Was searching the internet for some info regarding video poker and
seem to remember reading an article that claimed doubling up
increased expected return.
Any idea what article I was reading, as I cannot find it now.
Any comments regarding doubling up and expected return. I was of
the opinion that seeing that it was an even bet that it would not
affect return. Does seem as though it might affect variance.
Deuceswild1000
Looks like I can't spell either. <G>
Doubling up
--- In vpFREE@y..., "deuceswild1000" <deuceswild1000@y...> wrote:
Was searching the internet for some info regarding video poker and
seem to remember reading an article that claimed doubling up
increased expected return.Any idea what article I was reading, as I cannot find it now.
Any comments regarding doubling up and expected return. I was of
the opinion that seeing that it was an even bet that it would not
affect return. Does seem as though it might affect variance.Deuceswild1000
Old theory.....
If you are playing a negative expectation machine, using the double up option which is even money improves your average.
Regards
A.P.
----- Original Message -----
From: deuceswild1000
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, October 05, 2002 9:46 PM
Subject: [vpFREE] Doubling uop
Was searching the internet for some info regarding video poker and
seem to remember reading an article that claimed doubling up
increased expected return.
Any idea what article I was reading, as I cannot find it now.
Any comments regarding doubling up and expected return. I was of
the opinion that seeing that it was an even bet that it would not
affect return. Does seem as though it might affect variance.
Deuceswild1000
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This "old theory" is about as accurate as my dart throwing... which is erratic to say the least.
Does doubling up work? Sure, IF you have no limit on the machine or table game, and if you have unlimited money. Trust me, somewhere a bad run will come that will destroy you.
I'll leave it to the math experts to do the number's explanation. I am assuming you mean doubling when you lose? Doubling when you win can have just as disastrous results since you are giving up valuable winnings.
That's my two-cent's worth... wanna go double or nothing and get four-cents worth?
Allen
:>
At 08:43 PM 10/5/02, you wrote:
Old theory.....
If you are playing a negative expectation machine, using the double up option which is even money improves your average.
I think you misunderstood the question. (or I did) .
I was referring to the "double-up" option on video poker machines, that allows you to pick a card against a machine card ... if you beat the machines card you win . The option is an even money proposition with an even chance of winning.
Regards
A.P.
----- Original Message -----
From: Webmaster
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 12:12 AM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Doubling uop
At 08:43 PM 10/5/02, you wrote:
>Old theory.....
>If you are playing a negative expectation machine, using the double up
>option which is even money improves your average.
This "old theory" is about as accurate as my dart throwing... which is
erratic to say the least.
Does doubling up work? Sure, IF you have no limit on the machine or table
game, and if you have unlimited money. Trust me, somewhere a bad run will
come that will destroy you.
I'll leave it to the math experts to do the number's explanation. I am
assuming you mean doubling when you lose? Doubling when you win can have
just as disastrous results since you are giving up valuable winnings.
That's my two-cent's worth... wanna go double or nothing and get four-cents
worth?
Allen
:>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I did a little, but I can't see where it would increase one's chances of winning. I assume the house likes the feature because it adds volatility to the game, and that's the curse of VP players, IMHO.
Anything that can cause a VP player to lose their bankroll is what the house wants. Obviously, if you get "lucky" I've seen players keep doubling and make a ton of money.
So, where are all the math wiz's to verify or dispute this argument? <G>
Allen
p.s. I changed the thread name... that misspelling was driving me nuts!!
At 09:12 PM 10/5/02, you wrote:
I think you misunderstood the question. (or I did)
--- In vpFREE@y..., "Albert Pearson" <a-p@s...> wrote:
I think you misunderstood the question. (or I did) .
I was referring to the "double-up" option on video poker machines,
that allows you to pick a card against a machine card ... if you
beat the machines card you win . The option is an even money
proposition with an even chance of winning.
Yes, I was referring to the double-up on video poker, not the
Martingale system.
