vpFREE2 Forums

Changes in bankroll

#1

Anyone who has played VP for very long knows there are large winning
streaks and losing streaks. I thought some of you might be interested
in hearing about one of my losing streaks.

I just returned from two days in Vegas. The only game I played was
FPDW. At the end of the trip I had lost $1360 (I had been down $1460
before winning $100 right before I left). Now, I have had losing
streaks before, so I wasn't all that surprised. But here is the part
that I thought was interesting. I didn't hit the deuces, or a royal,
even one time. Buy using Dan Paymar's book and doing a few
calculaions, I think it is about 1 time out of 110 that I should have
that kind of a loss without hitting the deuces or a royal. Since I
have had about 25 trips to Vegas to play VP, I guess my time for the
losing streak came a little early. Strange things do happen in VP.

I hope someone else found my experience interesting and informative.

#2

I was in LV a few weeks back. I also had my first losing streak. I
wrote about this in an earlier post. I went to several places and
played most 25/50/1.00 DB. I hit some quads in 25c but not too many. I
basically got skunked on 50c and 1.00. I made a point of going to
places that are known for good VP conditions, like I always do. Same
result at all places. Last couple of times before this trip, I would
always hit at least one win ($400 or more) that I would "cruise" on
for a while and instead of spending the money I came to LV with. Not
this time.

My theory is that casinos have simply tighted up on VP machines due to
the rotten economy. When times are good things get looser, when time
are bad they get tighter. After all, a VP machine is nothing more than
a computer and I'm certain it can be programmed to give more good
hands or more good draws or less good hands and less good draws any
time. I mean, anyone who has played VP for a while (and that's just
about everyone who tunes into this forum) KNOWS when they're on a
"friendly" machine. A machine that deals flushes or full-houses more
than a few times, for example is a "friendly" machine. A machine that
frequently provides the missing cards that you need when you draw to
get yourself a winning hand is a "friendly" machine. On my last few
trips to LV, I went to places that had machines like this. Not this
time. The machines were tight, in most cases.

I haven't changed anything about the way I play DB. I've put many
hours of practice playing DB using WP and, while I haven't mastered
perfect strategy, I'm usually in the 90% plus area of accuracy. So, I
don't think my bad experience this trip has much to do with my playing
style.
I think the machines have just been tightened up.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "jhtks2002" <jthimes@k...> wrote:

Anyone who has played VP for very long knows there are large winning
streaks and losing streaks. I thought some of you might be interested
in hearing about one of my losing streaks.

I just returned from two days in Vegas. The only game I played was
FPDW. At the end of the trip I had lost $1360 (I had been down $1460
before winning $100 right before I left). Now, I have had losing
streaks before, so I wasn't all that surprised. But here is the part
that I thought was interesting. I didn't hit the deuces, or a royal,
even one time. Buy using Dan Paymar's book and doing a few
calculaions, I think it is about 1 time out of 110 that I should have
that kind of a loss without hitting the deuces or a royal. Since I
have had about 25 trips to Vegas to play VP, I guess my time for the
losing streak came a little early. Strange things do happen in VP.

I hope someone else found my experience interesting and informative.

#3

My theory is that casinos have simply tighted up on VP machines due
to the rotten economy. When times are good things get looser, when
time are bad they get tighter. After all, a VP machine is nothing
more than a computer and I'm certain it can be programmed to give
more good hands or more good draws or less good hands and less good
draws any time.

The previous statement shows how many people come to this site with
little knowledge of VP machines.
VP machines CAN NOT be tightened legally other than to lower the pay
table, pure and simple. I'll go back to GVR now and hit a royal.

#4

VP machines CAN NOT be tightened legally other than to lower the pay table, pure and simple. I'll go back to GVR now and hit a royal.

  I agree with you, but he didn't say whether he thought it was legal or not. I trust Nv. has random, unbiased games, but I don't KNOW that's the case for every machine I play there. That's one reason I never stay at the same machine very long.

