vpFREE2 Forums

Bob Dancer's Multi-Strike Poker Analysis (long postplus math)

#1

Your last question is great as they do not show the "free ride" percentage on the games here in the Chicago Area. Having worked with spreadsheet software for many years, I know it is extremely easy to have a formula error including bugs in some versions of EXCEL so we are all glad for the work you did! One of the Chicago Area casinos has Atlantic City Joker 2 pair as a choice. To reach a 50% advance rate you would need almost a 25% "free ride" rate. Since all Multi-Strike at that house is poor, I avoid it.

···

----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Velek
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: 8/28/2003 9:03:30 PM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's Multi-Strike Poker Analysis (long postplus math)

tooncesthecatwhocoulddriveacar wrote:

snipped columns of data

As I suspected earlier, you made a calculation error that resulted in
the ridiculously low return for Tier 3. ...

Thanks. ... and man, do I have egg all over my face. I swear, I really
thought that I had triple checked my math completely for each table ...
but there were 4 separate strategy tables for Bob Dancer's method, and I
obviously missed this one. Makes me wonder if I checked another table 6
times.

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

vpFREE Links: http://tinyurl.com/a7ga

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

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

#2

Judging by my knowledge of how multiple paytable machines work, I'm
pretty sure that any changes in free-ride percentages would have to
be assigned by the manufacturer. In order to launch Multi-Strike and
generate interest (as well as get Dancer's support), the game was
designed with free-ride percentages to ALWAYS pay out more than its
single-line counterpart. When the machines want to offer a lower
percentage game currently, they do so by lowering the paytable, not
by lowering the free ride percentages.

Of course, there's no guarantee that they will continue to do so. I
do know that in most juristictions, machines publicly display the
free-ride percentages, and if they were to start changing, I'm sure
some eagle-eyed poster would catch on, and a lot of the interest in
the VP community for Multi-Strike would be lost. As for the
percentages not being available in Chicago, I have not looked myself,
but I would not be surprised if some silly Illinois regulation
forbids the display of percentages on machines to represent return
(perhaps so casinos can't advertise "up to 98% return")

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Howard Stern" <howard.w.stern@e...>
wrote:

Your last question is great as they do not show the "free ride"

percentage on the games here in the Chicago Area. Having worked with
spreadsheet software for many years, I know it is extremely easy to
have a formula error including bugs in some versions of EXCEL so we
are all glad for the work you did! One of the Chicago Area casinos
has Atlantic City Joker 2 pair as a choice. To reach a 50% advance
rate you would need almost a 25% "free ride" rate. Since all Multi-
Strike at that house is poor, I avoid it.

From: Bill Velek
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: 8/28/2003 9:03:30 PM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's Multi-Strike Poker Analysis

(long postplus math)

tooncesthecatwhocoulddriveacar wrote:

snipped columns of data

> As I suspected earlier, you made a calculation error that

resulted in

> the ridiculously low return for Tier 3. ...

Thanks. ... and man, do I have egg all over my face. I swear, I

really

thought that I had triple checked my math completely for each

table ...

but there were 4 separate strategy tables for Bob Dancer's method,

and I

obviously missed this one. Makes me wonder if I checked another

table 6

times.

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

vpFREE Links: http://tinyurl.com/a7ga

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of

Service.

···

----- Original Message -----

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

#3

I would like to add a few words to this thread:

Howard, you should take another look at the game.

When you press the "See Pays" button the game shows the paytable but
also displays a "Next" and "Return to Game" button. If you press
the "Next" button you will get a screen that shows the Free Ride
Values. And yes, for the 2-pair Joker Poker games they are around
27% if I remember correctly.

Bill, if the casinos could change the Free Ride values then they
could wreak havoc on the game. The software in the game does not
allow for the Free Ride values to be individually modified. The game
operator selects one of the available pay tables (such as those shown
in the Bob Dancer Article) and the Free Ride values come with it.
Remember that you can always verify this by checking the See Pays
screen as described above.

Bill, you came up with a very novel method to use WinPoker to analyze
the game and at the same time give people confidence in the 6-4-2
strategy. Note that the 99.79 number that you calculated for the 6-4-
2 strategy matches the 99.79 number that is calculated for the
regulators as the absolute optimum strategy possible by comparing all
possible holds on all possible levels (this is done from the top down
for any of you that are looking for some extra credit work). From
this you have to conclude that the 6-4-2 strategy *is* the optimal
strategy for the game. Thank you for introducing us all with this
easy method to verify this for any combinations of free rides and
paytables.

