vpFREE2 Forums

Advice needed

#1

Hello,
I live near Bangor, Maine so my video poker options are limited, to say the least. The only
slots/video poker machines in the entire state can be found at Hollywood Slots, in Bangor.
(Owned by Penn National Gaming, Inc.)

I suppose because they have no competition, they can afford to offer very poor rates of
return on their machines. They have a handful of video poker machines and each machine
offers the following games and 5 coin rates of return: Bonus Poker (94.18%), Double
Bonus Poker (93.10%), Deuces Wild (91.42%), and Joker Poker (91.12%).

My question is this. If I only have a bankroll of $200 (and prefer not to lose more than
$100 of it, if possible), and I play the 25 cent machines, and I can only play for 3 or 4
hours, if my money lasts that long, which game would be best to play? I would at first
glance assume I should play Bonus Poker because it has the highest rate of return, but I
understand that refers to the long term. In the short term, and with a limited bankroll,
would Bonus Poker still be my best bet? I realize some games are more volatile than
others.

Now for all those of you who are tempted to tell me I should just drive to Foxwoods or
Mohegan Sun, keep in mind that I live 7 hours from there so I would start off with an $80
"investment" in gas, round trip. And for others of you who plan to tell me I might as well
flush my money down the toilet as play a game with a return of 94%, consider the fact that
I take care of my mother who has Alzheimer's 24/7 so when my husband gives me a few
hours off, "feeding money" to a machine at Hollywood Slots is a welcome diversion, even if
it isn't lucrative.

So, given all of the above, which game would allow me (and my $200 bankroll) to play the
longest?

Thank you for any assistance you can give me.

Best wishes,
Cathy B.

#2

Since Bonus poker pays 2 for 1 for 2 pair it probably has the lowest
volatility so your money will last longer. Have fun playing.

···

At 03:25 PM 9/5/2006, you wrote:

Hello,
I live near Bangor, Maine so my video poker options are limited, to
say the least. The only
slots/video poker machines in the entire state can be found at
Hollywood Slots, in Bangor.
(Owned by Penn National Gaming, Inc.)

I suppose because they have no competition, they can afford to offer
very poor rates of
return on their machines. They have a handful of video poker
machines and each machine
offers the following games and 5 coin rates of return: Bonus Poker
(94.18%), Double
Bonus Poker (93.10%), Deuces Wild (91.42%), and Joker Poker (91.12%).

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#3

Dear Bill,
Thank you for your response. Unfortunately, the Hollywood Slots Bonus Poker only pays
one for one for two pair. The pay table is 1-1-3-5-8-10-25-40-80-50-800.
Given that fact, do you still think Bonus Poker is the way to go?

Thanks again.

Cathy

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bill Coleman <vphobby2@...> wrote:

Since Bonus poker pays 2 for 1 for 2 pair it probably has the lowest
volatility so your money will last longer. Have fun playing.

At 03:25 PM 9/5/2006, you wrote:
>Hello,
>I live near Bangor, Maine so my video poker options are limited, to
>say the least. The only
>slots/video poker machines in the entire state can be found at
>Hollywood Slots, in Bangor.
>(Owned by Penn National Gaming, Inc.)
>
>I suppose because they have no competition, they can afford to offer
>very poor rates of
>return on their machines. They have a handful of video poker
>machines and each machine
>offers the following games and 5 coin rates of return: Bonus Poker
>(94.18%), Double
>Bonus Poker (93.10%), Deuces Wild (91.42%), and Joker Poker (91.12%).

#4

Oy!

Do you have WinPoker? If so, plug each paytable in and find the one
with the lowest variance. If not, post the paytables and one of us
will do it for you.

Regards,

B

···

At 04:38 PM 9/5/2006, you wrote:

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bill Coleman <vphobby2@...> wrote:
>
> Since Bonus poker pays 2 for 1 for 2 pair it probably has the lowest
> volatility so your money will last longer. Have fun playing.
>
> At 03:25 PM 9/5/2006, you wrote:
> >Hello,
> >I live near Bangor, Maine so my video poker options are limited, to
> >say the least. The only
> >slots/video poker machines in the entire state can be found at
> >Hollywood Slots, in Bangor.
> >(Owned by Penn National Gaming, Inc.)
> >
> >I suppose because they have no competition, they can afford to offer
> >very poor rates of
> >return on their machines. They have a handful of video poker
> >machines and each machine
> >offers the following games and 5 coin rates of return: Bonus Poker
> >(94.18%), Double
> >Bonus Poker (93.10%), Deuces Wild (91.42%), and Joker Poker (91.12%).
>

Dear Bill,
Thank you for your response. Unfortunately, the Hollywood Slots
Bonus Poker only pays
one for one for two pair. The pay table is 1-1-3-5-8-10-25-40-80-50-800.
Given that fact, do you still think Bonus Poker is the way to go?

