I'm going to betray my preference for low volatility by suggesting
that Jacks is still a reasonable candidate.
I understand the attraction to higher volatility games with "jackpots"
(say hand wins of 500 cr. or more) for single session play of a couple
of hours.
However, when game return is more strongly concentrated in infrequent
higher paying hands the downside is that the drain between those hands
is more intense. I know of no experience more deflating than hitting
Aces in DB but finding that I don't take much away from the session
due to below par return on lower, more frequent hands.
It's not only the case with Jacks that you'll see a smother session.
Your money will tend to last longer given the double pay on 2-pair and
you'll have a greater opportunity to hit those quad runs that will
leave can with a very tidy win, even playing Jacks.
Plus, a $100 session bankroll is a comfortable amount with which to
approach $.50 Jacks - generally looking for it to frequently see you
through at least an hour's play (a period of play that is only
moderately assured at $.25 for many higher volatility games),
increasing the likelihood that you'll come away with a nice sum on
your winning sessions -- a bankroll that I wouldn't even think of
touching $.50 DB with.
The advance to $.50 play can, at some casinos, bump up some promotions.
Bottom line, however, I look to a longer horizon and go with the
highest return game that's available at a denomination that's
comfortable. I'm much happier with sustained longer term wins than
I am with a large session win that tends to evaporate over a limited
number of future visits.
Something to consider: Frugal VP software has a Computer Play option
that does an excellent job of simulating play. It provides a grapical
display of win/loss history over any specified session. I like to do
a run of 10,000 hands, for example, and look at the graph to get a
feel for a game. You can review such a chart for a given game to get
assess the frequency with which $100 would see you through to a
session jackpot or result in a bust.
- Harry
David wrote:
···
For each session of 9/6 JoB ($0.25), I play till I either lose the
$100 or till i hit the jackpot of a Royal.
For FPDW, there are 2 jackpots -> Royal and quad 2's. When i hit
either i quit.
I have never played any of the "Bonus" variety VP.
I prefer FPDW over JoB not because it has better return (100.7% vs
99.5%) but because there is a 2nd jackpot in DW. to me, that means
less chance of walking away losing the whole $100.
Which type of machine gives me the best possibility of hitting any
mini-jackpot w/o going broke? (take into account the variance.)
I guess I'm asking what's the machine to play that offers me the max
probability of walking away with some $ (based on the criteria that
i walk away when i hit a jackpot/minijackpot)?
THX