I'm considering taking a shot at this game three coin ($5)
with the + $750 to any handpay.
1. Does anyone know what the paytable Caesars AC has @ the $5 level.
2. Assuming it is 8/5 what is the ROR if I use a 2k bankroll and will
quit after the first handpay?
Thanks
I'm considering taking a shot at this game three coin ($5)
with the + $750 to any handpay.1. Does anyone know what the paytable Caesars AC has @ the $5 level.
2. Assuming it is 8/5 what is the ROR if I use a 2k bankroll and will
quit after the first handpay?Thanks
...--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "maclarenv12" <ahduff@...> wrote:
8/6 BPD has a return of 98.49%. 8/5 with 3 coins (3*250 coins for
RF) has a return of 96.19% according to WinPoker.
Adding in the $750 handpay would make this game (3-coin $5 8/5 BPD)
barely positive: 100.2%, again according to WinPoker (assuming I
have made the adjustments correctly).
Taking the WinPoker data and putting it into Dunbar's Risk
Analyzer:
For $5 BPD with 3 coins at 8/5 (with a shorted RF payout), a $2000
bankroll would suffice 75% of the time to reach a handpay. The
other 25% of the time you would lose the $2000 bankroll. You have
less than a 1% chance of needing more than 1000 hands to finish the
play.
I can't easily calculate the average number of hands you'd play, but
even at a generous 500 hand estimate, the EV would be just
500*$15*0.2%=$15. And it's probably less than that.
If by chance the BPD is 8/6, then with the shorted Royal, the return
is 97.37% (WinPoker). With the $750 handpay, the ev is 101.34%.
The 500-hand estimate would yield an EV of 500*$15*1.34% = $100
(though, again, it is probably less than that because "500" is most
likely a overestimate of the average number of hands required).
--Dunbar
I'm considering taking a shot at this game three coin ($5)
with the + $750 to any handpay.1. Does anyone know what the paytable Caesars AC has @ the $5
level.
2. Assuming it is 8/5 what is the ROR if I use a 2k bankroll and
will
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "maclarenv12" <ahduff@...> wrote:
quit after the first handpay?
Thanks
I entered the following 5 coin payouts into VPgenius for $5 8/5 BP
Deluxe and got a return of 108%
RF 1250
SF 250
4OAK 650 (390 for 3 coins "240 + 150 bonus")
FH 40
FL 25
ST 20
3OAK 15
2p 5
j/b 5
The return for this paytable is 108.2745% with perfect play.
The variance for this paytable is 44.5501 individual bets.
Hand Payoff Count Probability Frequency Variance Return
Royal Flush $1,250.00 383,632,908 0.0019% 1 in 51,959.1258 1.1925
0.4811%
Straight Flush $250.00 2,065,002,576 0.0104% 1 in 9,652.8841 0.2479
0.5180%
Four of a Kind $650.00 49,772,835,228 0.2497% 1 in 400.4841 41.4989
32.4607%
Full House $40.00 164,263,165,308 0.8241% 1 in 121.3494 0.3943
6.5925%
Flush $25.00 224,902,036,896 1.1283% 1 in 88.6307 0.1731 5.6414%
Straight $20.00 259,026,394,068 1.2995% 1 in 76.9544 0.1106 5.1979%
Three of a Kind $15.00 1,562,902,308,768 7.8407% 1 in 12.7540 0.2882
23.5221%
Two Pair $5.00 2,174,821,363,368 10.9105% 1 in 9.1655 0.0007 10.9105%
Jacks or Better $5.00 4,574,735,827,668 22.9503% 1 in 4.3572 0.0016
22.9503%
Nothing $0.00 10,920,357,950,412 54.7847% 1 in 1.8253 0.6423 0.0000%
Totals 19,933,230,517,200 Any Win: 1 in 2.2116 44.5501 108.2745%
Here is a link, you can enter the paytable and use paytable analyzer.
http://www.vpgenius.com/video-poker/bonus-poker-deluxe.aspx
Let me know if this looks correct.
