Free Money Isn't Free
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/f7ael">
http://tinyurl.com/f7ael</a>
************************************************
This link is posted for informational purposes and doesn't
constitute an endorsement or approval of the linked article's
content by vpFREE. Any discussion of the article must be done
in accordance with vpFREE's rules and policies.
************************************************
Bob,
Could you explain this paragraph a little further?
On occasion, of course, players make rounds and collect Free Play at several
casinos back to back --- perhaps Palms, Gold Coast, Tuscany, and Ellis
Island all on the same trip. (Each local player has his own set of "rounds"
to make. It's a cost of doing business these days.) On these days, the idea
is to collect the Free Play and leave, and the monthly play is done on other
days.
I had the impression that using free play and then leaving would bring down
your daily average, thus reducing the offers you get in the future. Or is
your daily average only affected when you bet your own money?
What about at places like Wynn, where you have to make at least one unit's
bet with your own money?
Is there any inherent disadvantage to using freeplay on a day when you're
putting in your regular play? I know that my Tuscany mailers are good for
freeplay any day of the week, why wouldn't I want to redeem it on a Sunday
or Wednesday and then play as usual on a 5x points day?
I'm a little confused on this point.
Thanks,
~Jay
On 8/15/06, vpFae6128305 <vpfae6128305@cox.net> wrote:
Free Money Isn't Free
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/f7ael">
http://tinyurl.com/f7ael</a>************************************************
This link is posted for informational purposes and doesn't
constitute an endorsement or approval of the linked article's
content by vpFREE. Any discussion of the article must be done
in accordance with vpFREE's rules and policies.************************************************
vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jay asked about free play.
At some casinos, collecting free play lowers your theoretical.
At others (Station, Fiesta, Ellis Island) it doesn't.
At Palms, it affects your theoretical but personally I don't let
that affect my play much. I usually do my monthly play there over three
or four days --- depending on the promotion --- and trust it's high
enough to generate near-the-top mailers. But when I play, I often play
$500K or more in one day. Players who play lesser amounts have different
considerations.
I can't tell you about Wynn, although I've heard through the
grapevine that they expect some play there every time you come in. I was
dealt an $80,000 royal there ($2 Ten Play)on my second month's play and
was told by my host that that proved to them I was a strong player and
not to expect mailings, and that future comps would be based on losses
--- not theoretical. Obviously a dealt royal doesn't say anything about
one's competence, but that was the excuse they used. (There are other
strong players as well who've received similar treatment. Fortunately
for us, they at least let us "score a big one" before they cut us off
from the extra goodies.)
You'll have to ask others about Tuscany --- although it may be
moot at this point. Playing for dollars just doesn't float my boat. I
played for quarters and dollars for years, and certainly don't put
anyone down who's currently playing those stakes, but there are enough
strong plays for the well-financed higher-stakes players that going down
to that level simply isn't necessary. Were I to play lower stakes, I'd
probably hang out at the 50¢ Ten-Coin FPDW at Hard Rock. For fast
players, that's a $40/hour play --- even with no benefits. This won't
last long, and I'd get while the getting was good.
Bob Dancer
For the best in video poker information, visit www.bobdancer.com
or call 1-800-244-2224 M-F 9-5 Pacific Time.
I was dealt an $80,000 royal there ($2 Ten Play)on my second month's
play and was told by my host that that proved to them I was a strong
player and not to expect mailings, ...
You mean before that they had no idea that you were a strong player?
Were I to play lower stakes, I'd probably hang out at the 50¢ Ten-
Coin FPDW at Hard Rock. For fast players, that's a $40/hour play ---
You mean $40k don't you? I guess for you $40k play would feel like $40
for mere mortals.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Dancer" <bob.dancer@...> wrote:
You mean $40k don't you? I guess for you $40k play would feel like
$40
for mere mortals.
No Adams he means $40/hour EV.
You know, Bob, I read your column and I think you overanalyzed this
one. I think the reply that said, "and especially sweet because it
was using free money!" simply reflects a very normal, very human
reaction to getting something for nothing. I remember once I had
just $5 in free play one day at the Fiesta Rancho. I normally
wouldn't make a special trip anywhere for $5, but was driving by
Fiesta that day, swung by, played precisely one hand, and hit four
aces for $800. I have to admit, I thought it was "especially sweet"
myself to get $800 for cashing a $5 free play. People can understand
the principles behind bounce back cash and still think that getting a
royal on a free play *feels* especially nice.
