Hi,
I've searched the forums but not finding any exact numbers on these
machines.
I am going to be playing 50-play 9/6 JoB where I am betting max (250)
on nickle or dime.
As I understand it the swings on 50-play at full 50 hands are much
larger than just single-line play... so I can't use the normal "5x
royal flush = $1,000 bankroll (nickle)" logic right?
Thank you.
I'd recommend to take approximately 2.5 times your usual bankroll.
If you play 50-play dimes, it might make sense to only play 47 lines
and avoid a W2G on a dealt straight flush.
JBQ
On 2/24/06, stephenipc <Stephen@roundsparrow.com> wrote:
Hi,
I've searched the forums but not finding any exact numbers on these
machines.I am going to be playing 50-play 9/6 JoB where I am betting max (250)
on nickle or dime.As I understand it the swings on 50-play at full 50 hands are much
larger than just single-line play... so I can't use the normal "5x
royal flush = $1,000 bankroll (nickle)" logic right?Thank you.
vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
Oh, forgot to mention. That's an approximation based on variance alone
which assumes the same coin-in as you normally would in single-line.
If you deal the same number of hands you'll need a lot more (normal
statistics will say that you need to multiply by an extra 7, and that
doesn't take into account the skewing effect of big dealt hands).
JBQ
On 2/25/06, Jean-Baptiste Queru <jbqueru@gmail.com> wrote:
I'd recommend to take approximately 2.5 times your usual bankroll.
If you play 50-play dimes, it might make sense to only play 47 lines
and avoid a W2G on a dealt straight flush.JBQ
Thank you for your reply. I'm not sure I understand your 7x number.
As I see it, we have:
play_hands, coins, demonination, total_bet, rf_value
1, 5, $0.05, $0.25, $200.00
50, 5, $0.05, $12.50, $200.00
1, 5, $0.10, $0.50, $400.00
50, 5, $0.10, $25.00, $400.00
Now on single hand play general advice for bankroll is "3x royal
flush" or "5x royal flush" (Jean Scott mentioned as a source for this
in terms of practical experience). So on nickle play = (3x) $600 to
(5x) $1000.
My question was how does the 50-play change things... as the $12.50
total bet is applied against the same base hand.
You first said plan on about 2.5 times that = (3x) $1500 to (5x) $2500.
Your follow-up - oh so you are saying if I played 50x slower (lower
number of base hands) at 50x each play - but in reality I find I'm
playing at the same speed (I mean in terms of holding cars you are
really only playing one hand).
===============
I found one reference at
http://wizardofodds.com/askthewizard/105
Q: Should I avoid the 50 play (or even better the 100 play) video
poker machines? I'm weak and I love the rush but it's been sucking
down my cash. What should I know?
A: Generally speaking 50 and 100 play machines have lousy pay tables
and thus should be avoided. However assuming you did find a decent pay
table ask yourself what you would play on single play and then divide
that by 50 or 100. For example if you play the $1 single line machines
then you should play 2 cent 50 line or 1 cent 100 line games.
================
For bankroll purposes this seems to be the other extreme, doesn't it?
It seems to suggest you should treat it like a bet is just multipled
in a simple way. Using this logic, a RF is worth 50x$200 ($10,000)
and taking it a step further: Jean Scott's advice I should have a 5xRF
bankroll of $50,000.
This seems too simple to me, as a "pat hand" RF is not the same as
having 3 or 4 cards dealt... on single-line the outcome is the same,
but not on 10/50/100 play.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Jean-Baptiste Queru" <jbqueru@...> wrote:
Oh, forgot to mention. That's an approximation based on variance alone
which assumes the same coin-in as you normally would in single-line.
If you deal the same number of hands you'll need a lot more (normal
statistics will say that you need to multiply by an extra 7, and that
doesn't take into account the skewing effect of big dealt hands).JBQ
On 2/25/06, Jean-Baptiste Queru <jbqueru@...> wrote:
> I'd recommend to take approximately 2.5 times your usual bankroll.
>
> If you play 50-play dimes, it might make sense to only play 47 lines
> and avoid a W2G on a dealt straight flush.
>
> JBQ
Please join in on this, especially if you can point me to prior
discussion on this.
Ok, I found:
http://www.jazbo.com/videopoker/nplay.html
====================
To compute the variance of an N-play version of a game from the list,
just add the base game variance to (N-1) times the covariance.
For example, the variance of 9/6 Jacks in the 4-play version is 19.510
+ (4-1)x1.966 = 25.408. (Note that variance is always given in units
of bets squared.) The percentage column in the table gives the
correlation coefficent (=100%*Covariance/Variance), which makes it
easy to see that 4-play Jacks has about 30.2% more variance than the
standard game per base bet. That is, for all four draws together the
variance would be 4x(1.302) = 5.208 base bets squared instead of the 4
base bets squared you would get on four independent plays.
