About time someone hit on those things. Downstairs or in Don &
Mike's?
It was on the main level, an end machine. Don't ask me which end...
I have zero sense of N, S, E, W when on the boats.
100 Play RF
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "correna2" <correna2@y...>
wrote:
>>>>About time someone hit on those things. Downstairs or in Don &
Mike's?It was on the main level, an end machine. Don't ask me which
end...
I have zero sense of N, S, E, W when on the boats.
Well that proves it. The Don and Mike's machines are clearly gaffed.
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com,
"tooncesthecatwhocoulddriveacar" <tooncestdc@y...> wrote:
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "correna2" <correna2@y...>
wrote:
>
> >>>>About time someone hit on those things. Downstairs or in Don &
> Mike's?
>
> It was on the main level, an end machine. Don't ask me which
end...
> I have zero sense of N, S, E, W when on the boats.Well that proves it. The Don and Mike's machines are clearly gaffed.
Don't see what the downstairs machines have anything to do with it,
but I'd be surprised if you didn't chime in with some pretzel logic. I
note that you didn't quarrel with the numbers. And you were a net
winner on the Don & Mike's 100 plays last when? And how often since
they became operational?
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com,
"tooncesthecatwhocoulddriveacar" <tooncestdc@y...> wrote:
>
> --- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "correna2" <correna2@y...>
> wrote:
> >
> > >>>>About time someone hit on those things. Downstairs or in
Don &
> > Mike's?
> >
> > It was on the main level, an end machine. Don't ask me which
> end...
> > I have zero sense of N, S, E, W when on the boats.
>
> Well that proves it. The Don and Mike's machines are clearly
gaffed.
Don't see what the downstairs machines have anything to do with it,
but I'd be surprised if you didn't chime in with some pretzel
logic. I
note that you didn't quarrel with the numbers. And you were a net
winner on the Don & Mike's 100 plays last when? And how often since
they became operational?
You're absolutely right. I've played 4 sessions of the 100-play
NSUDs and lost all 4 times for a total of $4000 (pre-cash back) on
$110,000 of play. That's about a 96.4% return on a 99.7% machine,
based on a total of 4400 dealt hands. And, of course, I never make a
play mistake, just like everyone else that plays those games. If
that, plus your own and others observed statistics convinces you that
the machines are rigged, by all means, stay away from them
(especially during peak hours of 5x points days when I'm trying to
get a seat).
What I can't comprehend are the people that know that the machines
are rigged, yet continue to play them.
···
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "vp_nbi" <nbi@w...> wrote:
I'm pretty sure those machines aren't rigged. A friend of mine plays
them regularly (NSUD and BDLX 10-25 hands at a time) and claims he is
a "couple of hundred" ahead since they were installed. Also, about a
month ago I was dealt a natural royal on one of them. I was playing
NSUD at the time.
JW
--- In
vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "tooncesthecatwhocoulddriveacar"
<tooncestdc@y...> wrote:
>
> --- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com,
> "tooncesthecatwhocoulddriveacar" <tooncestdc@y...> wrote:
> >
> > --- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "correna2"
<correna2@y...>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > >>>>About time someone hit on those things. Downstairs or in
Don &
> > > Mike's?
> > >
> > > It was on the main level, an end machine. Don't ask me which
> > end...
> > > I have zero sense of N, S, E, W when on the boats.
> >
> > Well that proves it. The Don and Mike's machines are clearly
gaffed.
>
> Don't see what the downstairs machines have anything to do with
it,
> but I'd be surprised if you didn't chime in with some pretzel
logic. I
> note that you didn't quarrel with the numbers. And you were a net
> winner on the Don & Mike's 100 plays last when? And how often
since
> they became operational?
You're absolutely right. I've played 4 sessions of the 100-play
NSUDs and lost all 4 times for a total of $4000 (pre-cash back) on
$110,000 of play. That's about a 96.4% return on a 99.7% machine,
based on a total of 4400 dealt hands. And, of course, I never make
a
play mistake, just like everyone else that plays those games. If
that, plus your own and others observed statistics convinces you
that
···
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "vp_nbi" <nbi@w...> wrote:
the machines are rigged, by all means, stay away from them
(especially during peak hours of 5x points days when I'm trying to
get a seat).What I can't comprehend are the people that know that the machines
are rigged, yet continue to play them.
