Gold Exclusive
My Favorites
Wtf billyjoe, did DaBurglar hack your account? RNGs are random so you'll have good and bad stretches of cards to complete the royal, but the player also has no idea when all those stretches are coming, so players' average results longterm are 1 in 47 to hit it period. Otherwise the machine is clearly illegal under most states.
Personally I've missed aLL my 4 to a royal draws in a row in a casino over 3.5 years now. I've probably had at least 100 by now. But letting the machine cycle longer or shorter while praying for the draw to finally come in makes no difference. Next time I get 4 to a royal, I'll still have a 1 in 47 chance to make it.
casino integrity
-
onemoretry
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 3031
- Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:00 pm
If you have the time, try it with a few decks of cards on your kitchen table, and see what the distribution of your pool of cards looks like at the end. You are still making random selections, but I bet you will find far fewer than 1 in 47 good cards in your pool.
It's just math - and a lot of luck.
So, I'll start with ten decks of cards. I will remove from each deck the ace, king, queen and jack of diamonds, plus one other card that would be my one card discard from the other four.
I will then shuffle all ten decks and create a huge pile of cards on the kitchen table (470 cards, to be exact). The ten of diamonds will be in that pile ten times (once from each deck) and there will therefore be 460 other cards that are not the ten of diamonds.
Hmmm, lets see now - when I draw one card from that pile, there are ten chances it will be the ten of diamonds, and a huge 460 that it will not be the ten of diamonds. That's 46 to 1!
-
BillyJoe
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 3198
- Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 2:00 pm
[QUOTE=billyjoe]
If you have the time, try it with a few decks of cards on your kitchen table, and see what the distribution of your pool of cards looks like at the end. You are still making random selections, but I bet you will find far fewer than 1 in 47 good cards in your pool.
It's just math - and a lot of luck.
So, I'll start with ten decks of cards. I will remove from each deck the ace, king, queen and jack of diamonds, plus one other card that would be my one card discard from the other four.
I will then shuffle all ten decks and create a huge pile of cards on the kitchen table (470 cards, to be exact). The ten of diamonds will be in that pile ten times (once from each deck) and there will therefore be 460 other cards that are not the ten of diamonds.
Hmmm, lets see now - when I draw one card from that pile, there are ten chances it will be the ten of diamonds, and a huge 460 that it will not be the ten of diamonds. That's 46 to 1![/QUOTE]
Good start, but you did not follow the complete process.
To mimic the RNG, take your 470 cards, and select say 50 or 100 of them. NOW, from THAT pile, select the card to complete your hand. THAT'S how the random selection works in today's VP machines, to my knowledge. That is how it was explained to me by IGT.
So, your pile may have all 10 of the ten of diamonds, or none at all.
Of course, the actual machine has far more than the 470 cards used in this example to select from, but the concept is the same. When you hit "Draw", the RNG swoops into the string and grabs a set of cards, and from that set, selects the card to present.
The size and mix of the pile is random, conforming to the gaming regulations, but it is a function of the increase in the machine speed from year's ago that make the machines 'different' to some players .
If you have the time, try it with a few decks of cards on your kitchen table, and see what the distribution of your pool of cards looks like at the end. You are still making random selections, but I bet you will find far fewer than 1 in 47 good cards in your pool.
It's just math - and a lot of luck.
So, I'll start with ten decks of cards. I will remove from each deck the ace, king, queen and jack of diamonds, plus one other card that would be my one card discard from the other four.
I will then shuffle all ten decks and create a huge pile of cards on the kitchen table (470 cards, to be exact). The ten of diamonds will be in that pile ten times (once from each deck) and there will therefore be 460 other cards that are not the ten of diamonds.
Hmmm, lets see now - when I draw one card from that pile, there are ten chances it will be the ten of diamonds, and a huge 460 that it will not be the ten of diamonds. That's 46 to 1![/QUOTE]
Good start, but you did not follow the complete process.
To mimic the RNG, take your 470 cards, and select say 50 or 100 of them. NOW, from THAT pile, select the card to complete your hand. THAT'S how the random selection works in today's VP machines, to my knowledge. That is how it was explained to me by IGT.
So, your pile may have all 10 of the ten of diamonds, or none at all.
Of course, the actual machine has far more than the 470 cards used in this example to select from, but the concept is the same. When you hit "Draw", the RNG swoops into the string and grabs a set of cards, and from that set, selects the card to present.