________________________________________
Peppermillionaire
Visit Wiseguys.com for a free $5,000
football betting contest, an inexpensive
line service, and more! www.wiseguys.com
peppermillionaire wrote:
You know, Bob, I read your column and I think you overanalyzed this
one. I think the reply that said, "and especially sweet because it
was using free money!" simply reflects a very normal, very human
reaction to getting something for nothing ... People can understand
the principles behind bounce back cash and still think that getting a
royal on a free play *feels* especially nice.
I get where you're coming from on that aspect of the article. If I
were to start off a trip by downloading Free Play and then hit a RF
when playing it through, I'd be crowing to others that "I hit on THEIR
money". Yet, be assured that I'd consider that to have really been on
"my" money every bit as much as if I had bought into the machine
credits myself. There's absolutely no distinction to be made -- but
there's a little kick in suggesting that there is 
That said, I'm surprised that Bob didn't push a related point home.
More than once I've heard someone report how they went to a high wager
machine bank or standard reel slot, one that they'd never consider
playing on their "own dime", to play off their Free Play/bounceback/etc.
I never understood that one -- even if the money has to be played
through, the promotional cash bears every other characteristic as
their own money and it's irrational to play it differently. It's only
when a player starts to consider the money to be "Free" that you can
make sense of the "logic".
- Harry
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@...>
wrote:
peppermillionaire wrote:
> You know, Bob, I read your column and I think you overanalyzed
this
> one. I think the reply that said, "and especially sweet because
it
> was using free money!" simply reflects a very normal, very human
> reaction to getting something for nothing ... People can
understand
> the principles behind bounce back cash and still think that
getting a
> royal on a free play *feels* especially nice.
I get where you're coming from on that aspect of the article. If I
were to start off a trip by downloading Free Play and then hit a RF
when playing it through, I'd be crowing to others that "I hit on
THEIR
money". Yet, be assured that I'd consider that to have really been
on
"my" money every bit as much as if I had bought into the machine
credits myself. There's absolutely no distinction to be made -- but
there's a little kick in suggesting that there is
Not only that, but the best play in one casino does NOT allow free
play and I MUST always use another machine. When I hit a RF doing
this about a year ago it was especially nice because I wouldn't have
played the machine otherwise.
That said, I'm surprised that Bob didn't push a related point home.
More than once I've heard someone report how they went to a high
wager
machine bank or standard reel slot, one that they'd never consider
playing on their "own dime", to play off their Free
Play/bounceback/etc.
The last time I played at the Reno Hilton (3-4 years ago) their free
play capable machines were also very limited. I was time constrained
as I checked out and put it through a slot machine as the fastest way
to turn it into cash (won money also).
I never understood that one -- even if the money has to be played
through, the promotional cash bears every other characteristic as
their own money and it's irrational to play it differently. It's
only
when a player starts to consider the money to be "Free" that you can
make sense of the "logic".- Harry
IMO criticizing statements made in passing when all the facts are not
known is not a very good idea.
Dick
Peppermillionaire said: You know, Bob, I read your column and I think
you overanalyzed this one. I think the reply that said, "and especially
sweet because it was using free money!" simply reflects a very normal,
very human reaction to getting something for nothing.
I agree that the reaction you cite is very normal and very human, but
that doesn't imply that when I criticize it I am "overanalyzing". I also
strongly believe that people need to be hit over the head sometimes (not
literally) to get out of their "normal" way of thinking. David Sklansky
used to write an excellent column in various magazines (including
"Cardplayer", I think) called "Fighting Fuzzing Thinking," where he take
a subject that was typically viewed in one way by many and point out why
it's smarter to view it in another way. Although my column was about
something more trivial than what he normally addressed, I had the same
type of goal in mind.
Harry commented that I should have included "playing with THEIR money"
in the article. He's definitely correct about the concepts being
related. I didn't specifically include that because there are so many
examples (each one with a slightly lesson) that it could easily be a
separate column some day.
Bob Dancer
For the best in video poker information, visit www.bobdancer.com
or call 1-800-244-2224 M-F 9-5 Pacific Time.
mroejacks wrote:
IMO criticizing statements made in passing when all the facts are not
known is not a very good idea.
Statements and criticisms are both made within a context. Suggest a
different context and neither apply.
- H.
