100 Play Vs Single Play

[XAllKnightX]

Out of curiosity has any one else noticed a difference in the frequency of dealt sets (three of a kinds) in 100 play compared to single play? Especially 100 play Quick Quads. I know there are laws that govern the ability of a casino or game manufacturer to manipulate results, in video poker playing with a legitimate deck of cards being represented by the RNG is one of the laws. My question is not one of legal representation but rather is it possible to program a game with a certain personality that allows it to perform in a way that does not violate law but also does not provide a particularly fair game to the player?

[asteroid]

Yes. One common technique is to make the optimal strategy of the VP variant so complicated that it is almost impossible for a person to play it correctly. This increases the casino's hold. For example Bonus Streak Ultimate X is such a game. My question is not one of legal representation but rather is it possible to program a game with a certain personality that allows it to perform in a way that does not violate law but also does not provide a particularly fair game to the player?

[billryan]

Dealt sets will occur much more frequently in quick quads than in a normal game.

[BobDancer]

Dealt sets will occur much more frequently in quick quads than in a normal game. I strongly disagree. First of all, a "set" and "3 of a kind" in poker are not the same thing. Look it up, if you care. For this response, I'm calling them "trips."Trips happen every 47.33 hands on average in all 52-card games with no wild cards. That includes single-line video poker, Triple Play, Hundred Play, Spin Poker, Quick Quads, Ultimate X --- etc. That includes Jacks or Better, Double Bonus, White Hot Aces, Super Double Bonus, etc. etc.Specific trips --- say AAA or 222  or KKK --- occur 1/13 as often as trips in general --- which means once every 615.3 hands. The fact that you value AAA more than KKK (in most games) is irrelevant. Are there dry spells where relatively few trips are dealt? Of course. And you will also go through periods where you get more trips than expected. Over time, it'll come out pretty close. The machine is just dealing cards fairly from a freshly shuffled deck every time. I believe it and invest millions of dollars a month assuming it is true. My results over time have been very close to what they should be.

[BobDancer]

Yes. One common technique is to make the optimal strategy of the VP variant so complicated that it is almost impossible for a person to play it correctly. This increases the casino's hold. For example Bonus Streak Ultimate X is such a game.
I very much doubt this.I'm not disputing Bonus Streak is very difficult to play. It is. I'm personally avoiding it until I see a strategy I trust on a game where the return is high enough (given the slot club, promotions, etc.,  that exist in that particular casino.)What I'm disputing is that game designers create games with optimal strategy in mind. Generally speaking, game designers aren't very strong players. Their goal is to make games that players want to play and casinos will put in their casinos. That's it.For the most part, game designers are not "taking sides" in the player-casino "contest." If a game is too difficult, it probably is going to fail. If a game pays too little, players will learn to avoid it. If a game plays too much, casinos will pull it. Game designers often create several pay schedules so that each casino's slot director can put the game in whose return fits into the strategy of that particular casino.Players always have the right to refuse to play video poker games that are too tight or too complicated. There are players on this site --- especially in the Recreational Forum --- who believe players MUST play the bad games offered by the casinos, but that simply isn't true.

[billryan]

   When I said a set occurs more often, I was using his words.
In Quick quads, 6,6,4,3,2, you keep the 6,6,4,2 as a 3OAK, no? Using that as my standard, you will absolutely have more hands where it occurs.

[paco13]

Dunno if it's right or wrong but that's what I do in that situation Bill.

[BobDancer]

   When I said a set occurs more often, I was using his words.
In Quick quads, 6,6,4,3,2, you keep the 6,6,4,2 as a 3OAK, no? Using that as my standard, you will absolutely have more hands where it occurs. you are correct. in my writings i call holding 6642 a 'quick trip,' but the phrase is my own invention and not iniversally used. if you include quick trips, then yes there are more total trips in quick quads

[loldongs666]

where the !@%$# have you found a 100-play QQ machine, jeeeez

[Vman96]

[QUOTE=asteroid]
Yes. One common technique is to make the optimal strategy of the VP variant so complicated that it is almost impossible for a person to play it correctly. This increases the casino's hold. For example Bonus Streak Ultimate X is such a game.
I very much doubt this.I'm not disputing Bonus Streak is very difficult to play. It is. I'm personally avoiding it until I see a strategy I trust on a game where the return is high enough (given the slot club, promotions, etc.,  that exist in that particular casino.)What I'm disputing is that game designers create games with optimal strategy in mind. Generally speaking, game designers aren't very strong players. Their goal is to make games that players want to play and casinos will put in their casinos. That's it.For the most part, game designers are not "taking sides" in the player-casino "contest." If a game is too difficult, it probably is going to fail. If a game pays too little, players will learn to avoid it. If a game plays too much, casinos will pull it. Game designers often create several pay schedules so that each casino's slot director can put the game in whose return fits into the strategy of that particular casino.Players always have the right to refuse to play video poker games that are too tight or too complicated. There are players on this site --- especially in the Recreational Forum --- who believe players MUST play the bad games offered by the casinos, but that simply isn't true.[/QUOTE]

In recent years, there have been a bit of increase in games that are more difficult for the casual player to play. However, like you have suggested, players will often steer away from those games over time because of the extra hold the house is collecting from errors, and therefore, the players themselves experiencing more "losing experiences" than expected.

One game that has been examined here by alpax that is a great example is Super Draw 6 Card Poker. Optimally, the side bet adds a few tenths of percent versus the standard game. But at least for DDB, playing standard DDB strategy costs you a few percent! But casinos don't realize this and have often made this game have a paytable like 8/5 DDB because the machine tells them only the "optimal payback". It's definitely helped kill the game.

Regular Ultimate X is a weird exception to the rule because playing standard VP strategy hurts much less than one might expect it to. Only about 0.6% for multiple variants. The casual player is much less likely to notice this in a high variance game like Ultimate X.