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

···

From: staninnv

#5

I trust Nv. has random, unbiased games, but I don't KNOW that's the case

for every machine I play there. That's one reason I never stay at the same
machine very long.<

There is only one group of folks more paranoid than the people who own and
run casinos here in Las Vegas. The gamblers who play in them.
                                            Nudge

···

From: "Rob Singer" <rsinger1111@cox.net>

#6

I don't work for IGT, do you? What I know is what my experience is.
How many times has it happened that I play VP and when I'm down to my
last few coins, the machine just "happens" to deal me a token winning
hand to keep me playing? Lot of times. Since I am a trained Electical
Engineer and have programmed computers for many years, I'm not so
naive to think that these "computers" that happen to be called VP
machines cannot be programmed to behave one way or another and do
completely within the context of legality. Go hit yourself a royal at
GVR. And while you're there, maybe you can pick up a clue.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "staninnv" <arnot@l...> wrote:

My theory is that casinos have simply tighted up on VP machines due
to the rotten economy. When times are good things get looser, when
time are bad they get tighter. After all, a VP machine is nothing
more than a computer and I'm certain it can be programmed to give
more good hands or more good draws or less good hands and less good
draws any time.

The previous statement shows how many people come to this site with
little knowledge of VP machines.
VP machines CAN NOT be tightened legally other than to lower the pay
table, pure and simple. I'll go back to GVR now and hit a royal.

#7

I certainly agree that VP machines can be programed to do whatever
the casino wants. However, it ain't legal. Casinos are not risking
their license to make another 1% on their take.

#8

staninnv wrote:

I certainly agree that VP machines can be programed to do whatever
the casino wants. However, it ain't legal. Casinos are not risking
their license to make another 1% on their take.

Whatever the case, I'll repeat the question I've asked before: If
someone thinks that the machines their playing may have been tampered
with in some fashion, why are you playing them, much less playing in
that casino?!

- H.

#9

Not trying to split hairs here, but I think that tampering is too
strong a term. What I think, and this is based on many years of
programming experience, (including embedded programming in computer
circuitry), is that computers can be programmed to respond to various
conditions. And in the case of VP machines, I believe they can be
programmed to be tighter or looser and do so COMPLETELY in the context
of legality. Perhaps a better phrase for tighter or looser is the
"spread of randomness" can be adjusted up or down to return more good
hands or less good hands. As far as I'm concerned all a pay table
tells me is that, should I win, I will win more or less based on the
pay table. It doesn't tell me a thing about the frequency of winning
at a particular machine.

Like everyone on this forum, I play VP because I enjoy it. I just
happen to enjoy it more when I win. When I have an experience like I
just had out in LV, where I lose and lose and lose again and it
happens all over the place, my sense tells me something's changed. My
opinion is that casinos are a business and like all businesses want to
make a profit. In lean economic times when there are fewer people
coming to LV, they become more stingy. In better times, like the 90's
they are less so. And I believe there is a statistical standard
deviation for tightness and looseness that they can use to legally
affect a VP machines performance. Perhaps the issue is "what's legal?"
in the context of tightness or looseness? Does it mean returning 10
winning hands out of 100 when it previously was, say, 30?

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@v...> wrote:

staninnv wrote:
> I certainly agree that VP machines can be programed to do whatever
> the casino wants. However, it ain't legal. Casinos are not risking
> their license to make another 1% on their take.

Whatever the case, I'll repeat the question I've asked before: If
someone thinks that the machines their playing may have been tampered
with in some fashion, why are you playing them, much less playing in
that casino?!

- H.

#10

>
> My theory is that casinos have simply tighted up on VP machines due
> to the rotten economy. When times are good things get looser, when
> time are bad they get tighter. After all, a VP machine is nothing
> more than a computer and I'm certain it can be programmed to give
> more good hands or more good draws or less good hands and less good
> draws any time.
>
> The previous statement shows how many people come to this site with
> little knowledge of VP machines.
> VP machines CAN NOT be tightened legally other than to lower the pay
> table, pure and simple. I'll go back to GVR now and hit a royal.

I don't work for IGT, do you? What I know is what my experience is.

     I don't work for IGT either, but I do know that anecdotes of
individual experience can be very deceptive. It's more likely you just
pulled your notions from selective memory; I doubt you did any kind of
serious statistical analysis (as an "Electrical Engineer", trained or
untrained, presumably would).

How many times has it happened that I play VP and when I'm down to my
last few coins, the machine just "happens" to deal me a token winning
hand to keep me playing? Lot of times. Since I am a trained Electical

     If you actually believe this you have hit upon an brilliant winning
strategy. Simply hang around the $5 machines and wait until a player has
lost all but a few coins, then offer to buy his remaining credits at a
small premium. You can then enjoy the benefits of that juicy "token
winning hand" that the machine has clairvoyantly determined it must give
you in order to keep you interested.

