Skip wrote first : I believe that if a normal person spends x amount
of time learning and
practicing a penalty-free strategy or x amount of time learning and
practicing a strategy with penalty cards, he will play the penalty-free
strategy more accurately overall and probably achieve a higher ER
accuracy with the penalty free strategy than he would with the more
complex strategy.
Later Skip wrote: Bob is certainly welcome to his opinion. I just
prefer
he doesn't misstate mine.
On his last point, we've found a point of agreement. It's definitely my
goal to both understand Skip's position and hopefully present mine in a
way that he can understand me. I believe Skip and I would both prefer to
be able to say something like "under these conditions, Skip's way is the
better approach. Under those conditions, Bob's way works better."
His first comment, however, is news to me. It was my understanding that
Skips comments on penalty cards on this forum in the past few months
have largely been that there is very little difference in return
(usually 0.001% - 0.002% have been the numbers quoted) between
penalty-free and computer-accurate strategies and so once you knew
penalty-free strategy, learning the penalty cards too would be as
worthless as looking for dropped coins on the floor. Others have
paraphrased Skip's position similarly to this, and signified that this
is "proof" that studying penalty cards is worthless. My recent article
started from this understanding of Skip's position --- which now Skip
says is a misunderstanding. If I have mis-paraphrased him, I apologize.
I didn't mean to.
Skip's phrasing in this post is very different. He now says that if
you're learning a strategy FROM SCRATCH, and you have "x" (some unstated
but presumably small number) hours to study the game, your time is
better spent working on the simpler strategy than on the more complex
strategy.
I probably agree with this assessment if "x" is pretty small relative to
your experience level. and how quickly you are able to learn strategies.
If you're going to be spending 2 hours or less trying to learn a
strategy, even Frugal "penalty free" strategy is probably too complex.
That's roughly comparable to the Dancer/Daily "Level 3: Basic" strategy
(although I strongly believe the Dancer/Daily format is easier to use
once you get used to it --- and I expect Skip and Jean will argue the
opposite --- that's the nature of competition). While neither of these
strategies contain penalty cards, they are powerful and complex and it
takes considerably more than a couple of hours to master. For people
only willing to spend a smaller amount of time, I recommend the
Dancer/Daily "Level 2: Recreational" strategy. It is not as accurate,
but it is close, and far easier to memorize. Playing a Level 2 strategy
accurately yields a better result than playing a Level 3 strategy
inaccurately. (Leaving aside the Level 4: Advanced strategy --- which
includes penalty cards and is what I try to master.)
For people planning to study in the range of 2-6 hours total, I probably
agree with Skip's assessment put forward in his current post. If you are
only going to be studying that much, trying to master penalty cards is
too much to chew. Not minding at all if I mix my metaphors, you need to
walk before you can run.
My comments, though, are addressed to people willing to spend more time
than that. People who are serious about the winning process. Perhaps
this is only "pros" or "semi-pros", although any such collective term
has its problems. When I learned Super Double Bonus from scratch, I
probably spent 20 hours learning the game and its nuances before ever
playing a hand in a casino. Then after my first session in the casino, I
practiced more than two hours before my second session. The first four
or five times I spent more than two weeks between playing sessions on
this game, I spent at least two hours reviewing the game before playing
it again. Today, after spending probably 50 hours and writing six to ten
articles about various things in the game, I think I know it perfectly
--- and I still review a flow chart on the tough hands probably every
fifth time I play. At 58 years of age, my memory isn't what it used to
be. At least I think I'm 58.
I've spent far more time than that on NSU, largely the penalty-card
nuances are far more complex. I do not have that game mastered.
Distinguishing between Kh Qh Jd 4d 5h, Kh Qh Jd 4c 5h, Kh Qh Jd 4d 6h,
and Kh Qh Jd 4c 6h is tough for me. And the difference between them is
infinitessimal. But these things add up and I play for $100 or $125 per
hand and I want to get it right. But I still review it periodically and
the number of hands that are confusing to me in that game is
continually shrinking.
I hope we don't spend a lot of time on whether Skip "changed" his
position or not. I'm not criticizing him for that at all. Skip's view,
like mine, can be presumed to be multi-faceted and any 300-word
statement of it necessarily only covers part of it. And, like me, Skip's
views are evolving as he learns from others and considers different
aspects than he considered before.
If Skip limits his discussion to "recreational players" only, we are in
agreement that penalty cards are a waste of time for these players.
Where we have had disagreements in the past, though, is when I speak for
myself and explain that I study them extensively and have that studying
hard enough to master them has been worth tens of thousands of dollars
to me. Not the penalty cards themselves, but studying hard enough to
master the fine points means I don't miss some of the not-so-fine points
either. Skip doesn't have to agree that it's a good idea for him to
study this much or this hard, or that it's a good idea for most people,
but at the minimum I believe he should respect that I've been highly
successful using my methods. Further I believe he should acknowledge
that there's at least a good chance that there's a relationship between
my success and the way I go about trying to be successful.
This forum has a high percentage of recreational players. We have a few
successful professionals --- some of whom use penalty cards and have
stayed out of this discussion, and some who don't. We also have some who
aspire to be successful professionals some day. For those who do aspire
to be professionals, I believe that mastery of the games is the first
step. For those who do not have such aspirations, learning a lesser
strategy is a satisfactory methodology.
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.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