Taken from this column - http://tinyurl.com/f7ael: <<Similarly, hitting a royal flush on the very first hand of a day isn't any more special than hitting it on the 689th hand. Some people believe that one way is sweeter than another, but I just don't understand how they come to that conclusion.>>
Everything you say in that article, Bob, is true and mathematically sound - and would appeal to a robot playing VP.
However, most of us are not robots, but human beings. Playing VP, especially if you do a lot of it, is a very monotonous activity. It can be very boring for long periods of losing while you are waiting for a mini or major jackpot. So, as human beings, with normal human emotions, we look for "interesting" happenings. This doesn't mean that we are stupid and think these "interesting" happenings are meaningful in some mathematical sense.
Brad had a $20,000 royal dealt to him one time recently when he was playing through $30 Free Play. Of course, if you are a robot, that is waste of time to share that information with anyone else. But Brad and I are not robots - and we thought that event was extra "sweet" and we shared that information with this group.
When Brad and I no longer have wonder in our beings and amazement at coincidents and rare events, when VP becomes a purely mechanical exercise with no human spark of joy - then that is the time you will no longer see us at a VP machine.
________________________________________
Jean $�ott
"FRUGAL VIDEO POKER" - Pre-pub
orders for this new book now taken at
http://www.FrugalGambler.biz
I'm the opposite. I make it a point to play the free play on the the
lowest denominiation available (but not below $.25) for the highest EV
game that particular casino has to offer, which is usually FPDW
(Fiesta, Stations, Palms). My play at the Suncoast is the NSUD, but
will look for the reported 10/7 DB next time I'm there.
The bounce back/free play is often part of the formula when
calculating the overall return of a given play. I treat it as my money
and I figure that's the best way to come closest to the expected EV,
since I'm playing more hands.
Don the Dentist
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@...> wrote:
That said, I'm surprised that Bob didn't push a related point home.
More than once I've heard someone report how they went to a high
wager machine bank or standard reel slot, one that they'd neverplaying on their "own dime", to play off their Free
Play/bounceback/etc.
mroejacks wrote:
> IMO criticizing statements made in passing when all the facts are
not
> known is not a very good idea.
Statements and criticisms are both made within a context. Suggest a
different context and neither apply.
No. I was simply suggesting that all of the context may not be known.
That is one reason I found Bob's article silly at best and downright
condescending at worst. For him to demean someone who made a simple
post to this forum is also disgusting.
Now he claims he's educating us. What a bunch of crap. Please tell me
how ANYONE would ever think a RF on free play was worth any more money
than another one? Does he think all VP players are complete morons?
Dick
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@...> wrote:
Over the years, occasionally an innocuous statement posted here, that
might be better worded, leads to a modestly contentious thread running
outside the scope of the original statement. I think we have an
analogous situation here.
-----------
I've carefully re-read Bob's article. My take is the same as my first
reading -- he points out that some players regard playing Free Play to
be different in substance than standard play.
I can't speak for others, but on that count I'm guilty as charged.
(Although Bob clearly wasn't levying a "criminal" accusation against
me or anyone else.) At heart, my emotional reaction to Free Play
results is different than play on which I've "bought into" my credits.
I didn't get from my reading that Bob intended to condemn that in
itself, but instead to allude to potential undesirable consequences.
With a little Monday morning quarterbacking, Bob probably
injudiciously chose some of his words and, to a degree, his tone. If
so, it was hardly to an egregious degree -- it reflected no more
imperfection than that occasionally borne out in any writer's efforts.
As it is, he openly admits to being heavy handed. I see some reason
to a claim that subtlety isn't the best way to drive a point home.
Short of reading into the article some unstated agenda, a charge that
it demeaned players is, frankly, way out of line.
------------
Ok, so Bob observed that there's an emotional component in player's
consideration of Free Play. I was taken a little off guard that Jean,
while admitting accuracy in that, took particular exception to the
article. It's clear she interpreted the article as an attack on the
way human nature reveals itself in play.
I saw no indication in the article that Bob suggests play should be
devoid of emotion and instead conducted mechanically. What came
through is that players need to be on guard that the emotional
component of play doesn't cloud the rational judgement driving prudent
play.
I'd be very surprised if Jean would argue against this. I perceive
Jean wrote out of a bias originating outside of the article, triggered
by a nuance contained in it. Of course, this may be very presumptuous
of me.