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com,
"tooncesthecatwhocoulddriveacar" <tooncestdc@y...> wrote:
>
> --- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com,
> "tooncesthecatwhocoulddriveacar" <tooncestdc@y...> wrote:
> >
> > --- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "correna2" <correna2@y...>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > >>>>About time someone hit on those things. Downstairs or in
Don &
> > > Mike's?
> > >
> > > It was on the main level, an end machine. Don't ask me which
> > end...
> > > I have zero sense of N, S, E, W when on the boats.
> >
> > Well that proves it. The Don and Mike's machines are clearly
gaffed.
>
> Don't see what the downstairs machines have anything to do with it,
> but I'd be surprised if you didn't chime in with some pretzel
logic. I
> note that you didn't quarrel with the numbers. And you were a net
> winner on the Don & Mike's 100 plays last when? And how often since
> they became operational?You're absolutely right. I've played 4 sessions of the 100-play
NSUDs and lost all 4 times for a total of $4000 (pre-cash back) on
$110,000 of play. That's about a 96.4% return on a 99.7% machine,
based on a total of 4400 dealt hands. And, of course, I never make a
play mistake, just like everyone else that plays those games. If
that, plus your own and others observed statistics convinces you that
the machines are rigged, by all means, stay away from them
(especially during peak hours of 5x points days when I'm trying to
get a seat).
They're all yours. Enjoy.
What I can't comprehend are the people that know that the machines
are rigged, yet continue to play them.
Couldn't agree more. Most reasonable people would play a significant
number of hands before reaching a conclusion. Having reached one they
wouldn't act in a contrary manner. Of course many of the games have
such poor payback that nobody needs to even try slipping anything past
the ever dilligent regulatory bodies that never miss a thing.
···
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "vp_nbi" <nbi@w...> wrote:
Yes, as you say "10-25 hands at a time". I specifically mentioned that
the hand frequencies at 25 hands or lower are remarkably normal. Try
playing 100 play for a large number of hands and log how often 2 or
more deuces come up.
···
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "jaywilly240" <wha724@c...> wrote:
I'm pretty sure those machines aren't rigged. A friend of mine plays
them regularly (NSUD and BDLX 10-25 hands at a time) and claims he is
a "couple of hundred" ahead since they were installed. Also, about a
month ago I was dealt a natural royal on one of them. I was playing
NSUD at the time.JW
--- In
vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "tooncesthecatwhocoulddriveacar"
<tooncestdc@y...> wrote:
>
> --- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "vp_nbi" <nbi@w...> wrote:
> >
> > --- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com,
> > "tooncesthecatwhocoulddriveacar" <tooncestdc@y...> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "correna2"
<correna2@y...>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >>>>About time someone hit on those things. Downstairs or in
> Don &
> > > > Mike's?
> > > >
> > > > It was on the main level, an end machine. Don't ask me which
> > > end...
> > > > I have zero sense of N, S, E, W when on the boats.
> > >
> > > Well that proves it. The Don and Mike's machines are clearly
> gaffed.
> >
> > Don't see what the downstairs machines have anything to do with
it,
> > but I'd be surprised if you didn't chime in with some pretzel
> logic. I
> > note that you didn't quarrel with the numbers. And you were a net
> > winner on the Don & Mike's 100 plays last when? And how often
since
> > they became operational?
>
> You're absolutely right. I've played 4 sessions of the 100-play
> NSUDs and lost all 4 times for a total of $4000 (pre-cash back) on
> $110,000 of play. That's about a 96.4% return on a 99.7% machine,
> based on a total of 4400 dealt hands. And, of course, I never make
a
> play mistake, just like everyone else that plays those games. If
> that, plus your own and others observed statistics convinces you
that
> the machines are rigged, by all means, stay away from them
> (especially during peak hours of 5x points days when I'm trying to
> get a seat).
>
> What I can't comprehend are the people that know that the machines
> are rigged, yet continue to play them.
Yes, as you say "10-25 hands at a time". I specifically mentioned
that
the hand frequencies at 25 hands or lower are remarkably normal. Try
playing 100 play for a large number of hands and log how often 2 or
more deuces come up.