Thanks again.

Cathy

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#5

In that case, another consideration might be the difference in
playing strategy, so you don't have to completely relearn a strategy
when you do eventually make it out to a casino with better
paytables. The DW or DDB may have strategies that are very similar
to "normal" games, just lousy pays. Make sure you get every penny
you can in comps.

>
> Since Bonus poker pays 2 for 1 for 2 pair it probably has the

lowest

> volatility so your money will last longer. Have fun playing.
>

>

Dear Bill,
Thank you for your response. Unfortunately, the Hollywood Slots

Bonus Poker only pays

one for one for two pair. The pay table is 1-1-3-5-8-10-25-40-80-50-

800.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Cathy" <kitchat123@...> wrote:

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bill Coleman <vphobby2@> wrote:
Given that fact, do you still think Bonus Poker is the way to go?

Thanks again.

Cathy

#6

Thanks, BIll and Mike. I just ordered Jean Scott's Frugal Video Poker software. As soon as I
receive it, I will "plug in" the paytables and check out the variance (as soon as I figure out
what a variance is) and take a look at the strategies.

Thank you for your suggestions!

Best wishes,
Cathy B.

#7

Expected return and Variance (whatever Variance is!) calculations
don't need FVP software. For strategies, you need it.

I plugged the numbes you had in a GamblingTools webpage, and it came
up with the following:

Expected Return: 94.18%
Variance: 19.58

It positively (pun intended) qualifies the game to be shunned by
the "initiated".

The site has standard paytables for several games, and you can change
the numbers for variations thereof. Try
http://www.gamblingtools.net/vp/vpanalyzer.html

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Cathy" <kitchat123@...> wrote:

Thanks, BIll and Mike. I just ordered Jean Scott's Frugal Video

Poker software. As soon as I receive it, I will "plug in" the
paytables and check out the variance (as soon as I figure out what a
variance is) and take a look at the strategies.

#8

Hi,
Thanks for your assistance. Actually I am familiar with the vpanalyzer tool you mentioned.
That is how I figured the dismal expected return for the games I mentioned.

As for variance, I am still a little fuzzy on the concept. But I guess if you have a small
bankroll and lousy paytables, you would be better off playing a game with the lowest
variance?

Cathy B.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Adams Myth" <Adams_Myth@...> wrote:

Expected return and Variance (whatever Variance is!) calculations
don't need FVP software. For strategies, you need it.

I plugged the numbes you had in a GamblingTools webpage, and it came
up with the following:

Expected Return: 94.18%
Variance: 19.58

#9

Cathy wrote:

As for variance, I am still a little fuzzy on the concept. But I
guess if you have a small bankroll and lousy paytables, you would be
better off playing a game with the lowest variance?

That's ok, when it comes to vp, variance is a bit of a fuzzy concept
itself :slight_smile:

The gist of the concept is that the more game return that is tied up
in infrequent, high paying hands (like quads and the royal), the more
uncertain your game outcome is each session.

For example, with 9/6 Jacks or better, the game return excluding
everything from the quads and up represents about 8.5% of the game
return. If you play for several hours, it'll be rare that your return
dips below 90% (but it will happen occasionally).

In the case of 9/6 DDB, the return on these hands comprise over 20% of
the game return. Losses below 90% will occur with some frequency --
but there will be offsetting trips with returns that only royals could
attain in 9/6 Jacks.

···

------

A working definition of variance is that it's a measure of the
uncertainly with which you'll achieve a return closely approximating
the expected return of a game over any given number of hands. The
higher the variance number, the more fluctuation you expect in session
returns.

Because of the increasing fluctuation in return as variance increases,
you need to carry more cash into a session when playing a higher
variance game than lower. You're also subject to greater loss risk
over the longer term with a higher variance game.

The consequence of this is that a prudent player, who has preserving
their bankroll as a priority, will look for a higher return on a
higher variance game than for a lower variance game, as compensation
for the added risk.

Someone playing on a modest bankroll may be best off in playing lower
variance games -- at least until they have the experience under their
belt from which to judge which games their bankroll can bear.

------

With respect to poor paytables, the best advice is to play at minimum
denominations -- and in this case, it can make sense to play at less
than "full coin".

Play for the pleasure, but try not to wrap that pleasure up in
negative expectation risk and the thirst for a large jackpot. Save
the bucks up for an occasional trip to LV where the real enjoyment can
be found (or an excursion to AC, if more convenient).