Could you explain the "old theory" that it improves a negative
expectation game. Or is "old theory" equivalent to an "urban legend"
I can believe increased volatility, but cannot see how it would
affect expected return/value.
Deuceswild1000
Could you explain the "old theory" that it improves a negative
expectation game. Or is "old theory" equivalent to an "urban legend"I can believe increased volatility, but cannot see how it would
affect expected return/value.Deuceswild1000
If you make a bet on a 98% EV machine and then make a second bet (double-up)
that is 100% EV you have an average EV for that hand (2 bets) of 99%.
If you make a bet on a 102% EV machine and then make a second bet
(double-up) that is 100% EV you have an average EV for that hand (2 bets) of
101%.
From the above statements it would appear that a player on a 98% EV machine
would lose 1% less money by doubling up. This is not true. If he is betting
$1 per hand his expected long-term loss is $.02 per hand if he does not
double up. If he doubles up his expected loss is $.02 on the first bet
because the machine has a 98% EV. On his double-up bet the return is 100%.
100% EV means that he will average zero win/loss for the double-up bet. $.02
+ $.00 = $.02. His long-term average cost is still $.02. The same cost as
not doubling up.
There are other factors that also affect the cost or advantage of using the
double-up feature but I have written enough for tonight.
Good night.
vpFREE Home Page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREEvpFREE Links:
http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.htmlYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
<<<
Was searching the internet for some info regarding video poker and
seem to remember reading an article that claimed doubling up
increased expected return.
Any idea what article I was reading, as I cannot find it now.
A worthless piece of crap?
Actually, if you are playing a negative expectation
game, and you do this AND you consider the double up bet
to me part of the total amount wagered, the expected
return will be closer to 100%. Since this process slows
down the other bets, it will even reduce your expected
hourly loss. However, making that kind of claim is very
likely to mislead people into thinking it actually helps
you. An author who writes this is either so clueless that
he really does think the bet helps the player
or simply irresposibly misleading people.
If someone on this group is asking this question,
then we can be certain that many people in the general
public will be misled.
Since no slot club on the planet is known to give
points on these bets, the double up cannot be used to
generate added perks while making a break-even wager.
<<<
Any comments regarding doubling up and expected return. I was of
the opinion that seeing that it was an even bet that it would not
affect return. Does seem as though it might affect variance.
Bingo!
QZ
Deuceswild1000
<<<
I did a little, but I can't see where it would increase one's chances of
winning. I assume the house likes the feature because it adds volatility to
the game, and that's the curse of VP players, IMHO.
Actually, the house derives no benefit as a result of the
added variance. Variance is really only a factor of any significance
when one has a fairly small bankroll. Casinos have very LARGE
bankrolls (except maybe the Horseshoe). Winning an extra $100
from 10 players and losing an extra $1000 to one player might bust
out a few players, but the casino still winds up breaking even.
Anything that can cause a VP player to lose their bankroll is what the
house wants. Obviously, if you get "lucky" I've seen players keep doubling
and make a ton of money.
So, where are all the math wiz's to verify or dispute this argument? <G>
What happens is that more players bust out, but some win a
lot. The house sees a long term win of 0 on the bet, even though
individual players can have large swings.
Personally, I think the house should NOT like the idea of
having people bust out more. The majority of players are sheep.
Just like sheep, you get a lot more 'wool' if you shear them and
avoid slaughtering them. Even if the sheep survives, a particularly
poor run at a given casino is likely to make this sheep seek
greener pastures, i.e. your competition.
Since the process also slows down the play of the games
where the customer is a more or less certain loser, the double
up should reduce the house win.
To counterbalance all this is the aspect of customer
relations. If the players LIKE the option, then casinos could
easily be well advised to make the option available on a few
machines.