     People who are trained in fields like psychology attribute these
sorts of notions to a lack of critical thought or common sense.

Engineer and have programmed computers for many years, I'm not so
naive to think that these "computers" that happen to be called VP
machines cannot be programmed to behave one way or another and do
completely within the context of legality. Go hit yourself a royal at
GVR. And while you're there, maybe you can pick up a clue.

     There are no doubt hundreds of people on this list who can program
computers and none would dispute that they can be programmed to cheat.
But the Nevada regulatory scheme seems more than adequate in assuring that
the machines yield results in line with what the paytables suggest they
should. Your comment about the "context of legality" is
incoherent...either they are forcing certain results (and thus cheating)
or they aren't. You are welcome to present real evidence, a "clue", that
they are cheating but silly notions about machines that like to goose
losers don't cut it.

gj

···

On Thu, 24 Apr 2003, keenman55 wrote:

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "staninnv" <arnot@l...> wrote:

#11

Certainly the machines can be programmed to do anything. However, in Nevada
the machine MUST operate as if dealing from a completely random 52-card
deck. The number of winning hands within a span is not relevant. The pay
schedule gives perfect information about the "tightness" or "looseness" of
the machine. There is no wiggle room (except since the RNG is only
pseudo-random there are some mathematically allowed tolerances that do not
affect the appearance of randomness to the player. We can predict the
statistical occurrence of each hand from a random 52-card deck. No
additional programming to affect the outcome of hands can be included and
stay legal in Nevada.

If you could "tighten" the machines without changing the pay table, Coast
would have done this. They did not. That should indicate the fairness of
Nevada machines and casinos.

Not trying to split hairs here, but I think that tampering is too
strong a term. What I think, and this is based on many years of
programming experience, (including embedded programming in computer
circuitry), is that computers can be programmed to respond to various
conditions. And in the case of VP machines, I believe they can be
programmed to be tighter or looser and do so COMPLETELY in the context
of legality. Perhaps a better phrase for tighter or looser is the
"spread of randomness" can be adjusted up or down to return more good
hands or less good hands. As far as I'm concerned all a pay table
tells me is that, should I win, I will win more or less based on the
pay table. It doesn't tell me a thing about the frequency of winning
at a particular machine.

Like everyone on this forum, I play VP because I enjoy it. I just
happen to enjoy it more when I win. When I have an experience like I
just had out in LV, where I lose and lose and lose again and it
happens all over the place, my sense tells me something's changed. My
opinion is that casinos are a business and like all businesses want to
make a profit. In lean economic times when there are fewer people
coming to LV, they become more stingy. In better times, like the 90's
they are less so. And I believe there is a statistical standard
deviation for tightness and looseness that they can use to legally
affect a VP machines performance. Perhaps the issue is "what's legal?"
in the context of tightness or looseness? Does it mean returning 10
winning hands out of 100 when it previously was, say, 30?

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=247865.3003379.4507215.2595810/D=egroupweb/S=1705065732:HM/A=1482387/R=0/*http://ads.x10.com/?bHlhaG9vaG0xLmRhd=1051194438>M=247865.3003379.4507215.2595810/D=egroupweb/S=1705065732:HM/A=1482387/R=1=1051194438>M=247865.3003379.4507215.2595810/D=egroupweb/S=1705065732:HM/A=1482387/R=2>3235e0c.jpg
3235e79.jpg

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

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service.

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

#12

> >
> > My theory is that casinos have simply tighted up on VP machines due
> > to the rotten economy. When times are good things get looser, when
> > time are bad they get tighter. After all, a VP machine is nothing
> > more than a computer and I'm certain it can be programmed to give
> > more good hands or more good draws or less good hands and less good
> > draws any time.
> >
> > The previous statement shows how many people come to this site with
> > little knowledge of VP machines.
> > VP machines CAN NOT be tightened legally other than to lower the pay
> > table, pure and simple. I'll go back to GVR now and hit a royal.
>
> I don't work for IGT, do you? What I know is what my experience is.

     I don't work for IGT either, but I do know that anecdotes of
individual experience can be very deceptive. It's more likely you just
pulled your notions from selective memory; I doubt you did any kind of
serious statistical analysis (as an "Electrical Engineer", trained or
untrained, presumably would).

