Martingale coupled with Jacks 9/6

[FloridaPhil]

I'm not saying it won't.  You have to find what works for you.  Finding that out is part of the fun of VP.

[Gronbog]

it really doesnt matter how i trigger my bets on  a 99% game it all comes down to the pay table?
Yes.

[olds442jetaway]

For some reason, I have had very poor luck with versions of Martingale on job. Better luck by far with deuces wild. The many 4 of a kinds in deuces keep you in there. Also lots of pushes. I have had many dud streaks of 30 or more hands in job as well as quadless days. With deuces wild and a mild martingale I can still have a winning session without Royals, 4 deuces, even wild royals, as long as the smaller stuff comes in as it should. The downside on the very mild Martingale methods I use is sessions can be very long 8 to 12 hours. I never get bored, but have to remember to take stretch and water breaks.

[FloridaPhil]

I agree with Olds.  These systems work much better with wild card games.  I have to disagree somewhat with Gronbog.  Pay tables and accuracy are the biggest single determiner in your results.  However, there is more variation from player to player than he seems to indicate.   I am not a mathematician, so it's possible I may be misunderstanding his posts.   I'm sure he will respond.In VP, the cards are dealt at random.   If you compare the results of two players, one playing a 97% game and another playing a 100% game, it won't take long for the player playing the better game to be ahead.   This is due to the fact that the player playing the better game can play more hands with the same money.   I am not arguing against playing the best games.  However, if you compare two players playing the same exact game there will always be a difference in their results.The biggest difference will be determined by the number and timing of the royals.  You don't see this in a computer lab or on a spreadsheet because the calculations are made into "infinity".   The experts call this long term.Here is an example of the misinterpretation of "long term" play.  Two retired businessmen go to the same casino every day.   They both play the same game at the same denomination.  They play side by side everyday for five years.  They are both similarly accurate in their play.  At the end of the fifth year, one of the businessmen has a heart attack and dies.   The test is over so we tally up their results.  The remaining businessman is two royals ahead of the businessman who passed away.   If VP math was a perfect predictor of the outcome, both businessmen would have exactly the same results.  They didn't, so what happened?   Playing better games accurately lets you play more hands with the same money, it does not guarantee jackpots within a specific period of time.  The dead businessman may have experienced the two missing royals on the day after he died, but he wasn't in the game.  The expression "Long Term" as it applies to video poker is not a universally constant value for all players.  This is the reality that makes video poker "gambling". This entire scenario becomes even more unpredictable as players vary their bets and/or the games they play.  If Olds442jetaway switches to 20 coins and hits a royal flush, he could make up for years of losses.   What if one of the businessmen in the example above had switched from Jacks or Better to Double Double Bonus for 10 minutes each day and hit four aces with a kicker?   He could have earned 2,000 coins on that hand instead of 125.   What possible math formula can predict the timing of those events?  When human beings are involved in video poker, the math doesn't change, the variables do.

[Carcounter]

Steve, can you run test for the 9/5 Super Double Bonus that they have at Borgata? Thanks.

[onemoretry]

   I am not a mathematician..... Well, another FP statement that should not generate much disagreement!

How any intelligent person can conclude that "the math" predicts that two players, playing the same game, for the same length of time will have exactly the same result, is absolutely beyond me.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=onemortry]How any intelligent person can conclude that "the math" predicts that
two players, playing the same game, for the same length of time will
have exactly the same result, is absolutely beyond me.
[/quote]I posted this comment because Gronbog seems to be saying that the game's odds are 100% responsible for your results.   Perhaps he can quantify this and clear up any misunderstandings I may have?   I agree you can use mathematics to predict the "likelihood" of a result.  What happens over the time you play is up to random chance.   It is totally possible for a player who only plays positive VP games to die a loser.    That all depends upon when he/she dies or quits the game.     We have had numerous reports on this forum of players who have played for years without hitting a royal flush.   Many players I know have told me they are significantly under royaled.   At the moment I am significantly over royaled.  Is this a temporary condition or am I doomed to be a winner? (joke)Should we tell the underroyaled "You haven't played long enough?"   They may ask us... How much longer until I reap my just reward?  Tomorrow?  Next year?  Ten years from now?  No one knows.I think this is a very important question to any video poker player.   Don't you want to know that the promise made by a strategy will be kept, especially if you are going to risk thousands of dollars a day?  Our experts tell us if you play 100% games perfectly forever, you will be a winner.  They double down by telling us they live "great lifestyles" playing the game.  Is this 100% true for everyone that ever plays the game or just the lucky winners?