Allen
QZ
Either I haven't received all posts in this thread or my mail-reader hasn't properly tracked them, and so I'm not sure who made part of the statements below, so I'll indicate with '?' when it seems unclear to me.
someone_else wrote:
Could you explain the "old theory" that it improves a negative
expectation game. Or is "old theory" equivalent to an "urban legend"I can believe increased volatility, but cannot see how it would
affect expected return/value.Deuceswild1000
'?' said:
If you make a bet on a 98% EV machine and then make a second bet (double-up)
that is 100% EV you have an average EV for that hand (2 bets) of 99%.If you make a bet on a 102% EV machine and then make a second bet
(double-up) that is 100% EV you have an average EV for that hand (2 bets) of
101%.
'??' said:
From the above statements it would appear that a player on a 98% EV machine
would lose 1% less money by doubling up. This is not true. If he is betting
$1 per hand his expected long-term loss is $.02 per hand if he does not
double up. If he doubles up his expected loss is $.02 on the first bet
because the machine has a 98% EV. On his double-up bet the return is 100%.
100% EV means that he will average zero win/loss for the double-up bet. $.02
+ $.00 = $.02. His long-term average cost is still $.02. The same cost as
not doubling up.
It seems to me that you are both correct, somewhat. Regarding ?'s statements, if you _always_ double-down one time for each win, _and_ if you consider the play of doubling-down as 'another game' and not merely as an extension of the same game, then your average winnings for _all_ games, including the separate 'double-down' games, would be boosted if you're playing a negative game, or diluted if you're playing a positive game. However, I don't think you can just average the 98% + 100% to get 99% when thinking in this context, and this is why. Let's say that I play 800 games of max quarters on a 98% game. That's $1,000.00 coin-in and my average loss should be $20.00. Now, if I consistently played a single double-down on every initial win, then according to the law of averages, I would still lose $20.00 on that same $1,000.00 coin-in (which proves the point of '??', but it would be spread over many more games if you count the double-down as a separate game, which somewhat proves the point of '?'; however, I'm not going to double my games from 800 to 1600, because I don't get to 'play' an extra game on any hands that I have lost. So, let's say that the law of averages is that I win only 1 out of 4 hands, then the total 'games' that I would be playing would be only 1,000 instead of the 1,600 that I think you'd have to play to be able to pretend that your EV jumped from 98% to 99% (in other words your losses are .02 x 800 x 1.25 = .01 x 1600 x 1.25) ... but this is all just a play with numbers. The bottom line is that the percentage, relative to your coin-in, remains unchanged, and that is the true measure of your EV, in my opinion.
There are other factors that also affect the cost or advantage of using the
double-up feature but I have written enough for tonight.
What comes to my mind is that, since you add no coin-in, you get no slot-club points, which means that you are not earning anything toward comped meals, etc. It does add a lot of excitement to the game though, but at a cost of increased variance.
snip
Cheers.
Bill Velek, Attorney at Law
Please don't 'drink & drive' ... but if you do, remember us.
DUI- & DWI-Lawyer Referral Service: http://www.velek.com/dwi
I think Bill and QZ are on the right track here.
Let me state up front that I consider the effect of doubling on
expected net win of a session to be more significant than the effect
on expected return. More on that in a minute.
While most of Bill's comments are accurate, Bill talks about a net win
of $20 on $1000 coin-in with or without doubling. This unfortunately
ignores the coins wagered in doubling up. This is inappropriate since
the double up wagers involve risk.
To determine the actual effect on expected return (ER) let's look at
the calculation:
Expected Return (ER) = Expected Win (EW) / Coins Bet
When you add the effect of a double up wager, both the numerator and
denominator are increased by an equal amount. Note the reference is
to EW and not expected net win (ENW = EW - coins bet).
As stated by QZ, the effect of this will be to increase an expected
return less than 100% and decrease an expected return greater than
100%. But, assuming a fixed session length of say 3 hours, aren't we
more concerned with our ENW for the session than the actual return?