8/6 BPD has a return of 98.49%. 8/5 with 3 coins (3*250 coins for
RF) has a return of 96.19% according to WinPoker.Adding in the $750 handpay would make this game (3-coin $5 8/5 BPD)
barely positive: 100.2%, again according to WinPoker (assuming I
have made the adjustments correctly).Taking the WinPoker data and putting it into Dunbar's Risk
Analyzer:
For $5 BPD with 3 coins at 8/5 (with a shorted RF payout), a $2000
bankroll would suffice 75% of the time to reach a handpay. The
other 25% of the time you would lose the $2000 bankroll. You have
less than a 1% chance of needing more than 1000 hands to finish the
play.I can't easily calculate the average number of hands you'd play,
but
even at a generous 500 hand estimate, the EV would be just
500*$15*0.2%=$15. And it's probably less than that.If by chance the BPD is 8/6, then with the shorted Royal, the
return
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@...> wrote:
is 97.37% (WinPoker). With the $750 handpay, the ev is 101.34%.
The 500-hand estimate would yield an EV of 500*$15*1.34% = $100
(though, again, it is probably less than that because "500" is most
likely a overestimate of the average number of hands required).--Dunbar
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "maclarenv12" <ahduff@> wrote:
>
> I'm considering taking a shot at this game three coin ($5)
> with the + $750 to any handpay.
>
> 1. Does anyone know what the paytable Caesars AC has @ the $5
level.
>
> 2. Assuming it is 8/5 what is the ROR if I use a 2k bankroll and
will
> quit after the first handpay?
>
> Thanks
>
Just make sure the "handpay" on your ticket has no strings and does not mean "hand pay top prize".
I was at Stations a while back , and they have a sign that says free logo jacket ( nice one worth about $75 ) for every "Jackpot".
I hit a royal and they refused to give me my jacket. They said, at the slot club booth it defined in small print what a jackpot is, and it was defined as the top prize on any machine. I was playing a triple play with a progressive for dealt royal on all 3 lines, so single royal was not a 'top prize' type Jackpot !
----- Original Message ----- From: "maclarenv12" <ahduff@yahoo.com>
To: <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 9:44 AM
Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] [vpFREE] Re: Bonus Poker Deluxe ... dunbar ROR
...--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "maclarenv12" <ahduff@...> wrote:
I'm considering taking a shot at this game three coin ($5)
with the + $750 to any handpay.1. Does anyone know what the paytable Caesars AC has @ the $5 level.
2. Assuming it is 8/5 what is the ROR if I use a 2k bankroll and will
quit after the first handpay?Thanks
------------------------------------
vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
You are almost correct (and way closer than I was!). The return and
variance are slightly higher than what you came up with. You didn't
include the handpay bonus for royals and SF's.
A $750 bonus is 150 coins if the coin is $5. For a 5-coin paytable
you should add 250 coins, which is what you did for the 4OAK
payoff. The RF should be 1500 coins and the SF 500 coins.
With those changes to your paytable, the return is 108.9% and the
variance is 46.0. Both WinPoker and vpGenius agree on those figs.
The 25% RoR for a $2000 bankroll that I got from using Dunbar's Risk
Analyzer should still be accurate. I used a no-bonus 8/5 paytable
except that I substituted huge payoffs for the possible handpays.
That way I either go broke or end up above my "Goal". That's a
crude but effective way of modeling walking away after a handpay.
Obviously, if you can expect to play 500 hands before going broke or
getting a handpay (and I'm still not comfortable with that estimate,
but I'm unwilling to work on it right now--see below), then the game
is very attractive. 500*$15*8.9% = $668. That's a nice portion of
the $750 available from the handpay bonus.
Thanks for catching my blunder. (my error was in my conversion of
$750 into units) It perhaps goes to show that tackling any
question more complicated than the next place to snorkel is risky
while vacationing in Hawaii.
--Dunbar
I entered the following 5 coin payouts into VPgenius for $5 8/5 BP
Deluxe and got a return of 108%
RF 1250
SF 250
4OAK 650 (390 for 3 coins "240 + 150 bonus")
FH 40
FL 25
ST 20
3OAK 15
2p 5
j/b 5The return for this paytable is 108.2745% with perfect play.