> How many times has it happened that I play VP and when I'm down to my
> last few coins, the machine just "happens" to deal me a token winning
> hand to keep me playing? Lot of times. Since I am a trained Electical

     If you actually believe this you have hit upon an brilliant winning
strategy. Simply hang around the $5 machines and wait until a

player has

lost all but a few coins, then offer to buy his remaining credits at a
small premium. You can then enjoy the benefits of that juicy "token
winning hand" that the machine has clairvoyantly determined it must give
you in order to keep you interested.

     People who are trained in fields like psychology attribute these
sorts of notions to a lack of critical thought or common sense.

> Engineer and have programmed computers for many years, I'm not so
> naive to think that these "computers" that happen to be called VP
> machines cannot be programmed to behave one way or another and do
> completely within the context of legality. Go hit yourself a royal at
> GVR. And while you're there, maybe you can pick up a clue.
>

     There are no doubt hundreds of people on this list who can program
computers and none would dispute that they can be programmed to cheat.
But the Nevada regulatory scheme seems more than adequate in

assuring that

the machines yield results in line with what the paytables suggest they
should. Your comment about the "context of legality" is
incoherent...either they are forcing certain results (and thus cheating)
or they aren't. You are welcome to present real evidence, a "clue",

that

they are cheating but silly notions about machines that like to goose
losers don't cut it.

gj

First off, my "clue" remark in a previous post was in response to an
unprovoked condescending comment by another poster about "little
knowledge of VP machines". I'm not into "flaming", but I'm not into
getting "flamed" either. But for my part, I will apologize for that
remark and will refrain from making anymore. I joined this forum
because I enjoy VP and reading about the experiences of others.

Now, as to the topic at hand. You're right, my posts are empirical,
not scientific. I don't recall that I posted anything about performing
a statistical analysis. If I ever get that serious about playing video
poker I will pick up one of those brochures that casinos distribute
regarding "When it's not a game anymore".

But I do believe that VP machines are computers and computers are
programmed to behave certain ways by people. Is it inconceivable that
they can be programmed, entirely with the range of legal "tolerance"
to be looser or tighter as casinos desire? And is it inconceivable
that this can be done without being subjected to accusations of
cheating or gaffing the machines?

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, gj bart <bronco@e...> wrote:

On Thu, 24 Apr 2003, keenman55 wrote:
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "staninnv" <arnot@l...> wrote:

#13

Every card that comes out on a VP machine in Nevada must be randomly
selected. HANDS are not programmed to come out. To make a VP machine in
Nevada looser or tighter by altering the programming is cheating. So.. Yes
it is fairly inconceivable that any decent sized casino in Nevada would
"cheat" to make a VP machine looser or tighter. Slightly more possible but
still unlikely that a mom and pop place would try to do it. They would lose
their gaming license in a minute if they were ever caught.

···

-----Original Message-----
From: keenman55 [mailto:keenma…@…com]
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2003 8:41 AM
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Changes in bankroll

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, gj bart <bronco@e...> wrote:

On Thu, 24 Apr 2003, keenman55 wrote:

> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "staninnv" <arnot@l...> wrote:
> >
> > My theory is that casinos have simply tighted up on VP machines due
> > to the rotten economy. When times are good things get looser, when
> > time are bad they get tighter. After all, a VP machine is nothing
> > more than a computer and I'm certain it can be programmed to give
> > more good hands or more good draws or less good hands and less good
> > draws any time.
> >
> > The previous statement shows how many people come to this site with
> > little knowledge of VP machines.
> > VP machines CAN NOT be tightened legally other than to lower the pay
> > table, pure and simple. I'll go back to GVR now and hit a royal.
>
> I don't work for IGT, do you? What I know is what my experience is.

     I don't work for IGT either, but I do know that anecdotes of
individual experience can be very deceptive. It's more likely you just
pulled your notions from selective memory; I doubt you did any kind of
serious statistical analysis (as an "Electrical Engineer", trained or
untrained, presumably would).

> How many times has it happened that I play VP and when I'm down to my
> last few coins, the machine just "happens" to deal me a token winning
> hand to keep me playing? Lot of times. Since I am a trained Electical

     If you actually believe this you have hit upon an brilliant winning
strategy. Simply hang around the $5 machines and wait until a

player has

lost all but a few coins, then offer to buy his remaining credits at a
small premium. You can then enjoy the benefits of that juicy "token
winning hand" that the machine has clairvoyantly determined it must give
you in order to keep you interested.