As far as the interchange about this topic, I am reminded of the teen
cashier that you give a $20 bill to and after they punch in the
transaction the register shows $52 change which they scoop up to dole
out.

There are some big picture parameters that help detect when an error
has occurred which should stop the cashier from giving $52 change
after being presented with a $20 bill.

The same should hold true when you take a game that normally returns
99.54% and make some small strategy modifications. When you added a
lot to each "phantom" paytable value (6 and 4 respectively), you
calculated that the real return dropped from about 99.5% to about
96%. You then came up with a drop of over 20% when you added a less-
impacting 2 units for the 3rd stage. With 3 different posters
pointing out that this 76% number was waving a red flag that was on
fire and a 4th indicating that the Manufacturer and regulators all
agreed on the numbers, you came up with any theory and explanation to
defend triple-checked numbers. This was at best, frustrating to
watch.

I'm glad that Toonces and Howard found the problem and I'm glad that
you have come up with this nice method of doing the calcuations. It
will be an asset for everybody that is interested in the game.

-Larry DeMar
Leading Edge Design
http://www.ledgaming.com

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Howard Stern" <howard.w.stern@e...>
wrote:

Your last question is great as they do not show the "free ride"

percentage on the games here in the Chicago Area. Having worked with
spreadsheet software for many years, I know it is extremely easy to
have a formula error including bugs in some versions of EXCEL so we
are all glad for the work you did! One of the Chicago Area casinos
has Atlantic City Joker 2 pair as a choice. To reach a 50% advance
rate you would need almost a 25% "free ride" rate. Since all Multi-
Strike at that house is poor, I avoid it.

#4

Howard Stern wrote:

Your last question is great as they do not show the "free ride" percentage on the games here in the Chicago Area.

snip

Well, my only exposure to this game has been through the link that Harry Porter had provided, so I don't know anything about it.

Bob Dancer's article says: "The frequency of the Free Rides varies by game, which level you are on, and occasionally by pay schedule, but is always enough to make betting more a good idea. As an example, on the first line of 9/6 Jacks or Better, you receive Free Rides about one time in 13."

Bob probably based that statement on information from some source other than the MultiStrike game on the website. I visited the paytables on the on-line game to survey that information, and this is what I found:

The online sample game only has one paytable for each of the following games, and indicates these percentages of FREE-RIDES for each tier:

  GAME Tier-1 Tier-2 Tier-3
Jacks or Better (9/6) 7.70 7.00 6.40
Bonus Poker 7.60 7.00 6.20
Bonus Poker Deluxe 7.80 7.20 6.20
Joker Poker 8.90 8.10 7.70
Super Aces Bonus Poker 7.92 6.73 5.87
Double Bonus Poker 8.40 7.00 6.30
Deuces Wild Poker 8.25 7.80 7.80
Deuces Wild Bonus Poker 7.80 7.20 6.20
Double Bonus Deuces Wild 8.40 8.10 8.10
Double Double Bonus Poker 7.90 7.00 6.10
Super Double Bonus Poker 7.80 6.80 6.00
Triple Double Bonus Poker 8.35 6.60 5.90

For each of the above games, I variously changed the bet amount and the number of levels played to see if that would make a difference in the FREE-RIDE percentages; before going to the trouble, I should have realized that with the info posted on the paytable page, and there being only one paytable page per game, that there would be no differences ... at least in what is being disclosed. This does not necessarily mean that there are not actual differences from those listed, especially when Bob's article specifically warns that they can possibly change as the paytables for a game change.

Once again, unless the game somehow displays what the FREE-RIDE percentages actually are for that particular machine and game, the ER can varying quite a bit.

This also raises another question: are the FREE-RIDES required to be strictly random and equally possible for all hands? This doesn't mean that the game is illegally rigged; I can very easily see how this could be designed and approved despite a certain bias in the program regarding FREE-RIDES because that aspect of the game is not, afterall, guaranteed to be random. It is like the slot machines; the casinos can loosen or tighten them -- and presumably any aspect of the FREE-RIDE feature -- as they choose to do.