The variance for this paytable is 44.5501 individual bets.Hand Payoff Count Probability Frequency Variance Return
Royal Flush $1,250.00 383,632,908 0.0019% 1 in 51,959.1258 1.1925
0.4811%
Straight Flush $250.00 2,065,002,576 0.0104% 1 in 9,652.8841
0.2479
0.5180%
Four of a Kind $650.00 49,772,835,228 0.2497% 1 in 400.4841
41.4989
32.4607%
Full House $40.00 164,263,165,308 0.8241% 1 in 121.3494 0.3943
6.5925%
Flush $25.00 224,902,036,896 1.1283% 1 in 88.6307 0.1731 5.6414%
Straight $20.00 259,026,394,068 1.2995% 1 in 76.9544 0.1106
5.1979%
Three of a Kind $15.00 1,562,902,308,768 7.8407% 1 in 12.7540
0.2882
23.5221%
Two Pair $5.00 2,174,821,363,368 10.9105% 1 in 9.1655 0.0007
10.9105%
Jacks or Better $5.00 4,574,735,827,668 22.9503% 1 in 4.3572
0.0016
22.9503%
Nothing $0.00 10,920,357,950,412 54.7847% 1 in 1.8253 0.6423
0.0000%
Totals 19,933,230,517,200 Any Win: 1 in 2.2116 44.5501 108.2745%
Here is a link, you can enter the paytable and use paytable
analyzer.
http://www.vpgenius.com/video-poker/bonus-poker-deluxe.aspx
Let me know if this looks correct.
>
> 8/6 BPD has a return of 98.49%. 8/5 with 3 coins (3*250 coins
for
> RF) has a return of 96.19% according to WinPoker.
>
> Adding in the $750 handpay would make this game (3-coin $5 8/5
BPD)
> barely positive: 100.2%, again according to WinPoker (assuming I
> have made the adjustments correctly).
>
> Taking the WinPoker data and putting it into Dunbar's Risk
> Analyzer:
> For $5 BPD with 3 coins at 8/5 (with a shorted RF payout), a
$2000
> bankroll would suffice 75% of the time to reach a handpay. The
> other 25% of the time you would lose the $2000 bankroll. You
have
> less than a 1% chance of needing more than 1000 hands to finish
the
> play.
>
> I can't easily calculate the average number of hands you'd play,
but
> even at a generous 500 hand estimate, the EV would be just
> 500*$15*0.2%=$15. And it's probably less than that.
>
> If by chance the BPD is 8/6, then with the shorted Royal, the
return
> is 97.37% (WinPoker). With the $750 handpay, the ev is
101.34%.
> The 500-hand estimate would yield an EV of 500*$15*1.34% = $100
> (though, again, it is probably less than that because "500" is
most
> likely a overestimate of the average number of hands required).
>
> --Dunbar
>
> >
> > I'm considering taking a shot at this game three coin ($5)
> > with the + $750 to any handpay.
> >
> > 1. Does anyone know what the paytable Caesars AC has @ the $5
> level.
> >
> > 2. Assuming it is 8/5 what is the ROR if I use a 2k bankroll
and
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "maclarenv12" <ahduff@...> wrote:
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@> wrote:
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "maclarenv12" <ahduff@> wrote:
> will
> > quit after the first handpay?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>
dunbar_dra wrote:
Thanks for catching my blunder. (my error was in my conversion of
$750 into units) It perhaps goes to show that tackling any
question more complicated than the next place to snorkel is risky
while vacationing in Hawaii.
That's to be forgiven (even if it betrays an obsessiveness in
following these groups that runs beyond mine 
I trust you'll make out better in your snorkeling than my last venture
at Honaunau: Preparing to put my flippers on, my foot slipped into a
rock crevice. I took home the souvenir of a dozen+ 1/4" urchin spines
in my right heel. (The calcium content shows up rather brilliantly in
an x-ray.)