In any case, while I consider Jean's comments a little regrettable,
there's an allowance to be made. It's unfortunate, at best, that it
prompted a wide-ranging rebuke by Bob. It would have been preferable
that he made such an allowance rather than being provoked into letting
pent up frustrations fly.
------------
My point isn't to censure -- just to suggest that many comments in
this thread may have run afield of the basics of the column.
- Harry
Although some of us have heard Wynn's tracking system can skill check,
it seems that in practice, results=skill in their eyes. We've also
heard that some players previously backed off the mail have been
unbacked off. I really enjoy playing there, but it's kind of hard to
take advantage when I'm on the road 21 days a month.
They appear to base on trip average, even for locals, and like most
5-star Strip properties, have high theo minimums for comps and mail.
You need to run about $14K coin through to get a buffet comp for 2.
That's a little over 3 hours play at dollars for most players. The
booth can be difficult as well when handling anything more exotic than
said buffet comp.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Dancer" <bob.dancer@...> wrote:
Jay asked about free play.
I can't tell you about Wynn, although I've heard through the
grapevine that they expect some play there every time you come in. I was
dealt an $80,000 royal there ($2 Ten Play)on my second month's play and
was told by my host that that proved to them I was a strong player and
not to expect mailings, and that future comps would be based on losses
--- not theoretical. Obviously a dealt royal doesn't say anything about
one's competence, but that was the excuse they used. (There are other
strong players as well who've received similar treatment. Fortunately
for us, they at least let us "score a big one" before they cut us off
from the extra goodies.)
________________________________________________________________________
Dick, if VP players were wiser, there'd be less opportunities.
Consider the quality of posting on this forum; for the most part it
appears to be newbyville. By contrast, consider someone like yourself
who thrives on playing the hardest VP games known to mankind, the
Joker-class of games (including your beloved OEJ). Talk about your
basic alpha and omega...
Most of my writing is for advanced players. The way I see it, the cat
is more or less out of the bag anyway, and at some point in time the
next five years or so, positive VP situations will become an
endangered species. I'm surprised it hasn't happened already. However,
there's no profit in my mind to creating needless competition. Bob
apparently hasn't worked out that there is more value in withholding
information than releasing it, unless you have a steady stream of
customers willing to pay $200 hour to learn to play Jacks or better.
At least he has 100% certainty teaching, assuming the checks don't
bounce. Bob used to write great articles about things like the
difference between 10-7 and 10-7-80 DB, without realizing that the
actual audience might be much more talented than the intended one. Or
maybe he did and didn't care. But look at the result. Teach people how
to play a game paying 100.5%, watch the hold drop because of it, watch
the casino downgrade the game to the 97.8% 9-6-5.
I held my breath about the Caesars 10-play until its downgrading. It
was a great low-roller play. Three years ago, there were profitable
situations involving $2 Triple play 101% joker, $5 9-5 or 10-9-6
Double Joker (both the IGT and Sigma FP versions), $5 Pick'em, $5
9-6-5-8000 DB, et al. Pretty much all gone now. Wonder why that's
happened? I answered that question in my "Snakes on a Plane..."
article on my website.
While I keep my serious writing offline from here, because I have to
have a reason to generate traffic to the site, and because having my
own soapbox is important to me, I think anyone who wants to contribute
here should be welcome to, no matter how toxic the post is to everyone
else's EV. Just don't disclose the next $5 FPDW, ok?
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "mroejacks" <rgmustain@...> wrote:
Does he think all VP players are complete morons?
_______________________________________________________________________
cutting edge VP writing for serious players at: paladingaming.net
I am going to respond to my own response. And no "old lady" jokes about my talking to myself!!! 
I could have put my first response more tactfully. It is never good to post when one is in a hurry.
Here is what I should have said:
This column is mathematically accurate, as Bob's always are. However, there are often many sides to a topic and I would like to present the non-math side. This is not to imply the math side is "wrong." This is not a "right" or "wrong" issue.
There is a side I call the "human" side. There are a lot of members on this list who aren't as experienced as some of us who have been playing since the Middle Ages. There are others who look at VP play as purely a recreational pastime and they are looking to have as much fun during this pastime as they can. And, shocking as it might seem, for some very experienced and expert players, having fun is also right up there very close to EV.
