I have not gotten a Royal in over 3 months and have lost my bankroll, $5000.
I play .25 FPDW with optimum play.I play over 35 hours a week. I'm going
through a Dry Spell from Hell !!!
Has anybody had this kind of luck or similar long losing streaks ?
I'm curious to find out.
Dennis
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
dlvseuss@a... wrote:
I have not gotten a Royal in over 3 months and have lost my
bankroll, $5000.
I play .25 FPDW with optimum play.I play over 35 hours a week. I'm
going
through a Dry Spell from Hell !!!
Has anybody had this kind of luck or similar long losing streaks ?
I'm curious to find out.
Dennis
Dennis,
I have not had a royal since 11/1. I had twenty-seven royals last
year but none the the last two months of the year. So it's now been
three months and several thousands of dollars since my last royal.
When the flood gates open, I'll be back! I always come back. I
started playing vp in the mid 80's studying Stanford Wongs writings
and everything since. I only say this so that you'll know that I've
been doing this a long time, but only for recreation and comps.
Losing streaks suck and I find myself second guessing myself when I
play right and lose a royal. I can think of at least five royals I've
lost holding a high pair properly instead of perhaps an AJT or and
then getting the other two royal cards. That's my story.
Gang,
FYI for all......if you stop by the LVTC located across the street from the Convention Center or on I-15 as you enter from California, there are a number of publications plus discount coupons for food and entertainment. Also, some of the car rental counters (Alamo/National) have some great coupons as well. You save time/money just by looking through these materials.
Les From Long Island
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
In approx. 3 royal-less cycles of DB play I've lost the value of over
5 royals. The frustration is that I'm a relatively new DB player with
perhaps 4 cycles of total play and 1 royal. I have my doubts that my
cumulative DB play will ever become positive.
The fortunate thing is that over this period of time I've had
significantly better than expected results on my other play and can
attest to having a nicely positive year.
- Harry
dlvseuss wrote:
I have not gotten a Royal in over 3 months and have lost my bankroll,
$5000. I play .25 FPDW with optimum play.I play over 35 hours a week.
I'm going through a Dry Spell from Hell !!!
Has anybody had this kind of luck or similar long losing streaks ?
I'm curious to find out.
Dennis
If it helps any, we all go through
streaks. For a seven week period
beginning December 1, I hit six
royals in seven weeks, and would
have had seven if I hadn't
correctly held a high pair on one
hand. I only play weekends and
only expect (or hope for) about 12
royals a year. On the opposite
side I've had periods where I
didn't hit for three or four
months, lost quite a bit, but then
got it all back. If you believe you
are playing well (correct
strategy for the game and pay
table), it is important to stay with
it. Luck will change because the
probabilities favor it.
--- In
vpFREE@yahoogroups.com,
"staninnv <arnot@l...>" <
arnot@l...> wrote:
dlvseuss@a... wrote:
> I have not gotten a Royal in over 3 months and have lost my
bankroll, $5000.
> I play .25 FPDW with optimum play.I play over 35 hours a week. I'm
going
> through a Dry Spell from Hell !!!
> Has anybody had this kind of luck or sim> > Has anybody had this kind of luck or similar long losing streaks ?
> I'm curious to find out.
> DennisDennis,
I have not had a royal since 11/1. I had twenty-seven royals last
year but none the the last two months of the year. So it's now been
three months and several thousands of dollars since my last royal.
When the flood gates open, I'll be back! I always come back. I
started playing vp in the mid 80's studying Stanford Wongs writings
and everything since. I only say this so that you'll know that I've
been doing this a long time, but only for recreation and comps.
Losing streaks suck and I find myself second guessing myself when I
play right and lose a royal. I can think of at least five royals I've
lost holding a high pair properly instead of perhaps an AJT or and
then getting the other two royal
cards. That's my story.
bankroll, $5000.
I am very sad to hear that you find yourself in this situation. I am
equally proud of you that you had the courage to come forward and
tell folks that you this happened. All too often, all you hear about
are the number of royals that someone hit.
I am very close to 800,000 hands without a royal myself. I have
watched my bankroll shrivel up like a prune. It is very easy to lose
perspective when you find yourself in this situation. Pushing your
last Ben Franklin into a machine evokes very strong emotions.
A player can spend countless hours of practice honing their skills
with computer tutors until they play with perfect strategy. A player
can read countless tomes about gaining the advantage over a casino,
or using animal tactics, or using comps to gain the advantage. A
player can convince themselves that they can comfortably go to the
bank and withdraw from the family savings a bankroll, because
the "risk of ruin" calculations clearly state that they are safe from
losing it all.
If it were not for luck, all of that would be great. When Lady luck
shines it all seems so easy, when she frowns, get the hell out of her
way, she is very mean.
If it makes you feel better. I calculated that you played around
250,000 hands from what you said... another half a million and we can
cry in our beer together.
Brad Humelsine.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, dlvseuss@a... wrote:
I have not gotten a Royal in over 3 months and have lost my
--- In vpFREE mikephman55 wrote:
I would have had seven (Royals)if I hadn't ****correctly**** held a
high pair on one hand. If you believe you are playing well
(correct strategy for the game and pay table),
it is important to stay with it.
