Going For The Royal

[FloridaPhil]

Here is something interesting to think about. Next week we will be playing VP for three days in Biloxi. The trip is fully comped, so we are walking into the casino up $200 a day before we put any money in the machines. Would we make this trip if there was no gambling involved? Yes, only we would be paying for it ourselves.

The VP odds in Biloxi are in the 96-98% range. The State taxes hand pays at 3%. For these reasons, we will be playing max coin single line quarter VP. We know from experience that we must hit at least one royal to come away from this trip with a profit. We will most likely play about 5,000 hands of VP each day. That should put the odds of hitting a royal at about 30%. Of course anything can happen in three days.

My wife will play her usual Deuces Wild like she always does. I am considering playing max coin quarter Jacks or Better with one major strategy change. If I am dealt a paying pair with three to a royal, I will throw away the pair and keep three to a royal. This is similar to the strategy a player would use if playing for a big progressive.

My software says this error costs about 20 cents a hand, which is substantial. If I keep the pair I get my money back. If I hit three of a kind, I make a $2.50 profit on that hand. If I hit a quad, I make a $30 profit on that hand. If I hit a royal by keeping the three high cards, I make a $998.75 profit and pay for the trip. One of the advantages of quarter play is that you can do these things with minimal financial damage.

If I do this and hit one royal or more, does that make the math wrong? Of course not. The math says this error costs 20 something cents long term. The question is will this change tilt the odds enough in three days play to produce a royal?

Assuming you are going to play these particular games with quarters, would you do this?

[Tedlark]

See, that's the beauty of being a recreational player - sometimes just saying "What the F*&K" and going for the royal without giving it a second thought.

[Eduardo]

See, that's the beauty of being a recreational player - sometimes just saying "What the F*&K" and going for the royal without giving it a second thought.

Absolutely.!

Just so we're clear... the casino is better off when people do this.

But if you're playing for the royal, by all means go for the royal!

People who play a lot however would be better served in the long run by sticking to "the math." If your goal is to win as much as possible over time, these things can be a costly mistake. BUT... if you're more concerned about hitting a jackpot today, then some concessions are in order for the sake of entertainment.

But let's not kid ourselves. These strategy changes are best for people who don't play often. The more you play, the more it matters. What this boils down to is that if you play several times a week and this is your attitude, what you are saying is that "it's worth it to me to have some premium hands today, knowing that at the end of the year the casino will probably have more of my money than if I made the proper holds." That wouldn't sit well with me if I played all the time. But if a jackpot today is worth it on an emotional scale for someone and they understand the consequences, by all means... it's your money.

[Tedlark]

Eduardo, I believe Phil has stated many times before that he plays a lot more video poker than the average player. Would this then mean that Phil is caught in the "In between Advantage Player and Recreatrional Player" vortex? This same vortex where math may or may not apply?

[FloridaPhil]

All great comments. Going for the royal at all cost will definitely cost you more money long term. The more VP you play, the more this holds true.

The question is, could it make a significant difference in three days time? How many more possible royal flush hands will this produce? How much will being a bigger loser hurt at 20 cents a hand vs. going home a winner? I'm not sure it's worth it myself. It is interesting to think about.

[Eduardo]

The math certainly applies for someone who plays as much as Phil. There is no escaping it. He falls into the category I described above... "it's worth it to me to have some premium hands today, knowing that at the end of the year the casino will probably have more of my money than if I made the proper holds." I'm not sure that's how he would frame it, but that's the reality.

But his objective is not to be a long term winner and he is willing to pay a premium for the entertainment value he gets out of it.

Along with this, he has come to the realization that playing smaller will reduce his losses. Going for royals in off situations may hurt him, but probably not as much as proper dollar play would on these machines. So that is a trade-off. By playing smaller, he not only minimizes his losses due to the house edge, but his losses due to improper plays (while also reducing his possible winnings of course).

If he gets more pleasure out of a day with quads and royals and his goal is that pleasure... I can't fault him for how he chooses to spend his own money.

Now that he has seemingly stopped promoting any particular strategy and his endless rants, I think where he has ended up for himself is surprisingly sensible given his own goals (but not for someone with the goal of taking home more money each year).

[FAA]

You get dinged for maybe $5 a day with 25 such hands. Worth entertainment value I guess. Just leave the strategy with your room key.

[Waiting4RF]

The actual loss over 3 days, if you don't hit the royal, will be much greater than $0.20 each hand. The $0.20 per hand difference is a long term number. Assume 40 times this hand is dealt over the trip and there is no improvement on either hold's draw. Holding the high pair gets you $50. The 3 to a royal gets you $0. It is your entertainment money so have fun.

[billryan]

See, that's the beauty of being a recreational player - sometimes just saying "What the F*&K" and going for the royal without giving it a second thought.

Rules are like bones. It's fun to break them. It's okay though. Long as you state you are a recreational player, it seems "do what thou wants" is the only rule.

[Tedlark]

Sure, it's fun to break bones but it's the healing that sucks. Sure it's fun going for the royal when the math says not to but it's the drain on your wallet that sucks.