Re: Are you being cheated on Full Pay Video Poker?
First of all, anything is possible, including "gaffing" a video poker machine - there are undoubtedly computer programmers and cheats out there with the necessary combination of expertise, access, and resources.
If I were such a group of people, I would gaff the machine to give me more winners.
If I were the casino, where "access" to the machines is not a problem, I could do this, and risk losing my license, or just change the paytable, keeping it legal and keeping my license, and making plenty more profit with no risk (except the risk that I'd lose the business of the advantage players, oh gee).
Seems like better business to change the paytable.
So, how do we explain the reports of returns that are less than projected? Well, the options, have all been discussed -- deficient record-keeping, statistical variation -- except for one option, errors. I know that many here profess high-speed play with no errors. I don't believe anyone can play error-free, and while this can be verified one way or the other on a computer, it can't be verified in a casino setting, where the conditions include distractions, malfunctioning or missed buttons, fatigue, etc. etc. I do believe that most, if not all, of the expert players can play through these adverse conditions with minimal errors, but not hundreds of thousands of hands without errors. I think these players ARE human, even though that is occasionally subject to debate here.
I certainly don't think that most expert players can/do make enough errors to lose their advantage, but it is another factor which, along with all the others, can help explain returns that are below expectation at a level and over a duration that seems like a one in 10,000 chance of occurrence.
And let us not forget, events occur that are one in 10,000. And less likely than that -- think of all the people who hit the lottery, win the Megabucks, etc. -- certainly among those who play video poker expertly, there will also be some who have the one in 10,000 experience over a fairly long term.
Finally, I agree that the gaming commission could probably take their surveillance of machines up a notch - not only verifying that the correct chips are in machines, as is my understanding of their current inspections, but also hiring someone with sufficient expertise to determine if all the other chips in the machines are also "correct", and not a source of gaming the primary game chip. But I can see how this would not be a priority for them, with sufficient other issues to keep them busy with greater return on their resources.
--BG
ยทยทยท
===============