Playing Bad VP Games?

[FloridaPhil]

I am often painted on this forum as the poster child for playing bad games.   A legitimate question is "Why is Phil so fixated on playing bad VP games?"   Everyone should know by now that playing the best games perfectly is the most financially advantageous option.  Unless you just climbed out of a time capsule from 1997, you would know that.  My concentration on bad VP games has to do with our VP travel vacations.   My wife and I are both retired.   We enjoy traveling, but hate cruise ships and planned fun.   To us, one of the most enjoyable things to do is to jump in the car and drive around the country jumping from casino to casino.  It keeps us busy and the fun of seeing something different is entertaining.   We see a lot of bad VP games and a few good ones. We realize playing negative games comes with a cost.  To keep the cost as low as possible, we use a number of effective tactics.     We play single line deuces wild the majority of the time.  The worst quarter game is what we call 100/60/45 a 95% game at max coins.   This game is all too common.  The best DW games are in Nevada.  In Reno the default quarter game seems to be NSU, a 99.7% game.  This game is also common in Vegas if you get off the Strip.  Full pay deuces is available at Red Rock at the quarter level.  I'm sure it's available at some other off Strip casinos as well.On our travels we check out a lot of small native owned casinos.  Every once in a while we find one with decent games.   I can remember one small North Michigan casino where the odds were actually pretty good.  To us the most playable game is 98.9% deuces.  This game is widely available at our favorite VP vacation of all, Black Hawk Colorado.  The Monarch Casino in Black Hawk has NSU in quarters as well.  If you have never experienced playing VP in Colorado, you should.The vast majority of casinos we visit have terrible VP odds.  When you drive 6 hours to visit a new casino and you find bad odds, you play them.  To counter this we have developed a number of schemes that work well for us. There are only four ways to  reduce losses on negative VP games.  They are:Don't Play ThemPlay SmallerPlay SlowerLimit Your BankrollEach one has an up side and a down side.  Whichever one you choose, stick with your plan.   Experts don't talk much about playing negative VP games other than telling you not to play them.  I never understood this as the majority of players must play them or not play at all.  What good is a strategy it only works in Vegas or when playing $5 a coin in the high limit room?   As recreational players, I think what we need is information on how to play games we have.  It's fun to read stories about someone profiting from a flaw in a $10 VP game, but this never happens to us.If you know of a small out of the way casino with decent odds, tell us about it.   We are always looking for new road trips and new casino adventures.

[Carcounter]

I understand why you play Phil, but I do look at things differently. As I have said, I can't bring myself to play bad VP games no matter what. I will find something else to do. I remember once driving over 3 hrs to Foxwoods when it first opened, scouting the casino for what seemed like hours and not finding anything playable. Had dinner at Michael Jordan's steakhouse and drove home. Have never been back.

[FloridaPhil]

I understand.  I guess it has to do with how you see VP.  To us, VP is just fun entertainment.   We don't expect to win and we expect our entertainment will cost something.    On the other hand, we don't want to lose a lot of money just to be entertained.  We have friends who take similar road trips as we do only they play golf.  The golf course never pays them to play.  That does happen to us on occasion.

[felix]

Yes, but another point is that if enough VP players totally refused to play bad games, casinos would be left with either quitting VP or improving the paytables. You have mentioned the horrible paytables at Beau Rivage several times --- and in fact it is not just VP but everything in the casino. Despite this, it is always crowded and its parent corporation is amazingly profitable. They have no motivation to change anything in their successful formula.

[Deloradeuces18]

That assumes the casinos attribute the lack of play directly to their pay tables. I don't think they would reach that conclusion unless enough people were very vocal and made it clear to casino management that they are not playing for that exact reason.It also assumes you have enough people who actually know enough about pay tables to take such a stand. I think that is also incorrect.At most I think you could end up with 2 or 3 noisy patrons complaining about pay tables and the casinos would shrug their shoulders and move on without you.In my opinion.Maybe a positive approach is better than a boycott, telling a casino that you are more likely to play there if they will provide a machine or two with better pays for knowledgeable players. That seems to be how Vegas casinos run it at "locals" casinos. The ones on the strip don't seem to care.  You would need to somehow generate competition among your local casinos to provide better pays that attract players. If they all offer the same pays, there is not much incentive. But if you say you will play at whatever casino offers the best pay tables, then there is an incentive to experiment with a limited offering.Of course that requires talking to someone. I understand it's easier to just quit. I don't think just quitting will do anything to improve pay tables.

[Chicagoan]

Generally competition forces competitive pricing.

Example: You have an intersection with a gas station on each corner. None of the four stations is going to set its gas prices substantially higher than the others.


With casinos, it is different. Casinos must be licensed and regulated. In most states there are a limited number of casino licenses available. Casino development is also restricted to certain areas, and customers frequently are forced to travel many miles to patronize a casino.