How could this be done, and why would the casinos do it? Well, the program could be designed to peek at the first five cards before deciding whether to enable the FREE-RIDE feature; it could, for example, only enable it if it sees at least one Ace or Face-Card in the hand, and to only then randomly give a FREE-RIDE with a 10% chance of giving one. (I'm only pulling figures out of my head for the sake of this post.) But let's say that the 10% multiplied times the percentage of times you have at least an Ace or face-card in your intial deal happens to equal the 7.4% figure for the first-tier. Why would it be illegal for the program to use that approach to accomplish that 7.4% figure? I can't see how it would be illegal. What good would it do to only give FREE-RIDES with at least an Ace or face-card in the hand? Well, that approach will cause a disproportionate number of FREE-RIDES within hands that are winners, or are more likely to be winners, already. Since FREE-RIDES within winning hands are meaningless, a player gets the psychologically good feeling that he has just received a token award, along with the brief bells and whistles that signify it, and perhaps a false sense that the game gives plenty of free-rides to help make it a profitable game, when in reality it is not.

Cheers.

Bill Velek

#5

.

FREE-RIDES with at least an Ace or face-card in the hand? Well,

that approach will cause a disproportionate number of FREE-RIDES
within hands that are winners, or are more likely to be winners,
already. Since FREE-RIDES within winning hands are meaningless, a
player gets the psychologically good feeling that he has just
received a token award, along with the brief bells and whistles that
signify it, and perhaps a false sense that the game gives plenty of
free-rides to help make it a profitable game, when in reality it is
not.

I played a fair amount of NSUD Multistrike in the last couple of
weeks and was appalled by the hideous loss rate I experienced--minus
$1900 at the TEN CENT denomination!! I used the Dancer strategy
modifications and made sure I was using them correctly. I was
suspicious about the specific occasions the "Free Ride" came up. It
seemed a disproportionate amount of the time, the "Free Ride" had
only ceremonial value as it got thrown onto an existing winner. I
don't know what the odds are against getting DEALT trips or better
on a NSUD machine, but it seemed that almost half the Free Rides
were getting thrown on hands where they were useless, e.g., the hand
already was a winner that would advance without the FR.

As you note, it would fulfill the "letter of the law" to have the
FR occur the stated percentage of the time, while occuring
selectively and disproportionately on winners, thereby diluting its
value. Hell, you could make it completely worthless, by only dealing
it on hands that were or were GOING TO BECOME winners anyway. (I
would only expect this to happen in an Indian casino, however).

Someone needs to do these calculations, and do the tracking. I am
willing to do the latter if someone does the former. I also would
hope several people would do this as the sample size generated from
my play alone would not be sufficient to inspire confidence in the
result unless I played several hundred hours, and I'm not about to
do THAT.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bill Velek <billvelek@a...> wrote:

#6

Larry218 wrote:

snip

As far as the interchange about this topic, I am reminded of the teen
cashier that you give a $20 bill to and after they punch in the
transaction the register shows $52 change which they scoop up to dole
out.

There are some big picture parameters that help detect when an error
has occurred which should stop the cashier from giving $52 change
after being presented with a $20 bill.

The same should hold true when you take a game that normally returns
99.54% and make some small strategy modifications. When you added a
lot to each "phantom" paytable value (6 and 4 respectively), you
calculated that the real return dropped from about 99.5% to about
96%. You then came up with a drop of over 20% when you added a less-
impacting 2 units for the 3rd stage. With 3 different posters
pointing out that this 76% number was waving a red flag that was on
fire and a 4th indicating that the Manufacturer and regulators all
agreed on the numbers, you came up with any theory and explanation to
defend triple-checked numbers. This was at best, frustrating to
watch.

Now I'm beginning to understand why my father always said that I'm 'thick-headed'. Yes, I definitely deserve a tongue lashing for my stubborn failure to accept the possibility that I'd made a math mistake just because I thought that I had already rechecked my figures. And you are correct that the anomaly was so great that this alone should have tipped me off, and just because this was unfamiliar territory is really not an adequate excuse. Please forgive me, each and every one of you. I've been a bad boy, and I'll try to do better. Now, if I can just determine whether short-coin multistrike pays almost as much as full-coin ... :wink:

Cheers.

Bill Velek

#7

Everyone should go back and read Larry's post with the above subject line. I'm afraid a lot of you didn't realize that this Larry who wrote that post is Larry DeMar, the guy who DEVELOPED Multi Strike, NOT some yahoo who has a little bit of math knowledge and hopes to discredit the experts.

