Finally, another good STP hit for me.

[Tedlark]

I can completely understand DaBurglar's theory.....Doesn'y mean I agree with it though.

[DaBurglar]

I'd love to see someone design a program to test it....it's really not too complex a theory to test, except for the part where you'd just need to assign a quantitative value corresponding to the various starting hands that are dealt. Or, just to simplify things a lot, you could just tally up the total number of really good, strong starting hands dealt (i.e. How may three of a kinds, straights, Full houses, quads, etc etc).

Take 1 million hands dealt on a single line game, and compare it to 1 million hands dealt from the game like the one in ted's post above.....and compare. In my experience, the stats from the gimmick game starting hands will be noticeably weaker, although obviously not without the occasional monster like the one above....

Take the dozens of All Star II game machines present in Harrahs, Ballys and Caesars in AC. About 2-1/2 years in early 2016, and dating backwards a year to early 2015 during my last real experiences trying to play and win at VP, I had noticed how in just about ALL the games on the All Star II menu (and especially the Extra Draw Frenzy) the frequency of dealt Three of a kind ("trips") was VERY VERY low, far below the expected 1/80 frequency expected. This makes sense in that Three of a kind is a extremely strong, and potentially profitable starting hand for all those gimmick-type games. It truly seemed as if something, or someone, was deliberately preventing "trips" from appearing. If only the friendly, reliable NJ gaming agents still roamed the floors of AC casinos like they had during the first 31 years of casinos in NJ....! *sigh*

[Azure Dragon]

I think some days are better than others in terms of dealt hands, on STP or otherwise. A couple trips ago (just prior to the trip that I got the handpay) I was getting dealt trips left and right, and hitting a decent amount of quads after holding said trips. This was on both STP and single line games. One thing I've really noticed playing VP however, is the crazy amount of royals I hit holding three cards, and quads holding just a pair. I'm 3 for 5 on VP handpay royals holding three cards now. (The other 2 were holding four, believe it or not )

[Vman96]

One thing I've really noticed playing VP however, is the crazy amount of royals I hit holding three cards, and quads holding just a pair. I'm 3 for 5 on VP handpay royals holding three cards now. (The other 2 were holding four, believe it or not )

Sounds pretty normal to me. You're supposed to make a few more quads from a pair than trips. And slightly more royals drawing 2 than drawing 1.

As for me I've been pretty hot on converting 1 card draws lately.

Lifetime it looks like this for me.

1 dealt
5 draw 1
3 draw 2
1 draw 3

[Azure Dragon]

Sounds pretty normal to me. You're supposed to make a few more quads from a pair than trips. And slightly more royals drawing 2 than drawing 1.

As for me I've been pretty hot on converting 1 card draws lately.

Lifetime it looks like this for me.

1 dealt
5 draw 1
3 draw 2
1 draw 3

Didn't think the odds/math would support hitting nice hands when needing 2 cards vs. 1, not complaining when it works in my favor though. Still no dealt royal for me yet, but I have hit two royals holding only one card. One of those was my first ever royal flush.

[New2vp]

Single-card holds provided that extra surprise when a royal comes. It's quite rare to hit any natural royal flush on a Deuces Wild game holding only a single card.

[FAA]

server based casinos, there is something present on the server control(s) that allows the casino, as they see the need, to decrease (or even INCREASE) the typical starting hand quality. Just tell the program to filter the authentic, inviolate RNG results (i.e. that "CHIP" that NO ONE CAN POSSIBLY mess around with) that continuously generates random numbers that dictate starting deals to only accept (within certain percentages or parameters) a specific range of starting hand strengths.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, they can do an RNG end run with everything still legitimate anyway! Given this possibility and my own lackluster results, my conclusion is to avoid any CET gambling until noon on Sunday. AM results are a pure siphon operation in both B & C. I refuse to contribute to their donation setup.

[onemoretry]

So, they can do an RNG end run with everything still legitimate anyway!

No they can't! Such tampering would unquestionably be illegal, and a casino that was caught doing it (if, in fact, it's even possible to do), would likely be severely punished.

[Webman]

Let's not spread false rumors based on a theory someone dreamed up with zero evidence to show for it.

The theory on STP starting hands is of course an understandable perception, but it is also, of course, complete dooky. Analyze the game all you'd like, and I am confident this is the conclusion you will come to (if done properly with a large enough sample size). You can of course test this yourself easily on a program such as Video Poker for Winners. The only evidence you need in that case is the return of the game, which would be substantially lower than expected if this sort of thing was occurring. And if you don't trust that program to accurately represent the casino, then you will need to conduct your own test in an actual casino and keep good records. Because of how easy this would be to prove, I'm confident you will not find anything out of place.

We get similar comments from people playing on this site and I can assure you, we have no "secondary programming" that affects starting hands based on multipliers or any other factor. It randomly chooses a multiplier, and it randomly chooses the cards, exactly as should be expected.

A similar complaint is about the multipliers "not working" when people go an entire 100 hand contest session with only one or even zero multipliers. The odds of that happening to you in a session are indeed low. But if 5,000 people play in a contest, the odds also say that some people will almost certainly have this happen to them. The unlucky few either realize this happens, or get upset and assume things are not working correctly (insert angry email here).

Multipliers can be extremely finicky sometimes. A run of 50+ hands without a multiplier does happen. Pair a few of these streaks with the low frequency of a "good starting hand" and it's easy to see where these perceptions lead to. It would not be unusual to go several hundred hands before you get a single "good starting hand" with a multiplier. And that doesn't feel too good when you're betting 6 coins a hand in a casino and are wondering what good is coming of it.

Of course, there are other streaks that offset this, and the rare big multiplier paired with a big hand. That's life in a world of random chance, and it's what makes this game exciting for some people. You're betting an extra coin for a chance at multiplied wins that simply aren't possible in a 5 credit game.

I think we sometimes notice much less when multipliers come more often than they should. And there is something disheartening when the suspense builds with that multiplier animation and ends with a big X number and nothing to show for it. If that feeling becomes too familiar, it's easy to feel like you are getting the short end of the stick.

When this happens, there's probably a happy gal or fellow celebrating a multiplied win somewhere who thinks the game is working just fine.

[Tedlark]

Webman; I DEFY you to show where or how this theory is complete dooky.