of 21,500 double up attempts on a "fair game" is:

1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

That's a one with 323 zeros after it. That's as far as Excel will go until they say, "Screw it, it's zero." So I couldn't calculate the odds of only winning or pushing 35%, but it's more unlikely than that number above. You should win or push 52.94% of the time on average.   Wow, what a moldy oldie thread to dig up.....VMAN96, I remember this well (it's an easy thing to retain since it's a straightforward issue & scenario).....I didn't  "CLAIM", I stated an emphatic conclusion I arrived at via a limited but focused collection of data over a fixed time period (2003, or thereabouts).....And yes back then I played exclusively in Nevada casinos.....My position on DOUBLE-UP has not changed....I am positive the function/option does NOT operate in the way we all think and assume it does.....the option is based on some sort of algorithm or program that tilts the double-up "game" in favor of the house....as I stated several years back in the above posts, I find it difficult to believe today's casinos allow such a potentially advantageous aspect for players to exist on an already tough game for casinos to tolerate in general (i.e. Video Poker itself!)   Therefore to allow this option to exist as much as it does everywhere that it does, there MUST be some part of the games' function & resolution of play results that tilts the final results toward the house.Otherwise, it's truly like a table game existing that simply reads "Coin Toss:  Bet Range $1 to $999"      Would never happen....Sidenote:   I also adamantly maintain that if a player in one of today's casinos in AC chooses Double Up consistently, you will be completely decimated.    I will personally meet anyone anywhere in one of AC's remaining casinos that offer Double Up and play a challenge of sorts with a bet of an agreed upon amount, with me taking the side of "Anti Double Up"!   Side-Sidenote:   Double Up does NOT add or in any way influence a players accumulation of Reward Credits, Comp or Player points, etc etc etc      The only way it could influence your player card or club results would be if you were incredibly lucky and somehow increased your overall Bankroll via using the double Up option, which in turn allowed you to play far more and far longer, thereby increasing your player club comps/credits/ranking etc etc

[New2vp]

Like DaBurglar's claim of running so bad on double up that Excel can't even calculate the odds of it happening on a fair game? And he claimed it happened in Nevada!   

He claimed he only won or pushed on 35% of his attempts in 21,500 trials. FYI, the odds of winning or pushing 39.847% of 21,500 double up attempts on a "fair game" is:

1 in 10^323 (I shortened this to eliminate the scrolling at the bottom--New2vp)

That's a one with 323 zeros after it. That's as far as Excel will go until they say, "Screw it, it's zero." So I couldn't calculate the odds of only winning or pushing 35%, but it's more unlikely than that number above. You should win or push 52.94% of the time on average.   Oh, come on, Vman, you don't think our DaBurglar would ever stretch the truth just a little to speak more about rigged video poker like the long line of clones that we used to have on this forum before DB abruptly arrived and became one of the most prolific posters, do you?I want to go on record as saying I believe every word of brilliance that I see in his posts.  Clearly, he is the most intelligent person in the room, some room anyway.  He's made that clear in any number of posts, explaining his exploits in other areas from chess to live poker to politics and math.  He is so smart that here he was able to conduct a statistical test to determine that the double up feature was clearly not a fair game in Las Vegas.  And he was so smart that he was able to record over 100 times as many cases as any statistician would have needed to arrive at that conclusion given results like 65% losers while only 35% win or tie.And let's not forget that there was real money involved in doing this.  Anyone care to guess how much money was lost in conducting this test?  Well, he gives us a clue letting us know his favorite game is Jacks or Better, while also playing some similar games, and that he doubled on all outcomes less valuable than a full house.He was so smart that he lost somewhere in the neighborhood of $15-$16,000 by running this experiment more than 100 times longer than necessary to determine a bias.  And who knows how much was lost in the times when he used double-up before and his note-taking was not so painstakingly detailed.  And he still occasionally used the double-up feature in Atlantic City, without recording results, mind you!?!  What dedication!  Sacrificing his own fortune just so he could valiantly warn us of the evils of rampant video poker rigging!  What a guy!And if we remember correctly, he was a very successful gambler in Vegas before his Atlantic City travails.  How he was successful when exposing more than 95% of his winners* to the 30%+ house edge that he observed in the Vegas double-up feature is just staggering to comprehend.  Like I said, this must have been some brilliant maneuvering!So truth or fiction?  Brilliant or challenged?  What is the simplest set of facts explaining posts like this?Like I originally stated, I am still on the record:  I believe every word of brilliance that I see in his posts.*The only winners that he did not use the double-up on were full houses, quads, straight flushes and royal flushes.  As most video poker players know, by calculation or experience, these big wins make up a tiny fraction of winning outcomes, less than 5%.

I have, at various times throughout my player history going back to 1995
when I first encountered the double up option, regularly utilized it
for any win on a video poker hand below full house.....that is to say, I
used to consistently hit "YES" on double up for any Jacks or better, 2
pair, 3 of a kind, Straight or flush when playing video poker;   I
played this way from about 1996 thru 1998, then I stopped using it for a
while, then started using it again in 2002 thru 2004, then reduced to
only sporadic usage.Almost ALL my play during the above time
periods was in Las Vegas and/or Reno, and most of my play was on JOB
(9/6 and even a few 10/7 machines which could still be found as late as
the mid 2000s in a few Nevada locales;  I also played a fair amount of
Bonus Poker and DDB as well.....I used to keep detailed and
copious records of my play back then, and I can confidently state that
my success rate at hitting double up functions on the games I played up
through 2004/2005 was around 33%.......no where near 50%, and it goes
beyond this mere statistical summary/average:     During one stretch
from May 2002 thru MArch of 2003, I played a total 21,500 hands that
involved me hitting the double up feature ...during this stretch my
success was a little higher than my average (I won or tied about 35% of
the time), but amongst the 65% hands that I lost, almost 60% of those
were hands that I either hand NO chance of winning or drawing (meaning
ALL the cards amongst the four choices were losers), and about 10% ONLY a
chance of a draw (whereby at least ONE of the four was a "draw"). . . .
. very very fishy to me.....Even these last few years in AC,
while I do not REGULARLY utilize double up, of the few times I have used
it, I definitely have lost more often than I won......and I do not know
any single person who can report differently.


And who doesn't remember the few 10/7 Jacks or Better games that survived as late as the mid 2000's?  Boy, those must have been the days!By the way, Vman, nice calculating!  Sorry if my post was too far out of line with what you wrote.

[pokerforme]

Lmfao. Get ready for 20,000 words of dribble to expose your post as mean hearted and just not right. Bravo guys!

[New2vp]

Lmfao. Get ready for 20,000 words of dribble to expose your post as mean hearted and just not right. Bravo guys!Thanks, pokerforme.  I'm not certain I understand, though.  My response was to Vman.  He is not that wordy and gets to his points rather quickly.Oh ... you mean the other guy.  Well, I suppose he might have something to say.  If I were him I would rather not respond and have more people reading this in Active Topics.  But clearly I do not think I can accurately predict his thought patterns.  Who knows, maybe he will agree with me.