···

____________________
Jean $cott - "The Frugal Gambler"
MORE FRUGAL GAMBLING can NOW
be ordered, autographed, at a pre-pub
discount, at http://www.FrugalGambler.biz

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

#8

mkl54321 wrote:

snipped stuff about diluting the value of FREE-RIDE percentages

Someone needs to do these calculations, and do the tracking. I am
willing to do the latter if someone does the former.

snip

I don't go to the casinos enough, and don't even know if they have MultiStrike where I go (Tunica, Mississippi), so I can't help with the tracking, and I wouldn't even know where to begin with the calculations because there are probably dozens of ways to bias that feature, and no doubt thousands of possible degrees of biasing. For instance, the program could provide ... "No free rides unless the ER of the dealt hand is at least equal to 'X'", where 'X' can have a decimal value within a range of hundreds, if not thousands, of possible values. I wouldn't have a clue as to how to approach this potential problem.

Cheers.

Bill Velek

#9

Jean Scott wrote:

Everyone should go back and read Larry's post with the above subject line. I'm afraid a lot of you didn't realize that this Larry who wrote that post is Larry DeMar, the guy who DEVELOPED Multi Strike, NOT some yahoo who has a little bit of math knowledge and hopes to discredit the experts.

Hmmmmm. Jean, I hope you are not implying that I am "some yahoo who has a little bit of math knowledge and hopes to discredit the experts." If so, I think you owe me an apology. To begin with, I did not _hope_ to discredit anyone; in fact, I made it clear that I hoped that I was mistaken about my conclusions on MultiStrike because I like the game and certainly want profitable opportunities. Secondly, I don't know who the "experts" _are_; I certainly didn't know who Larry DeMar is, probably because I'm not a gambling pro like you. At any rate, Jean, perhaps YOU should go back and read Larry's post; while he did indicate that I was somewhat unreasonable and unyielding in my position (which I _honestly_ thought I had rechecked), he was also quite complementary toward me for the contributions I made in this discussion. And he certainly doesn't appear to have gotten his nose out of joint over this, perhaps because he is a bit more reasonable in understanding that there is always room for some healthy scrutiny and skepticism.

Jean, I have always been very civil towards you and everyone else on this group. In this instance I had a legitimate interest and concern that was not immediately answered, so I asked questions; that's what these discussion groups are for. Maybe the discussion is not the type that many members here are interested in ... all that nasty math and high-browed technical stuff ... but I'm not particularly interested in the probably equally as long and boring thread which has been debating whether Las Vegas is a wonderful city to live in. I just use my delete button, and life goes on.

Cheers.

Bill Velek

#10

I just re-read my post - and I realize it WAS too harsh. And I apologize I was too rushed and didn't re-read it, as I usually do before I hit Send. Bill, I was not referring to you. You stated very clearly early that you doubted your own results and asked for people to check your figures. And, as Larry stated, in spite of an error, your posts showed how the calculations were made, and that would help players who wanted to figure out the math for themselves. I am not math-inclined so, of course, I have to depend on the "experts" and trust they are correct. I'm glad there are others who are able to check and double-check.

My purpose was to point out who Larry DeMar was, fearing that many people would not know and might assume his post was not "valid" information and question his "right" to make the statements he did. There have been some members in the past who have questioned things, with a very argumentative and negative tone although they didn't know (or accept) the math. I was just trying to save future embarrassment for any member who might respond to his post in such a way. So much for good intentions. They certainly went astray.

As you know, I love Multi Strike myself - we have played it quite a bit. In fact I wrote a 3-part article on it in Frugal Fridays a month or so ago, one that can still be read in the FF Archives.

Again, I apologize for the hasty post.

···

____________________
Jean $cott - "The Frugal Gambler"
MORE FRUGAL GAMBLING can NOW
be ordered, autographed, at a pre-pub
discount, at http://www.FrugalGambler.biz

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

#11

Jean Scott wrote:

I just re-read my post - and I realize it WAS too harsh.

Thank you, Jean. I might have been a little too thin skinned and overly sensitive. It's not a pleasant thing to insistently post how positive you are that the math is correct, and then find, to your embarrassment, that you really did make a stupid mistake. On the heels of that, I was pretty sure that you were probably referring to me ... and I sure do deserve a lot of ribbing about this; I won't mind, so long as it's done with a little bit of kindness or sense of humor. I can tell you that I think Larry was extremely tactful in the way he expressed how he must have anguished over my posts.

I hope there are some MultiStrike in Tunica. My wife and I are planning to go something this September. My son and daughter just left Vegas this afternoon; they were only there for a few days on their way to California. Apparently my son hit a big VP hand -- won a $1,000.00.

Anyway, thanks for posting your very kind reply.

Cheers.

Bill Velek