- H.
dunbar- thanks much for all your help
I did forget to add the bonus to the royal, but the SF will only pay
me 150 coins($750) for 3 coins in so it won't be a handpay.
Not that it matters much, if I go with this strategy I am playing all
out for a 4OAK
You are almost correct (and way closer than I was!). The return
and
variance are slightly higher than what you came up with. You
didn't
include the handpay bonus for royals and SF's.
A $750 bonus is 150 coins if the coin is $5. For a 5-coin paytable
you should add 250 coins, which is what you did for the 4OAK
payoff. The RF should be 1500 coins and the SF 500 coins.With those changes to your paytable, the return is 108.9% and the
variance is 46.0. Both WinPoker and vpGenius agree on those figs.The 25% RoR for a $2000 bankroll that I got from using Dunbar's
Risk
Analyzer should still be accurate. I used a no-bonus 8/5 paytable
except that I substituted huge payoffs for the possible handpays.
That way I either go broke or end up above my "Goal". That's a
crude but effective way of modeling walking away after a handpay.Obviously, if you can expect to play 500 hands before going broke
or
getting a handpay (and I'm still not comfortable with that
estimate,
but I'm unwilling to work on it right now--see below), then the
game
is very attractive. 500*$15*8.9% = $668. That's a nice portion of
the $750 available from the handpay bonus.Thanks for catching my blunder. (my error was in my conversion of
$750 into units) It perhaps goes to show that tackling any
question more complicated than the next place to snorkel is risky
while vacationing in Hawaii.--Dunbar
>
> I entered the following 5 coin payouts into VPgenius for $5 8/5
BP
> Deluxe and got a return of 108%
> RF 1250
> SF 250
> 4OAK 650 (390 for 3 coins "240 + 150 bonus")
> FH 40
> FL 25
> ST 20
> 3OAK 15
> 2p 5
> j/b 5
>
>
> The return for this paytable is 108.2745% with perfect play.
> The variance for this paytable is 44.5501 individual bets.
>
> Hand Payoff Count Probability Frequency Variance Return
> Royal Flush $1,250.00 383,632,908 0.0019% 1 in 51,959.1258 1.1925
> 0.4811%
> Straight Flush $250.00 2,065,002,576 0.0104% 1 in 9,652.8841
0.2479
> 0.5180%
> Four of a Kind $650.00 49,772,835,228 0.2497% 1 in 400.4841
41.4989
> 32.4607%
> Full House $40.00 164,263,165,308 0.8241% 1 in 121.3494 0.3943
> 6.5925%
> Flush $25.00 224,902,036,896 1.1283% 1 in 88.6307 0.1731 5.6414%
> Straight $20.00 259,026,394,068 1.2995% 1 in 76.9544 0.1106
5.1979%
> Three of a Kind $15.00 1,562,902,308,768 7.8407% 1 in 12.7540
0.2882
> 23.5221%
> Two Pair $5.00 2,174,821,363,368 10.9105% 1 in 9.1655 0.0007
10.9105%
> Jacks or Better $5.00 4,574,735,827,668 22.9503% 1 in 4.3572
0.0016
> 22.9503%
> Nothing $0.00 10,920,357,950,412 54.7847% 1 in 1.8253 0.6423
0.0000%
> Totals 19,933,230,517,200 Any Win: 1 in 2.2116 44.5501 108.2745%
>
> Here is a link, you can enter the paytable and use paytable
analyzer.
> http://www.vpgenius.com/video-poker/bonus-poker-deluxe.aspx
>
> Let me know if this looks correct.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > 8/6 BPD has a return of 98.49%. 8/5 with 3 coins (3*250 coins
for
> > RF) has a return of 96.19% according to WinPoker.
> >
> > Adding in the $750 handpay would make this game (3-coin $5 8/5
BPD)
> > barely positive: 100.2%, again according to WinPoker (assuming
I
> > have made the adjustments correctly).