     People who are trained in fields like psychology attribute these
sorts of notions to a lack of critical thought or common sense.

> Engineer and have programmed computers for many years, I'm not so
> naive to think that these "computers" that happen to be called VP
> machines cannot be programmed to behave one way or another and do
> completely within the context of legality. Go hit yourself a royal at
> GVR. And while you're there, maybe you can pick up a clue.
>

     There are no doubt hundreds of people on this list who can program
computers and none would dispute that they can be programmed to cheat.
But the Nevada regulatory scheme seems more than adequate in

assuring that

the machines yield results in line with what the paytables suggest they
should. Your comment about the "context of legality" is
incoherent...either they are forcing certain results (and thus cheating)
or they aren't. You are welcome to present real evidence, a "clue",

that

they are cheating but silly notions about machines that like to goose
losers don't cut it.

gj

First off, my "clue" remark in a previous post was in response to an
unprovoked condescending comment by another poster about "little
knowledge of VP machines". I'm not into "flaming", but I'm not into
getting "flamed" either. But for my part, I will apologize for that
remark and will refrain from making anymore. I joined this forum
because I enjoy VP and reading about the experiences of others.

Now, as to the topic at hand. You're right, my posts are empirical,
not scientific. I don't recall that I posted anything about performing
a statistical analysis. If I ever get that serious about playing video
poker I will pick up one of those brochures that casinos distribute
regarding "When it's not a game anymore".

But I do believe that VP machines are computers and computers are
programmed to behave certain ways by people. Is it inconceivable that
they can be programmed, entirely with the range of legal "tolerance"
to be looser or tighter as casinos desire? And is it inconceivable
that this can be done without being subjected to accusations of
cheating or gaffing the machines?

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=247865.3003379.4507215.2595810/D=egroupweb/S=17050657
32:HM/A=1482387/R=0/*http:/ads.x10.com/?bHlhaG9vaG0xLmRhd=1051200282%3eM=247
865.3003379.4507215.2595810/D=egroupweb/S=1705065732:HM/A=1482387/R=1=105120
0282%3eM=247865.3003379.4507215.2595810/D=egroupweb/S=1705065732:HM/A=148238
7/R=2>

<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=247865.3003379.4507215.2595810/D=egroupmai
l/S=:HM/A=1482387/rand=735233107>

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

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.

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

#14

>
> I don't work for IGT either, but I do know that anecdotes of
> individual experience can be very deceptive. It's more likely you just
> pulled your notions from selective memory; I doubt you did any kind of
> serious statistical analysis (as an "Electrical Engineer", trained or
> untrained, presumably would).
>
> > How many times has it happened that I play VP and when I'm down to my
> > last few coins, the machine just "happens" to deal me a token winning
> > hand to keep me playing? Lot of times. Since I am a trained Electical
>
> If you actually believe this you have hit upon an brilliant winning
> strategy. Simply hang around the $5 machines and wait until a
player has
> lost all but a few coins, then offer to buy his remaining credits at a
> small premium. You can then enjoy the benefits of that juicy "token
> winning hand" that the machine has clairvoyantly determined it must give
> you in order to keep you interested.
>
> People who are trained in fields like psychology attribute these
> sorts of notions to a lack of critical thought or common sense.
>
> > Engineer and have programmed computers for many years, I'm not so
> > naive to think that these "computers" that happen to be called VP
> > machines cannot be programmed to behave one way or another and do
> > completely within the context of legality. Go hit yourself a royal at
> > GVR. And while you're there, maybe you can pick up a clue.
> >
>
> There are no doubt hundreds of people on this list who can program
> computers and none would dispute that they can be programmed to cheat.
> But the Nevada regulatory scheme seems more than adequate in
assuring that
> the machines yield results in line with what the paytables suggest they
> should. Your comment about the "context of legality" is
> incoherent...either they are forcing certain results (and thus cheating)
> or they aren't. You are welcome to present real evidence, a "clue",
that
> they are cheating but silly notions about machines that like to goose
> losers don't cut it.
>
> gj

First off, my "clue" remark in a previous post was in response to an
unprovoked condescending comment by another poster about "little
knowledge of VP machines". I'm not into "flaming", but I'm not into
getting "flamed" either. But for my part, I will apologize for that
remark and will refrain from making anymore. I joined this forum
because I enjoy VP and reading about the experiences of others.