The size and mix of the pile is random, conforming to the gaming regulations, but it is a function of the increase in the machine speed from year's ago that make the machines 'different' to some players .
-
Vman96
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 3298
- Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:49 am
To mimic the RNG, take your 470 cards, and select say 50 or 100 of them. NOW, from THAT pile, select the card to complete your hand. THAT'S how the random selection works in today's VP machines, to my knowledge. That is how it was explained to me by IGT.
So, your pile may have all 10 of the ten of diamonds, or none at all.
But if you have ALL 10 of the Royal cards in that sample of 100, then your chances of hitting the royal would become 10/100 = 10%. So scenarios like this make up for the times you grabbed zero of the Royal cards from the 470. In the end, doing this over and over and over and over and over and over leads to the chances of completing the Royal still to be 1 in 47. Otherwise, it breaks the law.
Unfortunately their explanation somehow made you forget that the RNG can be MORE heavily weighted in the cards you want at times!
Your argument currently sounds like the blackjack player that gets mad at the other player making the wrong play. Sometimes the wrong play helps that mad player win too!!! And in the end, other players' actions cancel out the effects on your results. But the player that complains about it never seems to consider that.
-
BillyJoe
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 3198
- Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 2:00 pm
[QUOTE=billyjoe]
To mimic the RNG, take your 470 cards, and select say 50 or 100 of them. NOW, from THAT pile, select the card to complete your hand. THAT'S how the random selection works in today's VP machines, to my knowledge. That is how it was explained to me by IGT.
So, your pile may have all 10 of the ten of diamonds, or none at all.
But if you have ALL 10 of the Royal cards in that sample of 100, then your chances of hitting the royal would become 10/100 = 10%. So scenarios like this make up for the times you grabbed zero of the Royal cards from the 470. In the end, doing this over and over and over and over and over and over leads to the chances of completing the Royal still to be 1 in 47. Otherwise, it breaks the law.
[/QUOTE]
I do not disagree with you, VMan. But the key to that argument is OVER TIME, and over the "life" of that machine. How many opportunities do you have to fill in a four to the royal on a particular machine?
I just wanted to make the point that, when you are presented with that opportunity, that PARTICULAR opportunity is NOT NECESSARILY a 1 in 47 shot. It, in fact, may be higher, but is probably lower, since the opportunity for a poor set of cards to draw from is greater.
This, once again, is different from the 'old' machines that chose ten cards at the start. In that case, EVERY opportunity for your fifth RF card was a 1 in 47 chance.
To mimic the RNG, take your 470 cards, and select say 50 or 100 of them. NOW, from THAT pile, select the card to complete your hand. THAT'S how the random selection works in today's VP machines, to my knowledge. That is how it was explained to me by IGT.
So, your pile may have all 10 of the ten of diamonds, or none at all.
But if you have ALL 10 of the Royal cards in that sample of 100, then your chances of hitting the royal would become 10/100 = 10%. So scenarios like this make up for the times you grabbed zero of the Royal cards from the 470. In the end, doing this over and over and over and over and over and over leads to the chances of completing the Royal still to be 1 in 47. Otherwise, it breaks the law.
[/QUOTE]
I do not disagree with you, VMan. But the key to that argument is OVER TIME, and over the "life" of that machine. How many opportunities do you have to fill in a four to the royal on a particular machine?
I just wanted to make the point that, when you are presented with that opportunity, that PARTICULAR opportunity is NOT NECESSARILY a 1 in 47 shot. It, in fact, may be higher, but is probably lower, since the opportunity for a poor set of cards to draw from is greater.
This, once again, is different from the 'old' machines that chose ten cards at the start. In that case, EVERY opportunity for your fifth RF card was a 1 in 47 chance.
-
Vman96
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 3298
- Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:49 am
I'm not sure what those people at IGT fed you...but obviously it's thrown you off.
You agree it's 1 in 47 longterm...but it's worse odds shortterm? How? At some point better odds would have to appear to make that shortfall up...when does that happen?
As for individual players, yes there will be unlucky ?!#%$ like me that hit 4 to a Royal 1 in 60 times, and then there were be lucky ?!#%$ that hit it 1 in 25 times... Hell my ex-fiancee has hit a quarter royal in less than 5000 hands lifetime...Damn ?!#%$. But add everyone's stats together for the last 30 years of VP in "random and equally probable" states and you'll get something like 1 in 47.00000000001 or 1 in 46.99999999999.