> >
> > Taking the WinPoker data and putting it into Dunbar's Risk
> > Analyzer:
> > For $5 BPD with 3 coins at 8/5 (with a shorted RF payout), a
$2000
> > bankroll would suffice 75% of the time to reach a handpay. The
> > other 25% of the time you would lose the $2000 bankroll. You
have
> > less than a 1% chance of needing more than 1000 hands to finish
the
> > play.
> >
> > I can't easily calculate the average number of hands you'd
play,
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@...> wrote:
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "maclarenv12" <ahduff@> wrote:
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@> wrote:
> but
> > even at a generous 500 hand estimate, the EV would be just
> > 500*$15*0.2%=$15. And it's probably less than that.
> >
> > If by chance the BPD is 8/6, then with the shorted Royal, the
> return
> > is 97.37% (WinPoker). With the $750 handpay, the ev is
101.34%.
> > The 500-hand estimate would yield an EV of 500*$15*1.34% = $100
> > (though, again, it is probably less than that because "500" is
most
> > likely a overestimate of the average number of hands required).
> >
> > --Dunbar
> >
> > --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "maclarenv12" <ahduff@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm considering taking a shot at this game three coin ($5)
> > > with the + $750 to any handpay.
> > >
> > > 1. Does anyone know what the paytable Caesars AC has @ the $5
> > level.
> > >
> > > 2. Assuming it is 8/5 what is the ROR if I use a 2k bankroll
and
> > will
> > > quit after the first handpay?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> >
>
dunbar- thanks much for all your help
I did forget to add the bonus to the royal, but the SF will only
pay
me 150 coins($750) for 3 coins in so it won't be a handpay.
Not that it matters much, if I go with this strategy I am playing
all
out for a 4OAK
Ouch, you're right--I made yet another error! After removing the
bonus from the SF payoff, I now get 108.37% with variance of 45.1.
Hopefully together we have finally come up with the return of the
game.
Even if you go all out for the 4OAK, maybe you'll have to suffer
through getting it on an RF handpay. ;>)
--Dunbar
PS--psst, don't tell Harry I'm still thinking about this from Hawaii.
>
> You are almost correct (and way closer than I was!). The return
and
> variance are slightly higher than what you came up with. You
didn't
> include the handpay bonus for royals and SF's.
>
> A $750 bonus is 150 coins if the coin is $5. For a 5-coin
paytable
> you should add 250 coins, which is what you did for the 4OAK
> payoff. The RF should be 1500 coins and the SF 500 coins.
>
> With those changes to your paytable, the return is 108.9% and
the
> variance is 46.0. Both WinPoker and vpGenius agree on those
figs.
>
> The 25% RoR for a $2000 bankroll that I got from using Dunbar's
Risk
> Analyzer should still be accurate. I used a no-bonus 8/5
paytable
> except that I substituted huge payoffs for the possible
handpays.
> That way I either go broke or end up above my "Goal". That's a
> crude but effective way of modeling walking away after a handpay.
>
> Obviously, if you can expect to play 500 hands before going
broke
or
> getting a handpay (and I'm still not comfortable with that
estimate,
> but I'm unwilling to work on it right now--see below), then the
game
> is very attractive. 500*$15*8.9% = $668. That's a nice portion
of
> the $750 available from the handpay bonus.
>
> Thanks for catching my blunder. (my error was in my conversion
of
> $750 into units) It perhaps goes to show that tackling any
> question more complicated than the next place to snorkel is
risky
> while vacationing in Hawaii.
>
> --Dunbar
>
>
>
>
> >
> > I entered the following 5 coin payouts into VPgenius for $5
8/5
BP
> > Deluxe and got a return of 108%
> > RF 1250
> > SF 250
> > 4OAK 650 (390 for 3 coins "240 + 150 bonus")
> > FH 40
> > FL 25
> > ST 20
> > 3OAK 15
> > 2p 5
> > j/b 5
> >
> >
> > The return for this paytable is 108.2745% with perfect play.
> > The variance for this paytable is 44.5501 individual bets.