- Harry

#10

I don't think that automatically follows. The smaller the bankroll, the
better off you are playing a game with low variance for a given EV
(which is a function of the paytable). But a low paytable will deplete
your bankroll in any case.

Variance can be a simple (or a complex) concept; there's variance right
there!

Excuse me if what follows below is already familiar to you. I think it
is to most people. I am only trying to see how clear and simple I can
make it. Which could be a measure of how well I understand it!

If you toss a perfect coin a 100 times, and note down the number of
heads, and repeat this a hundred times, you have a hundred numbers for
the number of times the heads appeared in each of the hundred trials.
And the mean of these hundred numbers should be very close to 50.

But some of the individual numebrs will be less than and some more than
50. If you take the difference between the maximunm and minimum of
these numbers, that spread is an indication of the variance. It is not
the variance as defined mathematically.

There will be more numbers bunched around 50 than, say, around 75.
There may not be a number around 90, though theoretically, it is
possible. The more the numbers are bunched around 50, the smaller is
the variance.

If you play a Video Poker game with a certain paytable, and
consequently a certain EV, with perfect (or pretty good) strategy, you
should expect obtain something close to the EV, if you play for a
sufficiently longtime. If the game has low variance (such as Jacks or
Better), that would be the case much of the time. If the game has large
variance (such as Deuces Wild), your return would swing on either of
the EV, wildly. The swings do not depend on the paytable, only on the
nature of the game. For example, a 9/6 JoB as well as a 6/5 JoB have
low variance, though the 6/5 SoB will make you lose money faster!

For example:
JoB Return Variance
9/6 99.54% 19.51
8/5 97.30 19.32
6/5 95.00 19.04

A Deuces Wild game on the other hand, has a lrage varaince, no matter
whether it is Full pay or lousy pay.

Deuces Wild Return Variance
1-2-2-3-5- 9-15 100.76 25.84
1-2-3-4-4-10-15 99.42 25.68
1-2-2-3-4-10-15 94.82 25.25

and Dbl Dbl Bonus (1-1-3-4-6- 9) has 98.98/41.98, and a higher paying
variation of it (1-1-3-4-7-10) has 100.39/39.90

With a lousy paytable, one is better off not playing, no matter the
bankroll size, no matter the level of variance. With a good paytable,
you need a larger bankroll, larger the variance.

I think I said too much. Hope it is clear, even if unncessary.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Cathy" <kitchat123@...> wrote:

As for variance, I am still a little fuzzy on the concept. But I

guess if you have a small bankroll and lousy paytables, you would be
better off playing a game with the lowest variance?

#11

Wow. Thank you so much for this very informative and helpful response, Harry. I think I
am beginning to understand variance! :slight_smile:

I will take your advice to heart. Until I can get somewhere that offers decent paytables, I
will stick to the lower denominations and lower variance games.

Thank you again!

Best wishes,
Cathy B.

#12

Thank you so much for this explanation of variance. Thanks to you and Harry, I am finally
beginning to understand variance. I am not a numbers kind of gal by nature, so I tend to
look at things more from an emotional or feeling standpoint. After reading your
description of variance, I guess I would view variance in terms of the lows and highs I feel
when I am done playing.

With a high variance, I am more likely to experience more lows and highs. "Wow, 3 quads
in 30 minutes! Awesome!" Or, "@#$*$#!!!! Two hours without one lousy quad. Give me a
break!" With a low variance, I am more likely to have more middle of the road type
feelings. (And be more at risk of falling asleep while I play.)

I think I have a high variance personality with a low variance bankroll. :slight_smile:

Thanks again, Adams_Myth! (Adam Smyth?)

Best wishes,
Cathy B.

#13

With a high variance, I am more likely to experience more lows and

highs. "Wow, 3 quads in 30 minutes! Awesome!" Or, "@#$*$#!!!! Two
hours without one lousy quad. Give me a break!" With a low variance, I
am more likely to have more middle of the road type feelings. (And be
more at risk of falling asleep while I play.)

By jove, you've got it!! In fact, in a recent post, someone said that
while many games have a Risk of Ruin number associated with a bankroll,
Jacks or Better has the Risk of Death by boredom!

Thanks again, Adams_Myth! (Adam Smyth?)

Now, you are blowing my cover! I'm just

A Myth

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Cathy" <kitchat123@...> wrote:

#14

Oops, sorry about that! You seem like too nice a guy to be called "A Myth", but, as old Bill
Shakespeare used to say, "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name
would smell as sweet."

Thanks again for your help!

