Waiting for that 0.7% advantage, or whatever we think we have, to
assert itself can be a LOOOOONG wait, indeed. The fact of the matter
is that the edge on most positive EV VP is so razor-thin that fairly
ghastly losses--or disproportionate wins-- are still well within the
realm of probability.
I know of several players who played damn near perfectly, were
bankrolled to half a percent of risk of ruin, but died in their tracks
when they had a long, long losing streak. Even with a 1%+ advantage.
I also know of a couple of players who hammered away, eight-plus hours
a day, at 50-cent FPDW. In a YEAR, neither one hit a royal. Yet, they
finished over $11,000 ahead---one remarked that they were hitting quad
deuces about every 2000 hands (more than twice as often as they
"should" have hit...)
I myself spent five years wallowing in the pits of .25 FPDW and NEVER
got ahead. Then one fine day, I hit FIVE royals, and that blossomed
into a +3.5% year. My results are STILL statistically bizarre. Even
now, I've played over 1.5 million hands at Fiesta Rancho and have only
hit TWO royals there. By contrast, with roughly the same lifetime play
at Fiesta HENDERSON, I've hit over 70 of them.
Parenthetically, I'm down horribly for 2003/2004 at "fullpay" games,
while I've been SHREDDING NSUD, JOB, DDB, SA, TDB, TBP+, and other
99-99.8% games. I play these games, of course, when there's a high
cashback or promo or something to push these games into positive
territory---but I'm returning 102%+ of coin-in on these NEGATIVE EV games.
I don't know if any viable conclusion can be drawn from all this,
except that it seems like in all but the very long term, luck, and NOT
the inherent EV of the games you play, determines whether you wind up
a winner. After all, a 100.7% return game just means that after 50,000
hands, 52% of the players will be ahead and 48% behind; at JOB the
results may be reversed. (I don't know the actual math here; I'm just
trying to illustrate the point.)
A note on "expected" results
The whole maximize the EV thing can be a little misleading. The mean
or average EV converges to the expected EV, The sum or aggregate EV
that is the amount you are up or down does not converge, in fact the
variance of your total results keeps increasing. This means if you
take into account gamblers ruins considerations the variance of each
play must be taken into account not just the EV. Most authors do not
consider this.
D. Borowiak
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rockofjello333"
<rockofjello333@y...> wrote:
Waiting for that 0.7% advantage, or whatever we think we have, to
assert itself can be a LOOOOONG wait, indeed. The fact of the
matter
is that the edge on most positive EV VP is so razor-thin that
fairly
ghastly losses--or disproportionate wins-- are still well within
the
realm of probability.
I know of several players who played damn near perfectly, were
bankrolled to half a percent of risk of ruin, but died in their
tracks
when they had a long, long losing streak. Even with a 1%+
advantage.
I also know of a couple of players who hammered away, eight-plus
hours
a day, at 50-cent FPDW. In a YEAR, neither one hit a royal. Yet,
they
finished over $11,000 ahead---one remarked that they were hitting
quad
deuces about every 2000 hands (more than twice as often as they
"should" have hit...)
I myself spent five years wallowing in the pits of .25 FPDW and
NEVER
got ahead. Then one fine day, I hit FIVE royals, and that blossomed
into a +3.5% year. My results are STILL statistically bizarre. Even
now, I've played over 1.5 million hands at Fiesta Rancho and have
only
hit TWO royals there. By contrast, with roughly the same lifetime
play
at Fiesta HENDERSON, I've hit over 70 of them.
Parenthetically, I'm down horribly for 2003/2004 at "fullpay"
games,
while I've been SHREDDING NSUD, JOB, DDB, SA, TDB, TBP+, and other
99-99.8% games. I play these games, of course, when there's a high
cashback or promo or something to push these games into positive
territory---but I'm returning 102%+ of coin-in on these NEGATIVE
EV games.
I don't know if any viable conclusion can be drawn from all this,
except that it seems like in all but the very long term, luck, and
NOT
the inherent EV of the games you play, determines whether you wind
up
a winner. After all, a 100.7% return game just means that after
50,000
hands, 52% of the players will be ahead and 48% behind; at JOB the
results may be reversed. (I don't know the actual math here; I'm
just
···
trying to illustrate the point.)
rockofjello333 wrote:
snip
I know of several players who played damn near perfectly, were
bankrolled to half a percent of risk of ruin, but died in their tracks
when they had a long, long losing streak.
snip
Good post. I don't recognize your name, so if you're new -- welcome.
Fortunately for me, I'm just a serious recreational player. Serious, because I've been persuaded to play full-coin, and I do play perfectly; recreational, because we only make a trip to the casino about every two months, although I'd like to increase that to just once a month. I'd find that very enjoyable, and very affordable despite any long runs of bad luck.
Cheers.
Bill Velek
rockofjello333 wrote:
Waiting for that 0.7% advantage, or whatever we think we have, to
assert itself can be a LOOOOONG wait, indeed.
Possibly, but on the other hand, it doesn't take long at all for the
advantage of 10/7/5 DB to show its face vs. 9/6/4 play.
My point here (and it's not necessarily directed at you) is that it's
a simple step for some to point to the uncertainty of achieving game
EV and turning a profit as suggesting that luck is far more important
than paytables. But two starkly different factors are at work here
and luck plays a role to a considerably different degree in each.