For 10-play (yikes!), you would need a bankroll that is 9x10.079% =
90.87% larger than for 1-play.
=====================
ok, so using this formula for JoB... I would need 49x10.079% = 493.871%
So the general pratical advice of having 3x to 5x RF as Bankroll would
come out:
RF=$200 (4000 nickles)
5x $200 = $1,000 (Jean Scotts practical advice)
$1,000 x 4.93871 = $4,938.71
Can someone look this over and make sure my reading comprehension, use
of percentages, and multiplication looks good?
stephenipc wrote:
Ok, I found:
http://www.jazbo.com/videopoker/nplay.htmlTo compute the variance of an N-play version of a game from the
list, just add the base game variance to (N-1) times the covariance.ok, so using this formula for JoB... I would need 49x10.079% =
493.871%So the general pratical advice of having 3x to 5x RF as Bankroll
would come out:RF=$200 (4000 nickles)
5x $200 = $1,000 (Jean Scotts practical advice)
$1,000 x 4.93871 = $4,938.71Can someone look this over and make sure my reading comprehension,
use of percentages, and multiplication looks good?
Stephen,
I'll toss out a few observations here. There are a couple of things
to clear up first.
There's a certain ambiguity when it comes to the term "bankroll".
It's used in two contexts -- the largest loss you might suffer in
lifetime play (defined under a stated risk tolerance) and,
alternatively, the amount you should take with you for a single
session or trip. I prefer to discuss the latter as a "stake" to avoid
confusion, but prevailing usage calls this a "trip bankroll".
At any rate, JBQ's reply addressed your bankroll question in the
"trip" sense -- how much more you should bring to see you through a
trip of 50-play. However, I don't think play variables were
sufficiently defined to arrive at firm answers.
-------------
Touching on the Jazbo article you've found:
http://jazbo.com/videopoker/nplay.html
Jazbo discusses the method by which n-play vp variance can be
calculated. He goes on to suggest if a single line game requires a
lifetime bankroll of x, and an n-play version of the game has a
variance (expressed in bets) that is T% greater, that the bankroll
requirement of the n-play will also be T% greater.
However, in a section addressing "volatility", he goes on to note that
people report a perceived volatility that's greater than what the
preciding would suggest. He suggests this may be the overall higher
volume of play implicit in n-play.
I'd suggest that it's another factor though. The variance
calculations that he performs are valid over the long-term. But
they're poor as a descriptor for what will happen in the shorter run.
In particular, a RF is hit very infrequently but is a very strong
component of the variance value.
Frankly, if the goal is to stake yourself for a losing trip, hitting a
RF isn't exactly a predominent concern. I'd suggest that an
alternative variance comparison, in which rare hands such as a RF are
excluded, would have greater validity. I'd expect that the n-play
values would be considerably higher than single line, under this
calculation, and would prove a more reliable basis for trip stake
(bankroll) determination.
------------
But, all that is by way of saying that for most people the only good
way to get a feel for what they want to bring to the n-play table is a
sense they've developed through their own play over time.
If you want stronger guidance, than give some concrete examples as to
what you'd bring for Jacks play under other scenarios and ask for
suggestions as to what an appropriate amount would by for a given
n-play -- stating clearly how much play you want to be assured of on
your stake.
------------
You dropped a couple of comments along the way which would appear to
be references to lifetime-play bankrolls. You've quoted "Jean Scott's
practical advice" of a 5-RF bankroll requirement.
I see similar statements from time to time by others, made outside of
any specific context. More familiar is guidance to bankroll for the
value of 3-5 RF's.
The statements are made under very clear play circumstances, typcially
play of FPDW with about .25% additional cash. Generally speaking,
we're talking about playing at a 1% advantage on a low variance game.
In that case, a 5-RF bankroll translates to about a 1% ROR; 3-RF to
about 5% ROR.
When you're talking about 9/6 Jacks, unless you're looking at a
minimum of .46% kicker (to error-free play), there's no such thing as
a defined "bankroll". You're playing a negative-expectation game and,
over the horizon of "forever", there's no limit to expected losses.
For a "positive" game, the bankroll concept offsets the risk of
short-term volatility by the fact that you have a winning expectation
in the longer term. The stronger that edge and the lower the game
variance, the smaller the necessary bankroll.
Bottom line, there's no general bankroll "rule of thumb" that can be
applied to all play options. Understand the "5-bankroll" one you've
cited in the context in which it's valid.
- Harry
Please join in on this, especially if you can point me to prior
discussion on this.Ok, I found:
http://www.jazbo.com/videopoker/nplay.html====================
To compute the variance of an N-play version of a game from the
list,
just add the base game variance to (N-1) times the covariance.