Now, as to the topic at hand. You're right, my posts are empirical,
not scientific. I don't recall that I posted anything about performing

     Except that science is empiricism done with rigor, and is our best
means of determining truth in situations like this one. Empiricism in the
sense of "casual observation" is a whole different ballgame.

a statistical analysis. If I ever get that serious about playing video
poker I will pick up one of those brochures that casinos distribute
regarding "When it's not a game anymore".

     VP is just a dumb game, like baseball, cricket, backgammon, or
whatever. That doesn't keep lots of folks from seriously studying their
hobby purely out of intellectual curiousity, nor does it mean such people
are in some way unhealthily "addicted".

But I do believe that VP machines are computers and computers are
programmed to behave certain ways by people. Is it inconceivable that

     In the relevant case they are programmed to fetch pseudo-random
numbers, and use them to pick cards from a virtual deck.

they can be programmed, entirely with the range of legal "tolerance"
to be looser or tighter as casinos desire?

     Yes, this is inconceivable because it is a direct contradiction.
There is no legal "tolerance" for mucking around with the programming or
random numbers. To loosen or tighten the machines they simply change the
pay table.

And is it inconceivable
that this can be done without being subjected to accusations of
cheating or gaffing the machines?

     No, this is inconceivable because gamblers are famous for making
accusations of cheating etc. no matter what the case may be, if they
happen to be losing.

gj

···

On Thu, 24 Apr 2003, keenman55 wrote:

#15

Like everyone on this forum, I play VP because I enjoy it. I just
happen to enjoy it more when I win. When I have an experience like I
just had out in LV, where I lose and lose and lose again and it
happens all over the place, my sense tells me something's changed.

Your "sense" does not understand the highly volatile nature of
VP. Running bad is part of the game. Go write a program to simulate
playing VP. Have it pay attention to losing streaks. You will see results
such as you describe. The idea that one casino has 'tightened' their
machines is pretty hard to believe. The idea that all the machines
across the city are now 'tighter' is really not credible.

Your argument about good vs. bad times makes no sense either.
No matter what business we want to talk about, the primary driving
force is profits. If casinoss were free to 'tighten' their machines,
they would do so all the time. Presumably this strategy would
maximize profits.

Perhaps the issue is "what's legal?"
in the context of tightness or looseness? Does it mean returning 10
winning hands out of 100 when it previously was, say, 30?

That has nothing to do with the definitions of legal. The definition
of what's legal foucuses on the random way that cards are dealt. It takes
millions of hands to get the approximate theoretical distribution
of final hands.

QZ

#16

Now, as to the topic at hand. You're right, my posts are empirical,
not scientific. I don't recall that I posted anything about performing
a statistical analysis. If I ever get that serious about playing video
poker I will pick up one of those brochures that casinos distribute
regarding "When it's not a game anymore".

I think this is out of line. You have pretty much said that if
one takes video poker seriously enough, one is in need of Gambler's
Anonymous. Am I missing something?

But I do believe that VP machines are computers and computers are
programmed to behave certain ways by people. Is it inconceivable that
they can be programmed, entirely with the range of legal "tolerance"
to be looser or tighter as casinos desire?

The short answer is: "Yes"

The state examines the algorithm used to produce the cards. It does
not allow the casino to modify this algorithm. We assume the state
only allows algorithms that are 'fair'. The casinos must break the
law if they want to 'tighten' the machines because they must use a
non-approved algorithm to do so.

QZ

#17

Yes, it is inconceivable because (see my previous post) it cannot be done without cheating under Nevada regs.

···

But I do believe that VP machines are computers and computers are
programmed to behave certain ways by people. Is it inconceivable that
they can be programmed, entirely with the range of legal "tolerance"
to be looser or tighter as casinos desire? And is it inconceivable
that this can be done without being subjected to accusations of
cheating or gaffing the machines?

#18

i, too, am a computer programmer (seems like everyone here is), and i
fully understand how programs and rngs can be manipulated.