As you gear-up the number of hands you play at a time you going to
get considerably fewer independent deals in a session, so I would
expect the results to "feel" a lot less normal...or put another way
your results will more likely deviate from expected value per given
session...obviously in the long run it has no effect.
···
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "vp_nbi" <nbi@w...> wrote:
It's great when you get a dealt royal on multi-play...my only dealt
royal was on a single line...at least it was at the dollar level.
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "jaywilly240" <wha724@c...>
wrote:
I'm pretty sure those machines aren't rigged. A friend of mine
plays
them regularly (NSUD and BDLX 10-25 hands at a time) and claims he
is
a "couple of hundred" ahead since they were installed. Also, about
a
month ago I was dealt a natural royal on one of them. I was playing
NSUD at the time.JW
--- In
vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "tooncesthecatwhocoulddriveacar"
<tooncestdc@y...> wrote:
>
> >
> > --- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com,
> > "tooncesthecatwhocoulddriveacar" <tooncestdc@y...> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "correna2"
<correna2@y...>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >>>>About time someone hit on those things. Downstairs or
in
> Don &
> > > > Mike's?
> > > >
> > > > It was on the main level, an end machine. Don't ask me
which
> > > end...
> > > > I have zero sense of N, S, E, W when on the boats.
> > >
> > > Well that proves it. The Don and Mike's machines are clearly
> gaffed.
> >
> > Don't see what the downstairs machines have anything to do with
it,
> > but I'd be surprised if you didn't chime in with some pretzel
> logic. I
> > note that you didn't quarrel with the numbers. And you were a
net
> > winner on the Don & Mike's 100 plays last when? And how often
since
> > they became operational?
>
> You're absolutely right. I've played 4 sessions of the 100-play
> NSUDs and lost all 4 times for a total of $4000 (pre-cash back)
on
> $110,000 of play. That's about a 96.4% return on a 99.7%
machine,
> based on a total of 4400 dealt hands. And, of course, I never
make
a
> play mistake, just like everyone else that plays those games. If
> that, plus your own and others observed statistics convinces you
that
> the machines are rigged, by all means, stay away from them
> (especially during peak hours of 5x points days when I'm trying
to
> get a seat).
>
> What I can't comprehend are the people that know that the
machines
···
> --- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "vp_nbi" <nbi@w...> wrote:
> are rigged, yet continue to play them.
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "jaydavidson118"
<jaydavidson118@y...> wrote:
>
> Yes, as you say "10-25 hands at a time". I specifically mentioned
that
> the hand frequencies at 25 hands or lower are remarkably normal. Try
> playing 100 play for a large number of hands and log how often 2 or
> more deuces come up.
>As you gear-up the number of hands you play at a time you going to
get considerably fewer independent deals in a session, so I would
expect the results to "feel" a lot less normal...or put another way
your results will more likely deviate from expected value per given
session...obviously in the long run it has no effect.
Obviously covariance plays a greater role in 100 play. That isn't the
point. I was specifically refering to the frequency of *dealt* hands
that contain 2+ deuces. If the dealt hands are truly random then the
frequency of 2+ deuce hands should be the same regardless of what the
'n' is in n-play. And "feel" has nothing to do with it neither as I
was counting and recording the counts in a log book. I'm very well
aware that the swings can be bigger for 100 play, but they are due
entirely to covariance and they should be bigger in both directions
not just down.
···
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "vp_nbi" <nbi@w...> wrote:
The day I come to the conclusion that the machine I lost on was rigged is
the last day I darken the door of that particular casino. I won't do
business with anyone that tries to cheat me.
Chandler
···
_____
From: tooncesthecatwhocoulddriveacar [mailto:toonces…@…com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 5:03 PM
To: vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [vpFREE_Chicago] Re: 100 Play RF
*
What I can't comprehend are the people that know that the machines
are rigged, yet continue to play them.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I was referring to dealt hands. I am often surprised at how few dealt
hands I'll play in a session when I play 100 hands, on 100 .01
machines i just multiply points by 2 so it is easy at the end of the
day calc. I am always curious how I did on royals, figuring very
roughly that I would expect to get a royal every 200 pts. I find it
surpriseing how many fewer dealt hands I play at 100 hands versus a
smaller number of hands, because I have often felt shorted on various
dealt trips, but when I run the numbers the reults are more often
than no within reasonable bounds...I do remeber one very long session
playing ddb where I never got dealt trip aces ouch! but these things
are expected to happen even in fair games.