> >
> > Hand Payoff Count Probability Frequency Variance Return
> > Royal Flush $1,250.00 383,632,908 0.0019% 1 in 51,959.1258
1.1925
> > 0.4811%
> > Straight Flush $250.00 2,065,002,576 0.0104% 1 in 9,652.8841
> 0.2479
> > 0.5180%
> > Four of a Kind $650.00 49,772,835,228 0.2497% 1 in 400.4841
> 41.4989
> > 32.4607%
> > Full House $40.00 164,263,165,308 0.8241% 1 in 121.3494 0.3943
> > 6.5925%
> > Flush $25.00 224,902,036,896 1.1283% 1 in 88.6307 0.1731
5.6414%
> > Straight $20.00 259,026,394,068 1.2995% 1 in 76.9544 0.1106
> 5.1979%
> > Three of a Kind $15.00 1,562,902,308,768 7.8407% 1 in 12.7540
> 0.2882
> > 23.5221%
> > Two Pair $5.00 2,174,821,363,368 10.9105% 1 in 9.1655 0.0007
> 10.9105%
> > Jacks or Better $5.00 4,574,735,827,668 22.9503% 1 in 4.3572
> 0.0016
> > 22.9503%
> > Nothing $0.00 10,920,357,950,412 54.7847% 1 in 1.8253 0.6423
> 0.0000%
> > Totals 19,933,230,517,200 Any Win: 1 in 2.2116 44.5501
108.2745%
> >
> > Here is a link, you can enter the paytable and use paytable
> analyzer.
> > http://www.vpgenius.com/video-poker/bonus-poker-deluxe.aspx
> >
> > Let me know if this looks correct.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > 8/6 BPD has a return of 98.49%. 8/5 with 3 coins (3*250
coins
> for
> > > RF) has a return of 96.19% according to WinPoker.
> > >
> > > Adding in the $750 handpay would make this game (3-coin $5
8/5
> BPD)
> > > barely positive: 100.2%, again according to WinPoker
(assuming
I
> > > have made the adjustments correctly).
> > >
> > > Taking the WinPoker data and putting it into Dunbar's Risk
> > > Analyzer:
> > > For $5 BPD with 3 coins at 8/5 (with a shorted RF payout), a
> $2000
> > > bankroll would suffice 75% of the time to reach a handpay.
The
> > > other 25% of the time you would lose the $2000 bankroll.
You
> have
> > > less than a 1% chance of needing more than 1000 hands to
finish
> the
> > > play.
> > >
> > > I can't easily calculate the average number of hands you'd
play,
> > but
> > > even at a generous 500 hand estimate, the EV would be just
> > > 500*$15*0.2%=$15. And it's probably less than that.
> > >
> > > If by chance the BPD is 8/6, then with the shorted Royal,
the
> > return
> > > is 97.37% (WinPoker). With the $750 handpay, the ev is
> 101.34%.
> > > The 500-hand estimate would yield an EV of 500*$15*1.34% =
$100
> > > (though, again, it is probably less than that because "500"
is
> most
> > > likely a overestimate of the average number of hands
required).
> > >
> > > --Dunbar
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm considering taking a shot at this game three coin ($5)
> > > > with the + $750 to any handpay.
> > > >
> > > > 1. Does anyone know what the paytable Caesars AC has @ the
$5
> > > level.
> > > >
> > > > 2. Assuming it is 8/5 what is the ROR if I use a 2k
bankroll
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "maclarenv12" <ahduff@...> wrote:
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@> wrote:
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "maclarenv12" <ahduff@> wrote:
> > --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@> wrote:
> > > --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "maclarenv12" <ahduff@> wrote:
> and
> > > will
> > > > quit after the first handpay?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@...>
wrote:
dunbar_dra wrote:
> Thanks for catching my blunder. (my error was in my conversion
of
> $750 into units) It perhaps goes to show that tackling any
> question more complicated than the next place to snorkel is
risky
> while vacationing in Hawaii.
That's to be forgiven (even if it betrays an obsessiveness in
following these groups that runs beyond mineI trust you'll make out better in your snorkeling than my last
venture
at Honaunau: Preparing to put my flippers on, my foot slipped
into a
rock crevice. I took home the souvenir of a dozen+ 1/4" urchin
spines
in my right heel. (The calcium content shows up rather
brilliantly in
an x-ray.)
