Bookends

[kennybobby]

In trying to read this and keep current with our version of a cyber-soap...I just wondered from the one comment-- who is the famous gambler that was made mention of?
please....and thank you

[FloridaPhil]

What a hoot!  Bob has an evil sense of humor and I love it when he jumps in on these posts.  Actually, I believe he is right about this.  You play 500 hands and this scenario never
happens.  Then on the 501st hand you draw two pair, don't get it and the card you need comes up on the next draw.  Your mind sees this and all of a sudden you are in "conspiracy mode".  You only remember that hand because you noticed it more.  This happens to me all the time when I come back from the casino and tell my wife exactly how many royals I missed by one card! 

[mdmick67]

the original poster was making a statement, based on their observations. he/she may very well be wrong, but here is no need to scold them. there are other ways to voice one's opposition or point out where one disagrees.  i thought that was a big reason for the forum, ask questions, get answers, give advice or correct inaccurate assumptions.    not everyone here has spent their entire life banging on a VP machine.
Well said this is a great forum,   Not everyone here is a so called know it all.

[Vman96]

And i feel Bob should have been more clear that if the card of the same rank and suit appears in the next hand that counts as a win for him. A card of any particular rank regardless of suit has slightly larger than a 1 in 3 chance of appearing.

I also love how Bob never responded to my bet offer that a casino would never offer a standard bonus poker deluxe paytable with "Quick Quads" rules. Probably doesn't like admitting when he's wrong.

Bonus poker deluxe with quick quads discussion

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=fairwayray]Has anyone else noticed how you almost never help a pair when they are bookends?[/quote]I think this forum is pretty decent when it comes to being open to the differing opinions of it's members.   Everyone is entitled to his/her own opinions and should have the right to express it freely.  I don't think Bob Dancer is right about everything in this world.  I do think it's a riot how he knows exactly how to push people's buttons.  Don't take this forum too seriously.  It's only video poker...  

[Galeygoo]

Not everyone here is a so called know it all.

[BobDancer]

I also love how Bob never responded to my bet offer that a casino would never offer a standard bonus poker deluxe paytable with "Quick Quads" rules. Probably doesn't like admitting when he's wrong.

Bonus poker deluxe with quick quads discussionI never saw your post until you pointed it out today. Unlike some on this forum, I check in occasionally and then not again for some time. If you really need me to answer a polite question, send it to bobdancerlasvegas@yahoo.com   I'm not looking for a pen pal and I know how to delete offensive emails.Insofar as your particular proposed bet goes, I'm not interested. videopoker.com has not been adding new pay schedules to Quick Quads --- and certainly would not add one that is 103+%I did not think the return would be that high --- so I was wrong about a bet of 400 for each quad being possible.. But it would be possible to make a pseudo-Bonus Poker Deluxe game where quads pay 350 instead of 400. The 8/5 version of that game would return 99.15% --- which puts it into the range offered by some casinos. If you really want 400 for quads, you have to reduce somewhere else --- perhaps 3-of-a-kind receiving 2 instead of 3. There are a number of ways to "cut up the pie" to make it in ranges acceptable to both players and casinos --- if videopoker.com wanted to add more pay schedules

[BobDancer]

the original poster was making a statement, based on their observations. he/she may very well be wrong, but here is no need to scold them. there are other ways to voice one's opposition or point out where one disagrees. I certainly wasn't scolding anyone. I was offering a proposition.There's a tradition in gambling that when there is a difference of opinion, you set up a trial and gamble on it. When I played backgammon back in the 70s and 80s, I probably participated in multi-thousands of these so-called props.For the Superbowl, casinos put out hundreds of prop bets --- where you can take either side --- with a spread which allows the sports book to make a profit. Would you say the sports book is scolding players for betting either side of these props? I certainly wouldn't.There are a number of famous weight loss props that have gone on between gamblers. During the WSOP, there are dozens of props between players of either the last-longer type, or will somebody win a bracelet, or which player will win the most money during the WSOP. We've spoken about a number of these on the GWAE radio show.Maybe you aren't aware of this tradition. But video poker is a gambling game and settling differences of opinion by betting on props is well established among gamblers.And yes I know this is not a gambling site. But it's a site dedicated to playing a gambling game. And in that context, suggesting a prop bet is proper. If the original poster doesn't want to take that prop bet, he doesn't have to. Not taking a prop bet can be for any number of reasons --- and he doesn't even have to specify which reason.

[FloridaPhil]

Bob, I'll bet you a $1,000 I can catch more bass than you can in an hour.  

[Vman96]

[QUOTE=Vman96]
I also love how Bob never responded to my bet offer that a casino would never offer a standard bonus poker deluxe paytable with "Quick Quads" rules. Probably doesn't like admitting when he's wrong.

Bonus poker deluxe with quick quads discussionI never saw your post until you pointed it out today. Unlike some on this forum, I check in occasionally and then not again for some time. If you really need me to answer a polite question, send it to bobdancerlasvegas@yahoo.com   I'm not looking for a pen pal and I know how to delete offensive emails.Insofar as your particular proposed bet goes, I'm not interested. videopoker.com has not been adding new pay schedules to Quick Quads --- and certainly would not add one that is 103+%I did not think the return would be that high --- so I was wrong about a bet of 400 for each quad being possible.. But it would be possible to make a pseudo-Bonus Poker Deluxe game where quads pay 350 instead of 400. The 8/5 version of that game would return 99.15% --- which puts it into the range offered by some casinos. If you really want 400 for quads, you have to reduce somewhere else --- perhaps 3-of-a-kind receiving 2 instead of 3. There are a number of ways to "cut up the pie" to make it in ranges acceptable to both players and casinos --- if videopoker.com wanted to add more pay schedules[/QUOTE]

Right. Something else would have to be changed downward. And I was mostly just ribbing you a bit for forgetting about the thread. I know you are sporadic here. Posting here everyday may drive you up a wall anyway.

And on my last trip to Vegas, one of your "go to" games was also good to me! Broke two pair for it too! Pulled that draw off twice in two months. Huge for me!