Perhaps I take too seriously my role as the defender of the VP "little guy," but I want to be sure that no one on this list will ever decide to never post again because someone might criticize their skill level or their goals. Talking about the human side of VP is what makes this list so interesting. I like to hear about your joy on getting two royals close together. It is a balance to the math side and discussions about differences in the third decimal place.
We need both sides - and we need no criticism, implied or stated, that one side is "better" than the other.
Hopefully we can continue to present various sides to a subject without putting down the person with alternate views.
________________________________________
Jean $�ott
"FRUGAL VIDEO POKER" - Pre-pub
orders for this new book now taken at
http://www.FrugalGambler.biz
They appear to base on trip average, even for locals, and like most
5-star Strip properties, have high theo minimums for comps and mail.
You need to run about $14K coin through to get a buffet comp for 2.
That's a little over 3 hours play at dollars for most players. The
booth can be difficult as well when handling anything more exotic than
said buffet comp.
If you've given significant play to the Wynn and you're ever turned down
for a comp by a boothling, make a beeline for a host. With $500K
coin-in there over three months, I was told by a boothling that I had no
comps. (I had used about $2K in comps over those three months, and had
been sure not to allow any 30-day periods of inactivity.) After picking
my jaw up off the floor, I inquired with my host, who apologized and
happily wrote a very generous comp for four for one of their fine dining
restaurants there. Even more so than other properties, the Wynn
boothlings seems to be looking at a completely separate account than the
hosts are...
________________________________________
Peppermillionaire
Visit Wiseguys.com for a free $5,000
football betting contest, an inexpensive
line service, and more! www.wiseguys.com <http://www.wiseguys.com>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
AMEN!
####################################################################
Jean Scott <QueenofComps@frugalgambler.biz> wrote:
Taken from this column - http://tinyurl.com/f7ael: <royal flush on the very first hand of a day isn't any more special than hitting it on the 689th hand. Some people believe that one way is sweeter than another, but I just don't understand how they come to that conclusion.>>
Everything you say in that article, Bob, is true and mathematically sound -
and would appeal to a robot playing VP..........when VP becomes a purely mechanical exercise with no human spark of joy - then that is the time you will no longer see us
at a VP machine.
Jean H--
You have brains in your head. You have feet in your shoes.
You can steer yourself any direction you choose.
You're on your own. And you know what you know.
And YOU are the one who'll decide where to go.... Dr. Suess
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jean wrote: I am going to respond to my own response. And no "old lady"
jokes about my
talking to myself!!!
I'm willing to accept what Jean said (including the part I didn't quote)
as some sort of a peace offering/apology, and let the matter drop.
Bob Dancer
For the best in video poker information, visit www.bobdancer.com
or call 1-800-244-2224 M-F 9-5 Pacific Time.
I am going to respond to my own response. And no "old lady" jokes about my
talking to myself!!!I could have put my first response more tactfully. It is never good to post
when one is in a hurry.Here is what I should have said:
This column is mathematically accurate, as Bob's always are. However, there
are often many sides to a topic and I would like to present the non-math
side. This is not to imply the math side is "wrong." This is not a "right"
or "wrong" issue.There is a side I call the "human" side. There are a lot of members on this
list who aren't as experienced as some of us who have been playing since the
Middle Ages. There are others who look at VP play as purely a recreational
pastime and they are looking to have as much fun during this pastime as they
can. And, shocking as it might seem, for some very experienced and expert
players, having fun is also right up there very close to EV.Perhaps I take too seriously my role as the defender of the VP "little guy,"
but I want to be sure that no one on this list will ever decide to never
post again because someone might criticize their skill level or their goals.
Talking about the human side of VP is what makes this list so interesting.
I like to hear about your joy on getting two royals close together. It is
a balance to the math side and discussions about differences in the third
decimal place.We need both sides - and we need no criticism, implied or stated, that one
side is "better" than the other.Hopefully we can continue to present various sides to a subject without
putting down the person with alternate views.________________________________________
Jean $¢ott
I see it as means and ends. Video poker is (or at least can be)
valuable both as a means to certain ends, which isn't necessarily
restricted to money, and as an end in itself. I theoretically
disvalue fluctuation, since I regard it as a business cost, but
sometimes I wonder how much more boring I would find video poker than
I already do if all fluctuation were eliminated and the expected value
of every hand were immediately paid (or, in the case of a serious
enough mistake, taken away). Not even the most disciplined
professional would keep playing video poker, no matter how profitable
it was, if playing it were past a certain point of misery.