--- In vpFREE staninnv wrote:
I find myself second guessing myself when I
play right and lose a royal. I can think of at least five royals I've
lost holding a high pair ***properly*** instead of perhaps an AJT
and then getting the other two royal cards.
*************************************************
You guys should try holding the 3-card Royal instead of High pairs
for a few months. Loosen up just this little bit and let LUCK happen
to you. The EV difference might favor the high pair by a few cents
per occurrence. With a few occurences per hour, over a session you
might save a buck, but you're spending the buck on tissues into which
you cry a river about missing Royals. Crazy! Anybody ever draw a
Royal by holding a High Pair?
The math nerds here have got you brainwashed into thinking long term
EV is the end-all. (you guys used the term "correct" and "proper"
play) Try this motto for a few months trial period:
"I'm here to gamble."
Life is short -you won't last to reap any benefits from "the long
term". That Royal is too sweet and your bankroll needs an infusion.
Read some Singer.
I'm wondering if anyone who posts here thinks like me.
~Mark Time
No
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Mark P. <mark_my_words_again@y...>"
<mark_my_words_again@y...> wrote:
I'm wondering if anyone who posts here thinks like me.
~Mark Time
I'm wondering if anyone who posts here thinks like me. <<
Some do, up to a point. Luck is certainly a factor, but you've got to be in
a position to take advantage of it. That means you've got to be sitting
there when some fortunate event hits. The best way to be sitting there is
to employ perfect play to the best of your ability, thereby increasing your
playing time.
lb
You guys should try holding the 3-card Royal instead of High pairs
for a few months. Loosen up just this little bit and let LUCK happen
to you. The EV difference might favor the high pair by a few cents
per occurrence. With a few occurences per hour, over a session you
might save a buck, but you're spending the buck on tissues into which
you cry a river about missing Royals. Crazy! Anybody ever draw a
Royal by holding a High Pair?The math nerds here have got you brainwashed into thinking long term
EV is the end-all. (you guys used the term "correct" and "proper"
play) Try this motto for a few months trial period:"I'm here to gamble."
Life is short -you won't last to reap any benefits from "the long
term". That Royal is too sweet and your bankroll needs an infusion.
Read some Singer.I'm wondering if anyone who posts here thinks like me.
The long-term cycle for a royal is indeed long, which is why actual
results may deviate substantially from theoretical over a considerably
long time.
However, in the frequency of medium term hands such a full-houses,
flushes, straights, etc., play with sub-optimal strategy will catch up
with you in relatively short order. This is a fact that is largely
overlooked by those advocating deviations from optimal strategy on the
logic that we never see the long term.
Skewing strategy to take more shots at the royal may very well achieve
higher returns that optimal strategy in some cases. But fail in
hitting those additional royals and your results will suffer. The key
is that on average, a large number of players playing that altered
strategy will have results that fall short from a large number of
players playing optimal strategy.
Bottom line, when you alter your strategy you're betting that you're
luckier than the average Joe, but taking less than an even payoff in
doing so. As long as you recognize the cost involved and the greater
chance at the royal is worth the expected cost, then you're an
intelligent player and I don't argue the choice.
- Harry
Mark P. wrote:
You guys should try holding the 3-card Royal instead of High pairs
for a few months. Loosen up just this little bit and let LUCK happen
to you. The EV difference might favor the high pair by a few cents
per occurrence. With a few occurences per hour, over a session you
might save a buck, but you're spending the buck on tissues into which
you cry a river about missing Royals. Crazy! Anybody ever draw a
Royal by holding a High Pair?The math nerds here have got you brainwashed into thinking long term
EV is the end-all. (you guys used the term "correct" and "proper"
play) Try this motto for a few months trial period:"I'm here to gamble."
Life is short -you won't last to reap any benefits from "the long
term". That Royal is too sweet and your bankroll needs an infusion.
Read some Singer.I'm wondering if anyone who posts here thinks like me.
~Mark Time
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Mark P. <mark_my_words_again@y...>"
<mark_my_words_again@y...> wrote:
--- In vpFREE mikephman55 wrote:
I would have had seven (Royals)if I hadn't ****correctly**** held a
high pair on one hand. If you believe you are playing well
(correct strategy for the game and pay table),
it is important to stay with it.
--- In vpFREE staninnv wrote:
I find myself second guessing myself when I
play right and lose a royal. I can think of at least five royals
I've
lost holding a high pair ***properly*** instead of perhaps an AJT
and then getting the other two royal cards.*************************************************
You guys should try holding the 3-card Royal instead of High pairs
for a few months. Loosen up just this little bit and let LUCK
happen
to you. The EV difference might favor the high pair by a few cents
per occurrence. With a few occurences per hour, over a session you
might save a buck, but you're spending the buck on tissues into
which
you cry a river about missing Royals. Crazy! Anybody ever draw a
Royal by holding a High Pair?The math nerds here have got you brainwashed into thinking long
term
EV is the end-all. (you guys used the term "correct" and "proper"
play) Try this motto for a few months trial period:"I'm here to gamble."