These events are SO RARE, it takes millions of hands to have even a small sense of "expectation". But that doesn't mean the machines are not giving out the expected values of these events to all players.
You agree it's 1 in 47 longterm...but it's worse odds shortterm? How? At some point better odds would have to appear to make that shortfall up...when does that happen?
As for individual players, yes there will be unlucky ?!#%$ like me that hit 4 to a Royal 1 in 60 times, and then there were be lucky ?!#%$ that hit it 1 in 25 times... Hell my ex-fiancee has hit a quarter royal in less than 5000 hands lifetime...Damn ?!#%$. But add everyone's stats together for the last 30 years of VP in "random and equally probable" states and you'll get something like 1 in 47.00000000001 or 1 in 46.99999999999.
These events are SO RARE, it takes millions of hands to have even a small sense of "expectation". But that doesn't mean the machines are not giving out the expected values of these events to all players.
-
notes1
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 3143
- Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:18 am
Lots of interesting info and discussions, much of which i had never heard of. From OTABILL posting info on other thread about different types of RNG to billyjoe and Vman discussion of how the 'draw' card can be affected by new technology. I keep reading that Nevada would not allow this or that, but, i would guess most of the posters here play mainly outside Nevada. I would guess at least half the states allow gambling, are you assuming they all abide by Nevada laws? Nevada's economy is dependent upon gaming, but, for many casinos in other states, they operate in a government protected zone, where the government's main concern is tax revenue and jobs. Most jurisdictions look at casinos, just like lotteries, any way to increase revenue, through stealth taxation. I did a quick google search and could not find a single case, in modern history, where a casino lost their license, due to anything other than the casino having financial problems. The threat of losing a license seems overblown, they just pay a fine, which is probably much less than the profit they made from any questionable actions. Either regulators are missing things or casinos are the most honest business operating in this country. Most casino fines are for underage gambling, underage drinking or letting those on the 'do not play' list into the casino. And that only comes up, when one them wins. I am perplexed by billyjoe's posts. On one hand he states his personal experiece has not changed over the past 5 years. Yet, he keeps pointing out ways that the newer RNG makes drawing the payoff card more difficult. Maybe, he is correct. A casino does not need to do anything illegal, as they have used legal methods, designed by manufactures to make the returns to the casino higher for them and cost the player more. Just like wall street, the regulators are either incompetent, look the other way or are behind the ever changing technology. All in all, it proves my original point, to my way of thinking. The cost for the average VP player has increased over the past years.
-
Vman96
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 3298
- Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:49 am
All in all, it proves my original point, to my way of thinking. The cost for the average VP player has increased over the past years.
Your original point is generally valid, even when you examine VP that most consider "fair". Most players have succumbed to playing crappier paytables in the the past 5 to 10 years.
For example, if you go from playing 9/6 DDB to 9/5 DDB, which many players probably have done in the last 5-10 years, your expected losses per session will more than DOUBLE as a result!
Your original point is generally valid, even when you examine VP that most consider "fair". Most players have succumbed to playing crappier paytables in the the past 5 to 10 years.
For example, if you go from playing 9/6 DDB to 9/5 DDB, which many players probably have done in the last 5-10 years, your expected losses per session will more than DOUBLE as a result!
-
Tedlark
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 8583
- Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 12:29 am
Noted there is legalized casino gambling in 36 of the United States. In Illinois there are casinos as well as legalized "gaming parlors". A gaming parlor is any location that has a liquor license and serves food. These places can have up to 5 gambling machines on premises and they are syphoning revenue from the established Illinois casinos. I also am enjoying this thread but I do not necessarily agree with you that the cost of gambling has risen for the average video poker player over the past years.
-
notes1
- Video Poker Master
- Posts: 3143
- Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:18 am
Vman, thanks for validating my personal opinion that vp costs more now than in the past, game and denomination being equal. I think many agree. Those who do not have either been on a lucky streak or do not want to believe the reality of todays casino. It is beyond me to see how folks cannot accept that a market place like AC, which had seen it's gaming revenue drop almost 50% in 7 years, could keep paying the large fixed expenses and not resort to increasing the take from those who do gamble at their properities. Do you believe the increased costs are simply from reduction in payout for flushes and full houses? Not until i started reading comments on this site did i ever hear of draw cards being 'seeded'. If this is an area you are familar with, i would be interested to hear more about it. b/t/w, enjoy your discussion with bj, seems you are correct. I do not care how many decks they use, it is still 1 out of 47.