There's no disputing, royals are king in vp. With the exception of a
game such as double double bonus, it's very unlikely over something
like a 100 thousand hands or so that you're going to pull out ahead if
you don't hit any royals. And if you manage to nail 2 or 3 more than
expected, you're probably whistling to the bank. Luck likely makes
most of the difference between a winner and a loser in any period
short of a million hands or so.
But take two players playing the same game but different paytables
(let's say 10/7 and 9/6 DB). Allow 10,000 hands and assume that both
players haven't hit a royal. I'll lay you very nice odds if you want
to bet against me that the 10/7 player is ahead of the game (it's not
a certainty since the high pay on Aces can push a player forward
nicely, as any player who's hit 5 sets in a day will attest).
The point is, if you've taken to play vp, don't go into a "positive"
game thinking it's a safe bet that after a year you'll hold a profit
(or might not suffer a very painful setback). But I'll offer strong
assurance that the better the paytables you play, the better your
showing will be at year end.
Don't let the fact that there's risk implicit in vp lead you into the
thought that luck is the only thing to be concerned about and good
paytables and skill aren't critical factors in the short run.
- Harry
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rockofjello333"
<rockofjello333@y...> wrote:
"Waiting for that 0.7% advantage, or whatever we think we have, to
assert itself can be a LOOOOONG wait, indeed. The fact of the matter
is that the edge on most positive EV VP is so razor-thin that fairly
ghastly losses--or disproportionate wins-- are still well within the
realm of probability."
"I know of several players who played damn near perfectly, were
bankrolled to half a percent of risk of ruin, but died in their
tracks when they had a long, long losing streak. Even with a 1%+
advantage. I also know of a couple of players who hammered away,
eight-plus hours a day, at 50-cent FPDW. In a YEAR, neither one hit
a royal. Yet, they finished over $11,000 ahead---one remarked that
they were hitting quad deuces about every 2000 hands (more than
twice as often as they "should" have hit...) ...."
Another wonderful story about adhering to the gospel of positive ev
vp; however, not all positive ev situations are created equal. A
secondary lesson would be the highlighting the dangers from the
indoctrination of perfect play coupled with the "long run."
Despite going through about 300,000 hands without a royal, granted
over 100,000 hands involved PE, I managed to consistently make
money from vp. I would say the biggest difference between you and
me is that I don't play razor-thin games. I like to wait for the
right opportunities. And I will add, I don't play anywhere near
perfect as is the case for hardcore vp players. That is to say,
rather than bang away to get the hands in, I choose to wait for 102%
+ opportunities during promotions, strong cash back, and attractive
progressive jackpots.
I used to be a $0.25 player, and I can tell you the first time I
stepped up to play $1 machines, I lost $600 within 40 minutes, and
that was a rude awakening! Fast forward a few years later, and with
a much larger bankroll, I again attacked the $1 machines and I got
lucky start. On a 9/6 JOB machine, I hit a STFL for $720 when a
baseline game was $250. For quads, I was cherry picking the quads at
$200 versus a the $125 baseline value (now, the market clears at
$150). In the case of quads, investing $600 to chase a $200 jackpot
is now par for the course.
The reason I like progressive STFL or Quads is that it doesn't take
that long to take down when compared with a RF. If I hit STFLs at
$800 and repeat this four more times, it's the equivalent of hitting
a RF. I've generally taken down 4 or 5 quad progressive per weekend
such that I can achieve the Quad RF equivalency cycle rather quickly.
Here's my message: Choose your positive ev opportunities carefully
rather than choosing every positive ev opportunity. Additionally,
know your opportunity costs - that ~$5 hourly win rate at $0.25
deuces (or ~$11.50 at $0.50 deuces) isn't a good idea, and to spend
a ungodly amount of hours banging away at it simply reinforces one's
contempt for vp.
I'll leave you this thought exercise that made the difference in my
vp career. Image a barrel containing an infinite number of tickets
(each ticket represents an outcome of a hand of vp). You have to pay
a fixed fee to draw one ticket out of the barrel. On average, it
takes you 40,000 tickets to hit a RF. However, you can play one
barrel at a time. The school of positive ev tells people to chose
those barrels whose base return is over 100% and/or those games with
other features (i.e. cash back, promotions, etc) that will result in
returns over 100%. The first question most people ask themselves is:
What is the best barrel to draw tickets? Another popular question
is how much time should one spend drawing out tickets?
For me, I asked myself if there is a way to cut down on the number
of tickets to get a RF? I think that has been the secret of my vp
success. Playing perfectly is the least of my problems -- finding
that right barrel and developing an acceptable ticket picking skills
are far more important in my book.
fordscks wrote:
snip
The reason I like progressive STFL or Quads is that it doesn't take
that long to take down when compared with a RF.
snip
Sounds like a good strategy. I never realized that their are progressives for the STFL or Quads, but then I've done 99% of my play in Tunica, and perhaps they just don't have such animals there.
Anyone know if there are those types of machines anywhere in Tunica?
Cheers.
Bill Velek
They have $1 machines at Harrahs and Sams Town in Tunica. These can
be really good plays especially at Harrahs.
Cheers
fordscks wrote:
snip
> The reason I like progressive STFL or Quads is that it doesn't
take
> that long to take down when compared with a RF.
snip
Sounds like a good strategy. I never realized that their are
progressives for the STFL or Quads, but then I've done 99% of my
play in
Tunica, and perhaps they just don't have such animals there.
Anyone know if there are those types of machines anywhere in
Tunica?