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "jaydavidson118"
<jaydavidson118@y...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Yes, as you say "10-25 hands at a time". I specifically
mentioned
> that
> > the hand frequencies at 25 hands or lower are remarkably
normal. Try
> > playing 100 play for a large number of hands and log how often
2 or
> > more deuces come up.
> >
>
> As you gear-up the number of hands you play at a time you going
to
> get considerably fewer independent deals in a session, so I would
> expect the results to "feel" a lot less normal...or put another
way
> your results will more likely deviate from expected value per
given
> session...obviously in the long run it has no effect.
Obviously covariance plays a greater role in 100 play. That isn't
the
point. I was specifically refering to the frequency of *dealt* hands
that contain 2+ deuces. If the dealt hands are truly random then the
frequency of 2+ deuce hands should be the same regardless of what
the
···
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "vp_nbi" <nbi@w...> wrote:
> --- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "vp_nbi" <nbi@w...> wrote:
'n' is in n-play. And "feel" has nothing to do with it neither as I
was counting and recording the counts in a log book. I'm very well
aware that the swings can be bigger for 100 play, but they are due
entirely to covariance and they should be bigger in both directions
not just down.
I still don't think you're getting my point. For openers the 100 plays
on the 2nd floor are abysmally slow, so comparing them to single plays
is a non-starter. The 100 plays in Don & Mikes otoh are very fast in
turbo. But I want to reemphasize that my quarrel is with the dealt
hands not with the covariant hands. Using your example the results
you're calculating are the net taking into account the covariant
hands. That's a subject worth investigating but before we investigate
hit rates on constructed hands it makes sense to look at the dealt
hands 1st. The hit rates of the constructed hands could be perfectly
normal for any dealt hand, yet the frequency of the dealt hands could
be off. The important point is that all the cards comprising the deal
and the draw should be random.
--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "jaydavidson118"
<jaydavidson118@y...> wrote:
···
I was referring to dealt hands. I am often surprised at how few dealt
hands I'll play in a session when I play 100 hands, on 100 .01
machines i just multiply points by 2 so it is easy at the end of the
day calc. I am always curious how I did on royals, figuring very
roughly that I would expect to get a royal every 200 pts. I find it
surpriseing how many fewer dealt hands I play at 100 hands versus a
smaller number of hands, because I have often felt shorted on various
dealt trips, but when I run the numbers the reults are more often
than no within reasonable bounds...I do remeber one very long session
playing ddb where I never got dealt trip aces ouch! but these things
are expected to happen even in fair games.--- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "vp_nbi" <nbi@w...> wrote:
>
> --- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "jaydavidson118"
> <jaydavidson118@y...> wrote:
> >
> > --- In vpFREE_Chicago@yahoogroups.com, "vp_nbi" <nbi@w...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, as you say "10-25 hands at a time". I specifically
mentioned
> > that
> > > the hand frequencies at 25 hands or lower are remarkably
normal. Try
> > > playing 100 play for a large number of hands and log how often
2 or
> > > more deuces come up.
> > >
> >
> > As you gear-up the number of hands you play at a time you going
to
> > get considerably fewer independent deals in a session, so I would
> > expect the results to "feel" a lot less normal...or put another
way
> > your results will more likely deviate from expected value per
given
> > session...obviously in the long run it has no effect.
>
> Obviously covariance plays a greater role in 100 play. That isn't
the
> point. I was specifically refering to the frequency of *dealt* hands
> that contain 2+ deuces. If the dealt hands are truly random then the
> frequency of 2+ deuce hands should be the same regardless of what
the
> 'n' is in n-play. And "feel" has nothing to do with it neither as I
> was counting and recording the counts in a log book. I'm very well
> aware that the swings can be bigger for 100 play, but they are due
> entirely to covariance and they should be bigger in both directions
> not just down.