Best wishes,
Cathy B.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Adams Myth" <Adams_Myth@...> wrote:

Now, you are blowing my cover! I'm just

A Myth

#15

bankroll. :slight_smile:

I missed the above before.

Years ago, a furniture store around DC used to have big ads on the
metro buses - Nancy's style at Barbara's prices.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Cathy" <kitchat123@...> wrote:

I think I have a high variance personality with a low variance

#16

I don't think this is a very good analogy. In video poker much of the EV is
tied to the Royal that has a 1 in 40,000 or so chance of happening. It is
easy to play 200,000 hands without getting a royal and lose a lot of money.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

···

On 9/7/06, Adams Myth <Adams_Myth@hotmail.com> wrote:

Excuse me if what follows below is already familiar to you. I think it
is to most people. I am only trying to see how clear and simple I can
make it. Which could be a measure of how well I understand it!

If you toss a perfect coin a 100 times, and note down the number of
heads, and repeat this a hundred times, you have a hundred numbers for
the number of times the heads appeared in each of the hundred trials.
And the mean of these hundred numbers should be very close to 50.
-----------------------------

#17

Perhaps. But I was making no particular reference to Video Poker, in
the explanation of variance.

A "perfect coin" toss would come close to a game with minimal
variance. Consider a Card game where all the 8's are removed. You are
dealt one card. If it is 9 or better, it pays you 2 coins. If it is 7
or lower, you lose your one coin. This is a game with 100% EV, and
very low variance.

On the other extreme, consider another game (keep the 8's) where you
are dealt one card, and get paid 13 coins if it is an Ace, and zero
for any other card. This is also a game with 100% EV, but a very
large variance.

As to the Royal Flush, while it is true that most games do not have a
positive expectation without the Royal Flush, it is not true
that "much" of the EV is tied to it. In a 9/6 JoB, only 1.98% of the
EV is tied to the Royal Flush.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "J Bernard" <jbernardk@...> wrote:

I don't think this is a very good analogy. In video poker much of

the EV is tied to the Royal that has a 1 in 40,000 or so chance of
happening. It is easy to play 200,000 hands without getting a royal
and lose a lot of money.

If you play 5-coins on a Quarter machine, you would have put in 250k,
and lose $6092 on the 9/6 JoB game, if you don't hit a Royal Flush.

#18

While this is generally true, some variance numbers can be very
misleading. For example, when you improve a game's payout
schedule (playing a progressive for instance) you may increase
the variance along with the ER:

9/6 JoB with 4,000 unit RF: ER - 99.5% VAR - 19.5

9/6 JoB with 12,000 unit PROG RF: ER - 103.3% VAR - 185

You don't need a bigger bankroll and you're not increasing your
risk, if you use basic 9/6 JoB strategy for both games.

vpFae

···

On 7 Sep 2006 at 9:24, Harry Porter wrote:

Because of the increasing fluctuation in return as variance
increases, you need to carry more cash into a session when playing a
higher variance game than lower. You're also subject to greater loss
risk over the longer term with a higher variance game.

#19

vpFae6128305 wrote:

You don't need a bigger bankroll and you're not increasing your
risk, if you use basic 9/6 JoB strategy for both games.

Good point. (My generality doesn't apply to a progressive -- and when
applied to a single session, it's also fallacious for a game such as
pick'em.)

- H.

#20

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "vpFae6128305" <vpfae6128305@...>
wrote:

While this is generally true, some variance numbers can be very
misleading. For example, when you improve a game's payout
schedule (playing a progressive for instance) you may increase
the variance along with the ER:

9/6 JoB with 4,000 unit RF: ER - 99.5% VAR - 19.5

9/6 JoB with 12,000 unit PROG RF: ER - 103.3% VAR - 185

You don't need a bigger bankroll and you're not increasing your
risk, if you use basic 9/6 JoB strategy for both games.

vpFae

This is an important point that is not widely appreciated. It is a
clear case where a much bigger variance leads to a smaller risk.

A similar example led Sorokin (of the "jazbo/Sorokin" longterm RoR
equation) to come up with his version of that
equation. He posted a question on the old bjmath.com board. He used
blackjack-type RoR equations to try to get the RoR for a very simple
(non-VP) game. Then he did nothing except increase the big payoff
and apply the equations again. Instead of RoR decreasing, as logic
demands, the RoR increased. He asked why that was. A few weeks
later, he answered his own question, introducing the polynomial RoR
equation to many of us. (jazbo had independently come up with the
polynomial RoR equation even earlier.)

My only point in re-hashing that is to highlight the significance
(and subtlety) of the 'higher variance/lower risk' condition.

--Dunbar