For example, the variance of 9/6 Jacks in the 4-play version is
19.510
+ (4-1)x1.966 = 25.408. (Note that variance is always given in units
of bets squared.) The percentage column in the table gives the
correlation coefficent (=100%*Covariance/Variance), which makes it
easy to see that 4-play Jacks has about 30.2% more variance than the
standard game per base bet. That is, for all four draws together the
variance would be 4x(1.302) = 5.208 base bets squared instead of
the 4
base bets squared you would get on four independent plays.
For 10-play (yikes!), you would need a bankroll that is 9x10.079% =
90.87% larger than for 1-play.
=====================ok, so using this formula for JoB... I would need 49x10.079% =
493.871%
So the general pratical advice of having 3x to 5x RF as Bankroll
would
come out:
RF=$200 (4000 nickles)
5x $200 = $1,000 (Jean Scotts practical advice)
$1,000 x 4.93871 = $4,938.71Can someone look this over and make sure my reading comprehension,
use
of percentages, and multiplication looks good?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
With the possible exception of JBQ & Marks-a-lot I have played more
50&100ply than any body else on this board because I ,we gamble in VP
NIRVANA, Reno-Reno where they are common. In fact this would be
better posted on VPfree_reno.
You got the right idea, not so sure in the math, but now we will take
it to the next step & discuss volatilty
If you played a single line game for $12.50 a shot, you either win
something or win nothing. Can lead to a WILD ride even in a low
variance game like job. Losing 5k in an hour is a strong possibily.
At 3 times a royal for session thats $30k ( i dont really agree with
that)
Now on a 50ply you will win somthing win every hand, cuts the
volatilty WAY down, now losing 5k in an hour is almost but not
quite ,impossible.
I play 100play at .01 & .02 level at Atlantis , $5 or $10 a shot, i
am comfortable sittin down with a $500 or $1k session bankroll. I
have lost $100 to $150 in an hour BUT not often. The more lines
played the closer you get to the games return ( 99.5% for JOB IF
played perfect)
Bob Dancer on his casinogambling.com site (on the links page) as
discuss this subject. Check it out please.
M J
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "stephenipc" <Stephen@...> wrote:
A 100-play $0.10 (dime) machine is equivalent to playing a single
line $10.00 machine, since both cost $50 per "pull".
A $10 machine has a RF of $40,000. Thus a bankroll of 3 "royals" is
$120,000.
Am I correct?
BL
Thank you for your reply. I'm not sure I understand your 7x number.
As I see it, we have:
play_hands, coins, demonination, total_bet, rf_value
1, 5, $0.05, $0.25, $200.00
50, 5, $0.05, $12.50, $200.00
1, 5, $0.10, $0.50, $400.00
50, 5, $0.10, $25.00, $400.00Now on single hand play general advice for bankroll is "3x royal
flush" or "5x royal flush" (Jean Scott mentioned as a source for
this
in terms of practical experience). So on nickle play = (3x) $600
to
(5x) $1000.
My question was how does the 50-play change things... as the $12.50
total bet is applied against the same base hand.You first said plan on about 2.5 times that = (3x) $1500 to (5x)
$2500.
Your follow-up - oh so you are saying if I played 50x slower (lower
number of base hands) at 50x each play - but in reality I find I'm
playing at the same speed (I mean in terms of holding cars you are
really only playing one hand).===============
I found one reference at
http://wizardofodds.com/askthewizard/105Q: Should I avoid the 50 play (or even better the 100 play) video
poker machines? I'm weak and I love the rush but it's been sucking
down my cash. What should I know?A: Generally speaking 50 and 100 play machines have lousy pay
tables
and thus should be avoided. However assuming you did find a decent
pay
table ask yourself what you would play on single play and then
divide
that by 50 or 100. For example if you play the $1 single line
machines
then you should play 2 cent 50 line or 1 cent 100 line games.
================For bankroll purposes this seems to be the other extreme, doesn't
it?
It seems to suggest you should treat it like a bet is just
multipled
in a simple way. Using this logic, a RF is worth 50x$200 ($10,000)
and taking it a step further: Jean Scott's advice I should have a
5xRF
bankroll of $50,000.
This seems too simple to me, as a "pat hand" RF is not the same as
having 3 or 4 cards dealt... on single-line the outcome is the
same,
but not on 10/50/100 play.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Jean-Baptiste Queru" <jbqueru@>
wrote:
>
> Oh, forgot to mention. That's an approximation based on variance
alone
> which assumes the same coin-in as you normally would in single-
line.
> If you deal the same number of hands you'll need a lot more
(normal
> statistics will say that you need to multiply by an extra 7, and
that
> doesn't take into account the skewing effect of big dealt hands).
>
> JBQ
>
> > I'd recommend to take approximately 2.5 times your usual
bankroll.
> >
> > If you play 50-play dimes, it might make sense to only play 47
lines
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "stephenipc" <Stephen@...> wrote:
> On 2/25/06, Jean-Baptiste Queru <jbqueru@> wrote:
> > and avoid a W2G on a dealt straight flush.
> >
> > JBQ
>