Different Quarter Jacks Strategy?

[FloridaPhil]

Next week I will be playing VP in AC.   I will be playing single line quarter Jacks or Better exclusively.  I expect to play 9/6 or 8/5 games.  I know from past experience that my only chance of breaking even or making a profit over that week will be if I hit at least one $1,000 royal.  Comps and free play are not an issue.I believe I will have a better chance of hitting a royal if I adjust my hand play strategy.  If I am dealt three to a royal with a paying pair, I am going to throw away the paying pair and keep the three to a royal.  I will also keep all Ace Ten hands.  I realize if I don't hit a royal, playing this way will increase my losses.  However, since I am playing quarters playing this way may be worth the investment.Comments?  

[Carcounter]

Phil, You may want to try the 9/5 Super double bonus. A better theo at 99.69% and those machines are easy to get on. If you have the software, you can get pretty proficient quickly. With the premium quads, if you go on a good run, you can win some decent money without the royal. I have won $1,000 on a single 3 hr. session at the .50 level. Of course I have also lost that much as well. It's all about getting the quads.

[Jstark]

Just stay home!

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=Carcounter]Phil, You may want to try the 9/5 Super double bonus. [/quote]I have never played that game.  I'll check it  out.Going back to my question.   My VPW software says ditching a paying pair to hold three to a royal costs about 30 cents a hand.  That's a significant error.   In 40,000 hands, the cost could be more than a royal.  Still, it might be worth a try for a week?   Perhaps not?I've been over royaled  the last four months.   By sitting on low variance games, they seem to be coming my way.   These things can change, but so far I'm pleased with my results.

[Gronbog]

More accurately, it will cost 30 cents every time you make that choice, not on every hand. You need to scale this loss by the frequency that you are dealt an initial paying pair.The Wizard of Odds gives 0.42256903 as the probability of being dealt an initial pair. But only Jacks or Better will pay so the probability of being dealt a paying pair is 0.42256903 x (4 / 13) = 0.13002124. So you expected loss per hand is $0.30 x 0.13002124 = about 3.9 cents per hand.This is on top of the normal expected loss from playing 9/6 Jacks with the correct strategy, which is  0.0046 x $1.25 = 0.575 cents per hand. So your total expected loss per hand is 3.9 + 0.575 = 4.475 cents per hand. You are increasing your expected loss rate by a factor of almost 8 times!!To put this into perspective, this is like switching from quarters to $2 (if it existed) but still only getting paid for playing quarters. This is a terrible idea for anyone. As a recreational player who wants to play for entertainment while keeping costs in check, the thought of this should be making you sick.I think that this is an extremely bad idea.

[Eduardo]

It's a "losing" play and I don't recommend it, but there is still a good question here that I don't know how to solve... Ignoring the overall return of the hold (gasp) how would this hold change the royal flush frequency?My guess is not all that much since it's not a high frequency situation, since you have to 1) be dealt a pair and a 3rf at the same time and 2) subsequently connect on the royal holding 3 cardsAnd it's certainly not worth all the lost JB, 3K, FH payouts you are giving up.But... still curious.

[FloridaPhil]

All good points.  I believe the cost is too great.  The majority of my royals seem to happen when I'm dealt 4 to a royal and this strategy wouldn't do anything to help that.   It's not always about wins.  Losses in between wins can make wins worthless.  Thanks for the feedback.

[Casino Knight]

Based solely on what I've learned on this forum, do not play in AC. I've been led to believe that the Video Poker games are rigged. Please do not waste your entertainment dollars playing tweaked machines.

[Eduardo]

Here's to hoping Phil has a wonderful trip to AC.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=Casino Knight]Based solely on what I've learned on this forum, do not play in AC.
I've been led to believe that the Video Poker games are rigged.[/quote]This has been said many times on this forum.   How do you think they are being rigged?   Are royals being suppressed?  Are the hands not random?  How do they get around the regulators?  I'm not saying they aren't, but it seems like a whole lot of trouble for very little gain.One of the reasons I am going there is to see for myself.  I'm not sure I will be able to tell.   If I conclude they're rigged, I will not hesitate to say so.