Gambling with an Edge July 28th

[Frank Kneeland]

frank i like reading your posts they are very constructive although your game is geared to high value progressives (example $3000 royal on 8-5 bp over 3% edge ) this also needs some change in play to aim for juicy royal but needs a larger bankroll and or teams to survive drought between royals in these games drains cash like the government. First, thanks. Second, I think you'd be surprised at the bankroll requirement for playing progressives vs non-progressives. What's really going on is nearly everyone is playing regular games under-bankrolled and therefore balking at mentions of realistic BR requirements.Try plugging in FPDW and FPDB, or others into VPW's RoR formula with a stable RoR like .1 and see what you find. Then compare that to a 8/5 JoB with a 14,000 coin RF and I think you'll be shocked.As an example one of the games at M had a $45,000 suggested BR, which everyone thought was high. Then I had one person that complained plug in their game of choice and it recommended $57,000 for a BR. The progressive turned out to be safer in this case.Let me know what you find and if it does indeed surprise you.~FK

[Frank Kneeland]

Has anyone tried messing around with the RoR feature in VPW since my last post?

[royal flush]

i did and games like fpdw quarters vs 99.17bonus poker with 2000 royal average about 101.25% needs double as no second place jackpot aaaa 400 credits 2222 on fpdw 1000 credits also with palms killing their games that is a big coffin nail for us all

[Frank Kneeland]

i did and games like fpdw quarters vs 99.17bonus poker with 2000 royal average about 101.25% needs double as no second place jackpot aaaa 400 credits 2222 on fpdw 1000 credits also with palms killing their games that is a big coffin nail for us allI'm sorry, but you used too many abbreviations in this post I'm having trouble understanding it.~FK

[royal flush]

my point is that one needs larger bankroll on atvantage progressive games as much payout dependant on hitting royal over 4% vs 2% on fpdw

[Frank Kneeland]

my point is that one needs larger bankroll on atvantage progressive games as much payout dependant on hitting royal over 4% vs 2% on fpdwOK now I got you. Yes progressives = bigger bankroll.Not as much bigger as you'd expect though. The higher edge does mitigate the larger variance quite a bit.~FK

[royal flush]

good point. and a point in your favor is the sudden palms downgrade likely casued by a coming sale of the palms to caesars/harrahs. i mostly moved on to live poker like omaha 8 or better. i starting with playing 21 as i count count 8 decks that played out then came "banked slots" watching the tourists play until group of games went into bonus round also vp game "flush attack" worked that way. next was vp dollar fpdw, promotions on 9/6 job double royal times 101.5+ game another promotion (the best of all) 9/6 job miss royal by one get 125 credits a 103% game sweet deal you would need a 12000 royal on 8/5 bonus poker progressive to beat that.

[Frank Kneeland]

OK, now you are just deliberately trying to make me wax nostalgic and tear up.Cheers

[royal flush]

we had a player "mickey crimm" whom also longed for the good ole days you like i have adjusted our play i went to live poker on weekends and holidays you hunted progressives that were 102+

[damule]

OMG...
 
...Bob Dancer finally stopped talking 19 minutes into the 1st show without Frank Kneeland. I need to give it a few more epidodes to hear how Bob and Richard mesh, but first impressions are that the show sucks without Frank Kneeland. So far it's been like "listening to paint dry."
 
Frank, I always thought you were a little goofy on the radio, but your wit and charm was the perfect balance to Bob's monolithic drone. I'm sure I'm not going to be the only one who notices this. I wish Bob and Richard good luck on the show, but I'm sure your future just got alot brighter Frank. Good luck dude!