However:

a) IGN, not the casinos, makes the machines
b) nobody at the casino could just "make a lil change" to
tighten/loosen the machines...even with slot machines, they have to
put a different IGN chip in the machine, and that has to be done
under the eye of the gaming commission, etc...it's illegal for there
to be different chips for vp machines in vegas, because there is only
one kind of programmming allowed: random...they can't put in 99%,
95%, 91%, etc chips like they do in slot machines or in slots
disguised as vp machines in non-vegas areas
c) the rng for all IGN vp machines, regardless of if it's fpdw, all-
american, job, or joker poker, should be the same, as the standard
states that it should be a random drawing from a full deck of
cards...they verify this based on 10000000s of trials, not on a
certain pay schedule or which cards make which hands...all that
matters is that the "random draw" results in a good distribution over
10000000s of hands and that there is no pattern to the rng's bias (if
there was a pattern, it'd only help us) as all rng's are biased...we
can't program a truly random rng, unfortunately

the fact that people think that machines will give you "token hands"
when you are almost out of credits is not due to the machines, but to
human nature/psychology.

also, in job, you should get a "winning hand" (jacks or better) about
44% of the time (give or take a few %, i forget what it is
exactly)...thus if ur down to a few credits, and have thus been
having more than your share of losing hands, then it's not unexpected
at all for u to win some (although it's also not unexpected at all
for u to lose ur next 20 hands as well, as cards only even out to the
expected % over approaching infinite hands have been played)

the times that you are almost out of credits (down to the last 5-15
credits) and you do hit that hand that lets u keep going, you
remember them

the times that you are down to last 5-15 credits and you lose those
credits, you don't renenber, as you expect to run out quickly when ur
down to
5-15 credits (otherwise we'd all just bring a $20 to vegas and leave
rest of money at home), so it's no big deal

this is human psychology, and it is the reason that people "see
patterns" in gambling and gaming...the truth is, rngs, good human
shuffling, roulette ball spinning (w/out biased wheel or dealer), etc
all follow chaotic patterns...and u can't predict chaos...the human
mind looks for patterns automatically (ie shapes in clouds) and that
is what makes u believe u've found a bias, cheat, or
pattern...however, u can only find short-term patterns in chaos..it's
impossible to find long-term patterns...but that doesnt stop the
human mind from thinking it's found a secret

#19

To QZ and gj:

(and yes, "QZ" you are missing something)

I wrote these words:

"If I ever get that serious about playing video
poker I will pick up one of those brochures that casinos distribute
regarding "When it's not a game anymore"."

When it was just "gj" responding to this remark and inferring that I
was somehow calling people addicted, I was inclined to leave it alone.
But now another poster has drawn the same conclusion, so I'd like to
respond.

Notice that this remark has the pronoun "I" in it. I enjoy playing VP
for recreational purposes. I don't take it so seriously that I would
take the time to make statistical samplings about results. The
statistical sample comment by "gj" is what lead up to my making a
comment about taking VP too seriously. My remark about "When it's not
a game anymore" was purely in response to my having no interest in
taking the time to statistically analyze my VP playing results.
(Here's his comment: "I doubt you did any kind of serious statistical
analysis (as an "Electrical Engineer", trained or untrained,
presumably would)

I have said that through observations (referred to as "casual
observations") I am suspicious and skeptical of the randomness or
"tightness" or "looseness" of some machines. I was taken to task for
making this remark since it's conjecture on my part. Fair enough.

Please do not take a statement that I made, in which I am clearly
speaking for myself, and infer that I am indicting those who might
have the inclination to spend the time making such statistical
samplings. Any possible inference you might take regarding "addiction"
is purely a creation of you own imagination. If someone wants to spend
time taking statistics to try to determine if a VP machine is somehow
biased, more power to him or her. Perhaps, when they're done, they can
start on trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head of
a pin!

If you want to take me to task, fine. But please take me to task for
what I've said, not what you've think I've said.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Quad Zilla" <quadzilla666@e...> wrote:

> Now, as to the topic at hand. You're right, my posts are empirical,
> not scientific. I don't recall that I posted anything about performing
> a statistical analysis. If I ever get that serious about playing video
> poker I will pick up one of those brochures that casinos distribute
> regarding "When it's not a game anymore".

I think this is out of line. You have pretty much said that if
one takes video poker seriously enough, one is in need of Gambler's
Anonymous. Am I missing something?

> But I do believe that VP machines are computers and computers are
> programmed to behave certain ways by people. Is it inconceivable that
> they can be programmed, entirely with the range of legal "tolerance"
> to be looser or tighter as casinos desire?

The short answer is: "Yes"

The state examines the algorithm used to produce the cards. It does
not allow the casino to modify this algorithm. We assume the state
only allows algorithms that are 'fair'. The casinos must break the
law if they want to 'tighten' the machines because they must use a
non-approved algorithm to do so.

QZ