[FAA]

Even with hundreds a day anted, I still want some shot at survival. A weekend of decimation. Another promise to remain with quarters. The poor availability at Harrah's paves the way for ruin. I won't be back.

[Gronbog]

I agree with Olds.  These systems work much better with wild card games.  I have to disagree somewhat with Gronbog.  Pay tables and accuracy are the biggest single determiner in your results.  However, there is more variation from player to player than he seems to indicate.   I am not a mathematician, so it's possible I may be misunderstanding his posts.   I'm sure he will respond.
Responding as predicted. Yes, I do believe that you misunderstand my posts. I don't think that you intentionally try to distort what I say. I really do think that you simply misunderstand.
In VP, the cards are dealt at random.   If you compare the results of two players, one playing a 97% game and another playing a 100% game, it won't take long for the player playing the better game to be ahead.   This is due to the fact that the player playing the better game can play more hands with the same money.
Yes, it will not take long for the one playing the 100% game to be ahead of the other. But it's not due to more hands played with the same money. Even with the same number of hands played at the same denominations, the one playing the 100% game will soon be ahead of the other. The reason is simply because he is playing a game with a better return.
   I am not arguing against playing the best games.  However, if you compare two players playing the same exact game there will always be a difference in their results.
Correct. But the difference will be within a predictable range determined by the variance of the games.
The biggest difference will be determined by the number and timing of the royals.  You don't see this in a computer lab or on a spreadsheet because the calculations are made into "infinity".   The experts call this long term.
This is one idea that you keep insisting on. This idea that the long term is equal to infinity. I have shown that the long term comes much sooner than that -- easily within reach of any regular player and that how long it is can be calculated based on the return and the variance of the game(s) played.
Here is an example of the misinterpretation of "long term" play.  Two retired businessmen go to the same casino every day.   They both play the same game at the same denomination.  They play side by side everyday for five years.  They are both similarly accurate in their play.  At the end of the fifth year, one of the businessmen has a heart attack and dies.   The test is over so we tally up their results.  The remaining businessman is two royals ahead of the businessman who passed away.   If VP math was a perfect predictor of the outcome, both businessmen would have exactly the same results.  They didn't, so what happened?  
Exactly the same results was never claimed. Results within a predictable range of what is expected as defined by the variance is what the math says. The dog on the leash wanders a bit off the sidewalk in an unpredictable way but he's still heading in the expected direction.


































The expression "Long Term" as it applies to video poker is not a universally constant value for all players.Correct in a practical sense. No two players play the same way. But each player can calculate how long the long term is for themselves individually.This is the reality that makes video poker "gambling". If the short term it's gambling. If you are unable to play to the long term, it's gambling. If you are able, then it's not.This entire scenario becomes even more unpredictable as players vary their bets and/or the games they play.  If Olds442jetaway switches to 20 coins and hits a royal flush, he could make up for years of losses.   What if one of the businessmen in the example above had switched from Jacks or Better to Double Double Bonus for 10 minutes each day and hit four aces with a kicker?   He could have earned 2,000 coins on that hand instead of 125.   What possible math formula can predict the timing of those events?  When human beings are involved in video poker, the math doesn't change, the variables do. The math can be broken up to to apply to each segment of hands which were played differently. EV can then be added segment by segment. Variance can also be combined. Given a strategy for varying your play, the results can still be predicted within that small range defined by the overall variance. The exact timing of the changes does not need to be predicted. The overall cumulative effect of the changes will be still be within the predicted range. In a similar way, simulation software can be programmed to imitate the way an individual plays. For example, if you were to tell me exactly how your CS strategy works, I could simulate it for you.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=Gronbog]This is one idea that you keep insisting on. This idea that the long
term is equal to infinity. I have shown that the long term comes much
sooner than that -- easily within reach of any regular player and that
how long it is can be calculated based on the return and the variance of
the game(s) played.[/quote]Thanks for the clarifications.  I have a question.  Lets assume a player plays 9/6 Jacks or Better with cash back and comps putting the game at 101%. Let's also assume that player plays error free and has a bankroll big enough to last through any downturn.   How many hands must he play before the possibility of a loss is zero?