Life is short -you won't last to reap any benefits from "the long
term". That Royal is too sweet and your bankroll needs an infusion.
Read some Singer.I'm wondering if anyone who posts here thinks like me.
~Mark Time
Not here. Take, for example, Jacks or Better, and a hand like
KhQhJhJd3c.
The problem is that combining two concepts clouds your reasoning.
You say that going for the royal costs you a few cents, but gives you
a chance at the royal, therefore, it's worth it. However, it only
costs you a few cents assuming you get exactly .0009 royals each time
(i.e. your expected value). In reality, 99.91% of the time that you
drop the pair to try for the royal, you won't get the royal and it
will cost you $1 (even more, when you hold hands like AJTs) in EV.
If this happens twice per hour, someone who plays 20 hours a week
will lose $40/week or $2080/year. Now, on average, this person will
hit 1.92 extra royal flushes a year, for $1920, but that doesn't make
up for the $2080 it cost you to try for it. In addition, every year,
there is a 1 in 7 chance (14%) that you will miss the royal every
time you try for it, and your strategy will cost you $2080, as well
as an additional 2 in 7 chance (28%) that you get only 1 royal and
lose $1080. In the other hand, every year, there is only a 30%
chance that your strategy produced at least 3 royals, making your
strategy change profitable.
If you play less than this, the same concept applies, but the numbers
will vary.
thanks for the well-written reply, toonces and Harry Porter, for
politely telling me the correct logic in plain english.
If I can make another observation without going thru the numbers,
this will be a good exchange.
I think your math is off, toonces. You certainly don't lose a dollar
99.91% of the time.
By Keeping the 3-part Royal, there are scenarios other than the Royal
that hit that are impossible when the high pair is kept: XX% of the
time the straight(4to1) or the flush(6to1) comes in. XX% of the time
trips (3to1) comes in (of a different rank).
of course XX% of the time you bust and lose the high pair (-1to1).
And there's a loss of trip or quads improvement to the tossed pair
card (-25to1 + 3to1) and (-3to1 + 1to1)(your drawn hand still pays
trips or high pair). And lost two pairs (-2to1) if the 2nd pair is a
low pair.
Etcetera. I think we are all talking the same story.
A proper EV calc for each holding takes all this into account.
It amounts to 5 cents or less per occurrence at the dollar level I
think. An occurrence is dealt high pair with 3 card Royal in 9/6 JoB.
Tom Ski's EV tables are linked from this website. Maybe I should try
my hand at the numbers.
I'm guessing you see this scenario 5 times max per 500 hands. Let's
say that's a quarter loss per hour for you or me at 500 hands per
hour. Whatever level of play we're talking just one Royal hit makes
up for 4000+ hours of lost payoff from tossing the high pair. Even
more-so when playing Progressive Royal jackpot machines.
I'm pretty sure both of us have errors in our numbers, but even if we
get this hand 5 times an hour I can't believe the small difference in
EV could drain anyone.
hold high pair: draw no Royals ever
hold 3-card Royal: draw just ONE royal and you won't even bother
calculating EVs. you'll be busy enjoying the money.
You know, we all understand the math, but to me, when two hands are
close, I like to pick the one that doesn't shut-out the lucky jackpot
draw. Close to half the folks who play it this way will come out
ahead in the long run whether or not they hit the Royal and WAY ahead
in the short run if they do.
And for all the folks who don't hold the 3 card Royal, I hope that
you live long enough to play the extra hands that holding the high
pair buys you. We are replying to two folks who admitted bankroll
hurt due to (they say) lack of jackpots. I think they should try this
low-risk change to "perfect" strategy.
~Mark
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "tooncesthecatwhocoulddriveacar
<tooncessnl@h...>" <tooncessnl@h...> wrote:
--- "Mark P. wrote:
> You guys should try holding the 3-card Royal instead of High
pairs
> for a few months
> ~Mark TimeNot here. Take, for example, Jacks or Better, and a hand like
KhQhJhJd3c.The problem is that combining two concepts clouds your reasoning.
You say that going for the royal costs you a few cents, but gives
you
a chance at the royal, therefore, it's worth it. However, it only
costs you a few cents assuming you get exactly .0009 royals each
time
(i.e. your expected value). In reality, 99.91% of the time that
you
drop the pair to try for the royal, you won't get the royal and it
will cost you $1 (even more, when you hold hands like AJTs) in EV.
If this happens twice per hour, someone who plays 20 hours a week
will lose $40/week or $2080/year. Now, on average, this person
will
hit 1.92 extra royal flushes a year, for $1920, but that doesn't
make
up for the $2080 it cost you to try for it. In addition, every
year,
there is a 1 in 7 chance (14%) that you will miss the royal every
time you try for it, and your strategy will cost you $2080, as well
as an additional 2 in 7 chance (28%) that you get only 1 royal and
lose $1080. In the other hand, every year, there is only a 30%
chance that your strategy produced at least 3 royals, making your
strategy change profitable.If you play less than this, the same concept applies, but the
numbers
will vary.