- H.
Whoa! Was that at "Two Steps", Harry? I've gotten pretty blase'
about those little urchins in the steps themselves. They are dug
down so deep, and I've made that entry at least 20 times over the
past decade without a problem. I may have to rethink it now! I
don't think a colorful x-ray is worth it, no matter how much you
like your radiologist.
--Dunbar
dunbar_dra wrote:
Whoa! Was that at "Two Steps", Harry? I've gotten pretty blase'
about those little urchins in the steps themselves. They are dug
down so deep, and I've made that entry at least 20 times over the
past decade without a problem. I may have to rethink it now! I
don't think a colorful x-ray is worth it, no matter how much you
like your radiologist.
You got it. Trust me, I really had to work at it to find that
critter. (Of course, with me, "where there's a will, there's a way"
-- especially when on vacation ... if you ever meet up with Bev and
me, I'll let you ask her about her little Kealakua swim with the
dolphins ;).
I had actually stepped a little aside near the "step in", fins in
hand, to let someone by who was exiting the water and slipped on
algae. I bashed up my knee so bad on the igneous rock (damn that
stuff is like glass!) that neither the state of my foot nor how deep
it must have slipped into the crevice registered on me until later in
the day.
I absorbed a decent amount of toxin from the spines. The kicker was
when making the rocky drive in a jeep over to Green Sand Beach a few
days later. The irregular pounding of the accelerator while crawling
over the rock in low gear must have really cracked open some of the
spines.
I swam a decent way out into the water on a windy day and suddenly
found that my heart felt like it going to implode. The pathetic swim
stroke I managed didn't seem to overcome a gentle outflowing tide.
I've never confided this to Bev but for a minute or two I had little
doubt I was going under (the buckets of water I was swallowing made it
seem a sure thing). Fortunately, middle-aged ballast and a back float
saved the day ... a steady flailing of arms and legs brought me back
in to shore, where I collapsed to my hands and knees and crawled, like
a sick walrus, to the sanctuary of a rock outcropping -- where I
beached myself, feebly smiling and managing a wave to friends,
assuring them I was just "taking a rest".
The 30 min ride back to our condo turned into an hour plus, taking on
something akin to those tortuous drives you may have had back in high
school after a big party -- my friend driving with one eye on the road
and the other looking to me in the back seat for the signal that
another roadside stop was necessary for me to spill my guts.
- Harry
- Harry
Sounds like a riptide, which can be fairly dangerous. The solution is
to swim parallel to the beach until you find where the riptide is not.
You generally don't want to try to outswim a riptide. Riptides are
actually very useful once you learn how to find them, they give you a
fast lane offshore and a fast lane inshore and often fish congregate
in one zone or the other or at the edges.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Hanakapiai_Beach_Warning_Sign_Only.jpg
http://www.navy.com/about/navylife/onduty/seals/becomingaseal/
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@...> wrote:
The pathetic swim
stroke I managed didn't seem to overcome a gentle outflowing tide.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nightoftheiguana2000"
<nightoftheiguana2000@...> wrote:
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@>
wrote:
> The pathetic swim
> stroke I managed didn't seem to overcome a gentle outflowing
tide.
Sounds like a riptide, which can be fairly dangerous. The solution
is
to swim parallel to the beach until you find where the riptide is
not.
You generally don't want to try to outswim a riptide. Riptides are
actually very useful once you learn how to find them, they give
you a
fast lane offshore and a fast lane inshore and often fish
congregate
in one zone or the other or at the edges.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Hanakapiai_Beach_Warning_Sign_Only
.jpg
http://www.navy.com/about/navylife/onduty/seals/becomingaseal/
"farily dangerous" is an understatement. And while your advice is
correct, the problem is that by the time you recognize you are in a
rip current, it may well be too late.