So, for the most part, casinos outside of the Vegas market are not subjected to the normal competitive forces of a free market.


Thus, except for markets where casinos are overbuilt (such as Vegas), I don't ever see casinos voluntarily improving their paytables at the expense of their profit margins.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=Chicagoan]Generally competition forces competitive pricing.[/quote]In most cases this is true.  For example, the Tampa Florida Hard Rock has no competition as the closest casino is 200 miles away.   The quarter VP odds are in the 96% range at max coins. Hollywood on the other hand is surrounded by Racinos and other medium sized casinos.  The management in Hollywood is smart.  They put in 6 decent VP machines and all the rest are lousy.  This allows the players who care to have what they want and keeps them coming back.  The rest of the players have plenty of games to choose from.Cherokee is another casino with no competition.  Their new sister casino in Murphy has the worst odds in the country.  It draws gamblers from Atlanta.  As long as the moral do gooders in Georgia keep casinos out of the State, Murphy and Cherokee will prosper.   Heaven help them if Atlanta ever opens up gambling.  The State of Georgia is missing out on millions of dollars in tax revenue.Biloxi is a totally different situation.  I am convinced their casinos collude together to keep the odds down.  The now closed Margaritaville casino is a good example.   This casino offered the best VP tables on the coast.  It also drew a lot of players off the beach casinos. When they opened the odds across the City started to improve.   The Margaritaville management asked to have a hotel.  After much political rangling, their request was denied.   As soon as Margaritaville closed the odds went back down.  There actually are a precious few good VP games left in Biloxi/Gulfport but you need to look hard to find them.Taxes are another big problem in Mississippi.   The State automatically takes a 3% tax directly off all hand pays and does not allow any offset for loses.  Even if you found a decent VP game in Mississippi, you are forced to play small just to keep the State out of your pockets.One thing that I keep thinking about is the fact that young people don't seem to be interested in casino gambling.  It could be an income gap issue or it might be they have other things to do with their money.  In any case, when all us old baby boomers die off I wonder if anyone will be playing VP on anything other than their phones?

[billryan]

Why does one drive six hours to visit a casino with bad games?
Last year, you traveled from Colorado to a one stop town in Northern Nevada only to discover the games there were bad. A quick look at Vpfree2 would have saved you the trip or pointed you to better games. Reading other gambling forums might have pointed out an outstanding BJ promotion that was in the very town you were in.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=billryan]Why does one drive six hours to visit a casino with bad games?
Last year, you traveled from Colorado to a one stop town in Northern
Nevada only to discover the games there were bad. A quick look at
Vpfree2 would have saved you the trip or pointed you to better games.
Reading other gambling forums might have pointed out an outstanding BJ
promotion that was in the very town you were in. [/quote]Do you think gambling is the only thing in life?  We like to take road trips to see the sights as well as the casinos.  Utah and Wyoming both have unbelievable scenery.  Colorado has huge mountains. New Mexico and Arizona are spectacular.  California has ocean front highways and Northern Michigan has the great lakes.  On our trips we have seen every part of this country and we like it all.  We also enjoy each other's company, which seems to be unusual in today's marriages.  The casino is a place where we can share some fun doing what we like to do together.  If more couples would do more of that, it would save a lot of marriages.    Our life is not built around free sandwiches, beers and a few percent edge on some slot machine. 

[Eduardo]

For me, the answer is easy: I don't play all that much. I go to a casino once, sometimes twice a year and I have a relatively small bankroll.I try to find the best pay tables I can... in Vegas I'll usually go off the strip for most of my play because I enjoy it and I like to get the most "bang for my buck."But if I'm only going to put $200 into a machine then the difference between a 9/6 and 9/5 machine just isn't going to be that much on a given day. It might cost me $5-$10 in payouts but it would cost me more than that to take a cab or even drive to a casino with better pays. So sometimes I'll just play what is available (it helps if I have been drinking).Why? Because I enjoy it and I have a chance at actually winning something that trip. I always treat my bankroll as "expendable" and count on losing it. It's gambling, after all. When I win it makes for a great trip, and the fun of it is that chance. I won over $1,000 my last trip. I spent it on things I wouldn't normally have bought. That's what it's about. Most trips I'll come home empty, and I'm okay with that. It's just part of my entertainment budget.If I played more often or lived in Vegas, I would be much more disciplined than I am about this. But I definitely understand what Phil is talking about.Even so, I still can be pretty picky sometimes. On a low bankroll I also understand that the extra $5 - $10 means more opportunities to hit the big one. So I'll hunt around when I can, or save my play for a visit to a casino where I know the pays are better.I have just come to the realization that I am more of a casual player than any sort of "pro" and I'm okay with that. I still do my best to learn the strategies and play to the best of my ability, while also looking to gain whatever edge/comps I can when the situation allows. But I don't let it get in the way of a good time, either.  It's very different for people who are dedicated to only taking positive opportunities.