It might seem that because the ENW on doubling wagers is 0, that
overall session ENW is unchanged. However, doubling up will reduce
the number of hands played in a given length of time and thus will
impact the EW of a fixed session. If you are playing a negative game,
clearly doubling up will reduce the number of negative ER wagers and
therefore the increase the ENW of the session. The opposite is true
for a positive game. Thus ENW tracks the ER.
Now QZ states this can mislead the player into thinking that doubling
is beneficial to the player of a negative game. I disagree. Anything
that reduces expected loss over the course of an hour truly benefits
the player assuming the he plays a fixed length of time. For example,
hand feeding coins (shudder at the thought) is beneficial to such a
player in terms of EW. In fact, the more coin jams the better. (I'm
not saying this improves the play experience 
However, assume that session length is variable and the player quits
after playing a fixed number of hands. Say, for example our player
strives to give the casino a given amount of coin-in, excluding
doubling, each day - perhaps $10,000 - and quits after that. In this
case clearly EW would be unchanged by doubling and doubling would be
neither beneficial nor detrimental to the player in terms of EW.
However, for a fixed session (or a variable one for that matter)
doubling is detrimental to the player in most cases when all things
are considered due to volatility effect. Bill notes that doubling
increases the volatility for the player. This is generally true for
most players, but isn't always the case.
The player who restricts their doubling to even money wins (5 credit
wins on a 5 credit bet) where the possible outcomes of the double are
a win of either 0 or 10, actually engages in a wager that has lower
volatility that that of most game wagers where a potential win of 4000
is involved. However, that relationship quickly reverses when
doubling involves higher wins or continues beyond a first successful
wager (in other words, a double of 10 credits or more).
Thus a player who restricts doubles to 5 credit wins and doesn't
double on wins beyond that will lower the variance of their play.
However, typically I observe players doubling well in excess of 5
credit wins, greatly increasing overall variance and the increased
risk more than offsets any potential improvement of EW in their play.
Doubling is therefore ill-advised beyond 5 credit doubles.
- Harry
One related anecdote: I was playing $1 JB one day when I observed a
woman next to me playing $2 AC-5K JW (a game with a shockingly low
return and very high variance). Every time she hit a 4K, a $160 win,
she would double up until she busted in pursuit of a $5000 win that
would cap the doubling and lock up the machine for a handpay. I was
amazed as I watch one $160 win after another go down the tubes. But
eventually she hit the "jackpot" (as I expect she does most sessions),
effectively aggregating her $160 wins into a single W-2G win :).
Either I haven't received all posts in this thread or my mail-reader
hasn't properly tracked them, and so I'm not sure who made part of the
statements below, so I'll indicate with '?' when it seems unclear to me.
Bill,
If you are using IE6 and you see > to the right of a line that means that
it is from a previous post. The lines without > are from the person that
posted. If you are using Netscape 7 there is a vertical line to the left of
lines from a previous post.
It seems to me that you are both correct, somewhat.
I made statements ONLY about hands that the double-up feature was used in.
I am aware of the change in % when you factor in every hand played. That is
why I also said, "There are other factors that also affect the cost or
advantage of using the double-up feature". You wrote about one of those
factors. I did not write about the factor that you wrote about because it is
only one of several and I wanted to go to bed.
1
vpFREE Home Page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREEvpFREE Links:
http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.htmlYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Let me state up front that I consider the effect of doubling on
expected net win of a session to be more significant than the effect
on expected return. More on that in a minute.
Nice post Harry.
You added several more factors that affect EV when using the double-up
feature. If you want to keep this thread going I will throw out a few more.
If there was a promotion that gave a scratch card for a hand-pay it would
increase your EV doubling up to reach the hand-pay amount. Many factors
here.
If a player is inconsistent in using the double-up feature a change in EV
cannot be determined.
Not all double-up machines are 100% EV.
A player knows that playing 10/7 DB his EV is below 100% because of errors.
At what % cash back and what % EV (after errors) would this player
increase/decrease his EV using double-up.