I grew up in Miami, spent 8 years in S. California, and vacation
regularly in Hawaii. I've spent a LOT of time at beaches. I've
heard about rip tides and the "swim parallel to shore" advice all my
life. The problem is, there is no billboard that pops up
saying "you are now in a rip current, relax and swim parallel to
shore!". You don't immediately realize you are in a rip current.
You think you've just drifted out a little deeper to where you can't
touch bottom. So, naturally, you swim a few strong strokes to
shore, expecting to touch bottom when you finish. Hmm. Still too
deep. So now you swim really hard toward shore and when you stop,
you still can't touch bottom. NOW you think, "hey this must be a
rip current! I should swim parallel." Except now you're exhausted
from the 2-3 sprints toward shore, and it's all you can do to tread
water and keep your head above the very choppy surf. (Rip currents
usually occur when the surf is up).
This all happened to me about 18 months ago at a no-lifeguard beach
in Palm Beach, Florida. The idea of actually swimming (parallel) in
that surf seemed impossible, as tired as I was. I tried to rest by
floating, but the surf was so rough that I was spending more energy
floating than treading. My brother was in the same trouble about 20
feet from me. We each figured we had maybe 2 minutes of strength
left before we'd go under. We only survived because a niece had the
insight to go ask a couple of surfers on the beach to help us. I
owe my life to those guys bringing their boards out to us.
--Dunbar
Harry, my Risk Analyzer has determined that you are a dangerous guy
to vacation with. ROA (Risk of Accident) = 75%. Despite that, if
you head again for the Big Island, drop me a note. We spend part of
most summers here.
Aloha!
--Dunbar
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@...>
wrote:
dunbar_dra wrote:
> Whoa! Was that at "Two Steps", Harry? I've gotten pretty
blase'
> about those little urchins in the steps themselves. They are
dug
> down so deep, and I've made that entry at least 20 times over
the
> past decade without a problem. I may have to rethink it now! I
> don't think a colorful x-ray is worth it, no matter how much you
> like your radiologist.You got it. Trust me, I really had to work at it to find that
critter. (Of course, with me, "where there's a will, there's a
way"
-- especially when on vacation ... if you ever meet up with Bev and
me, I'll let you ask her about her little Kealakua swim with the
dolphins ;).I had actually stepped a little aside near the "step in", fins in
hand, to let someone by who was exiting the water and slipped on
algae. I bashed up my knee so bad on the igneous rock (damn that
stuff is like glass!) that neither the state of my foot nor how
deep
it must have slipped into the crevice registered on me until later
in
the day.
I absorbed a decent amount of toxin from the spines. The kicker
was
when making the rocky drive in a jeep over to Green Sand Beach a
few
days later. The irregular pounding of the accelerator while
crawling
over the rock in low gear must have really cracked open some of the
spines.I swam a decent way out into the water on a windy day and suddenly
found that my heart felt like it going to implode. The pathetic
swim
stroke I managed didn't seem to overcome a gentle outflowing tide.
I've never confided this to Bev but for a minute or two I had
little
doubt I was going under (the buckets of water I was swallowing
made it
seem a sure thing). Fortunately, middle-aged ballast and a back
float
saved the day ... a steady flailing of arms and legs brought me
back
in to shore, where I collapsed to my hands and knees and crawled,
like
a sick walrus, to the sanctuary of a rock outcropping -- where I
beached myself, feebly smiling and managing a wave to friends,
assuring them I was just "taking a rest".The 30 min ride back to our condo turned into an hour plus, taking
on
something akin to those tortuous drives you may have had back in
high
school after a big party -- my friend driving with one eye on the
road
and the other looking to me in the back seat for the signal that
another roadside stop was necessary for me to spill my guts.- Harry
dunbar_dra wrote:
Harry, my Risk Analyzer has determined that you are a dangerous guy
to vacation with. ROA (Risk of Accident) = 75%. Despite that, if
you head again for the Big Island, drop me a note. We spend part of
most summers here.
A reality check with Bev suggests that if ill-fated consequences of
bone-headed moves are treated as "accidents", you better slide the
index up to 90%.
I'll keep you in mind should another trip come our way, although
Nov-Mar has been our track record to date for timing.
- Harry