This is why I did not try and cover all the factors in my post. I'm sure
there are many others that I have not thought of.
vpFREE Home Page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREEvpFREE Links:
http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.htmlYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Think about this, there are not many even money bets in LV.
On 6 Oct 2002 at 0:12, Albert Pearson wrote:
I think you misunderstood the question. (or I did) .
I was referring to the "double-up" option on video poker machines, that allows you to pick a card against a machine card ... if you beat the machines card you win . The option is an even money proposition with an even chance of winning.Regards
A.P.
----- Original Message -----
From: Webmaster
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 12:12 AM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Doubling uopAt 08:43 PM 10/5/02, you wrote:
>Old theory.....
>If you are playing a negative expectation machine, using the double up
>option which is even money improves your average.This "old theory" is about as accurate as my dart throwing... which is
erratic to say the least.Does doubling up work? Sure, IF you have no limit on the machine or table
game, and if you have unlimited money. Trust me, somewhere a bad run will
come that will destroy you.I'll leave it to the math experts to do the number's explanation. I am
assuming you mean doubling when you lose? Doubling when you win can have
just as disastrous results since you are giving up valuable winnings.That's my two-cent's worth... wanna go double or nothing and get four-cents
worth?Allen
:>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
vpFREE Home Page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREEvpFREE Links:
http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.htmlYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
someone_else wrote:
If there was a promotion that gave a scratch card for a hand-pay it
would increase your EV doubling up to reach the hand-pay amount. Many
factors here.If a player is inconsistent in using the double-up feature a change
in EV cannot be determined.Not all double-up machines are 100% EV.
A player knows that playing 10/7 DB his EV is below 100% because of
errors. At what % cash back and what % EV (after errors) would this
player increase/decrease his EV using double-up.
I've seen a somewhat comparable promo here in AC. Early this year the
Hilton sent out a coupon that would double a handpaid jackpot of up to
$500. (Jackpots above that amount would produce a $500 bonus.)
However, in that case it was a one-time win promo.
Let me first say, I think one would generally be ill-advised to use
doubling to attain a handpay. However, it might not be a bad prospect
in all cases. If you were playing a machine where only one or two
doubles would produce a handpay, the potential value achieved from the
scratch card might make this a very valuable option. For example,
let's say you were playing $.25 10/7 DB on a machine where a single
win of 1000 credits or more produced a handpay (usually only a RF).
One might choose to double up on any 4 of a kind other than bonus 4K's
(to avoid a large increase in volatility). Two successful doubles
would trigger a handpay. If the average value of the scratch card
were $10 or more, this would be a fairly nice bonus to the base 4K win
and would be advisable. I would deem a $5 bonus insufficient to make
doubling appropriate since I wouldn't find the boost in expected
return to offset the risk that I might lose more in lost 4K's than
earned from the scratch cards.
Note that while I wouldn't be doubling every hand, the increase in
expected return (and win) could be calculated since my doubling is
still "predictable". I wouldn't double smaller wins since there would
be considerable risk that my scratch card wins wouldn't offset the
wins lost due to failed doubles. For example, six doubles are
required to convert a straight into a handpay. It is quite likely
that fewer than one in six doubles would be successful in attaining
the 1000 credit win necessary and may result in a considerable
reduction of wins. By the way, obviously the ER calculation requires
some idea of the average scratch card amount.
To determine whether this is appropriate to pursue for a given machine
(and I would limit it to hands where only one or two doubles are
required to trigger the handpay), what you should look at is the
expected win on a hand with and without the scratch card bonus. Note
that this does require that you have some sense of the average value
of a scratch card. Also realize that in looking at a single hand,
doubling does not change the expected win for that hand. One would
then have to weigh the incremental expected win from the scratch card
against the added volatility to determine whether this is a desirable
strategy for the promotion. That decision would vary by individual
and be based on how adverse they are to incremental risk. My
suggestion for limiting doubling to 250 cr. 4K DB wins reflects my own
preferences. There are probably those who value the thrill of the
chase to an extent that they are willing to risk every win, no matter
what the size.
In this analysis, risk has no impact on the decision. Nor does the
analysis vary on whether the machine is positive or negative, what
cashback is earned, or what the reduction to expected return due to
errors is, other than that play is not advisable in any case where the
expected return (with cb and after errors) is less than 100%.
I won't take the time to explain this last statement, but if there is
particular interest I will detail the math behind it.
- Harry
> Not all double-up machines are 100% EV.
snip
Unless you're talking about a rigged-machine, such as possibly in an
Indian casino, I don't see how this is possible.
Bill,
There are double-up machines that win ties.
vpFREE Home Page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREEvpFREE Links:
http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.htmlYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
someone_else wrote:
Bill,
There are double-up machines that win ties.
Thanks, SE. I should have suspected I was the one being dense
(apologies to you, Bill!
Damn ... what an insidious machine!
- H.
If the players LIKE the option, then casinos could
easily be well advised to make the option available on a few
machines.<<
The question is, how many players like the option? I've rarely seen it, except at Chumash, where it seemed fairly popular. But two thoughts:
First, it's not vp, but a seperate game. Why churn away trying for perfect play and then be willing to throw away a winning hand on a game that's in essence, one-card War?
Second, I'd like to know more about the random generator that deals the double-up card. Is it a seperate generator? Is it more or less programmed by the house the way slots are programmed, for 94% win, or 97%, or whatever?
lb
----- Original Message -----
From: Quad Zilla
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 1:29 AM
Subject: RE: [vpFREE] Doubling up
<<<
I did a little, but I can't see where it would increase one's chances of
winning. I assume the house likes the feature because it adds volatility to
the game, and that's the curse of VP players, IMHO.
>>>
Actually, the house derives no benefit as a result of the
added variance. Variance is really only a factor of any significance
when one has a fairly small bankroll. Casinos have very LARGE
bankrolls (except maybe the Horseshoe). Winning an extra $100
from 10 players and losing an extra $1000 to one player might bust
out a few players, but the casino still winds up breaking even.
>>>
Anything that can cause a VP player to lose their bankroll is what the
house wants. Obviously, if you get "lucky" I've seen players keep doubling
and make a ton of money.
So, where are all the math wiz's to verify or dispute this argument? <G>
>>>
What happens is that more players bust out, but some win a
lot. The house sees a long term win of 0 on the bet, even though
individual players can have large swings.
Personally, I think the house should NOT like the idea of
having people bust out more. The majority of players are sheep.
Just like sheep, you get a lot more 'wool' if you shear them and
avoid slaughtering them. Even if the sheep survives, a particularly
poor run at a given casino is likely to make this sheep seek
greener pastures, i.e. your competition.
Since the process also slows down the play of the games
where the customer is a more or less certain loser, the double
up should reduce the house win.
To counterbalance all this is the aspect of customer
relations. If the players LIKE the option, then casinos could
easily be well advised to make the option available on a few
machines.
>>> Allen
QZ
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
vpFREE Home Page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE
vpFREE Links:
http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
One expansion on my earlier extented post on doubling in which I wrote:
The player who restricts their doubling to even money wins (5 credit
wins on a 5 credit bet) where the possible outcomes of the double are
a win of either 0 or 10, actually engages in a wager that has lower
volatility that that of most game wagers where a potential win of 4000
is involved. However, that relationship quickly reverses when
doubling involves higher wins or continues beyond a first successful
wager (in other words, a double of 10 credits or more).
At long last, I've finally perfomed the relatively simple math to
determine the variance involved in doubling. The following doubles
involve a wager with lower variance than most games (i.e., below 20):
One or two doubles of a 5 credit win.
One double of a 10 or 15 credit win.
These doubles will reduce the variance of a session. Other doubles
will usually increase play variance.
(For higher variance games, those above 25, one 20 credit win double
also has lower volatility.)
- Harry