vpFREE2 Forums

El Cortez Downgrade

#81

I believe the triple points on Monday is only available to those that
are 55 and older (club 55). At least this is the policy at the sister
property across the street at MontBleu. Triple points are available
through January with double points on Wednesday for all regardless of
age.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Dancer" wrote:

3. More importantly, it requires 200 points to earn a dollar in
cashback rather than the 400 points it says in the database. For 9/6
Jacks, this makes the slot club worth 0.25% rather than the reported
0.10%. This makes a big difference on Triple Point days --- of which
today was one.

#82

I got 9 of them, maybe more are coming!

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "jagardner5" <jagardner5@...> wrote:

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@> wrote:
>
> I'll send something out to LVA shortly, but I'm curious if other
> people are being deluged with exhortations to buy VPW from Las Vegas
> Advisor/Curtis. In the last 12 hours, I've received 8 of these
emails.
>
> - H.
>
I just receivd the 16th add for VPW and I already own it.

#83

Did they have any comments on their situation in Jersey?

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Dancer" <bdancer@...> wrote:

A few corrections to the database.

1. the $10 and $25 9/6 Jacks have a 239-coin straight flush as does
the $5 game on the same machine. At least one other $5 9/6 Jacks game
has a 250-coin straight flush. .

2. It requires $2 to receive a point 9/6 Jacks from $1 to $25
denominations, not the $2.50 rate the database says. According to the
booth, the rate varies between $1 and $2.50. Perhaps the single NSU game
(I didn't find it, although I didn't look too hard) has that rate.

3. More importantly, it requires 200 points to earn a dollar in
cashback rather than the 400 points it says in the database. For 9/6
Jacks, this makes the slot club worth 0.25% rather than the reported
0.10%. This makes a big difference on Triple Point days --- of which
today was one.

Bob Dancer

For a 3-day free trial of Video Poker for Winners, the best video poker
computer trainer ever invented, go to //www.videopokerforwinners.com

<http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=4641017/grpspId=1705065732/m
sgId=82080/stime=1197958173/nc1=4767085/nc2=4507179/nc3=3848643>

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

#84

Here's a note from the LVA website:

December 18, 2007 E-Mail Glitch If you're on the HP e-mail list, you
probably saw a bit too much of us this morning. We had a bug in our
program that wasn't discovered until multiple blasts were sent for a
free trial of Video Poker for Winners. The problem has been isolated
and corrected, and safeguards are being put in place to prevent this
in the future. We apologize for the aggravation and thank you for your
understanding.

Don the Dentist

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "wpbacker" <wpbacker@...> wrote:

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "jagardner5" <jagardner5@> wrote:
>
I got 9 of them, maybe more are coming!

#85

After forwarding Harry's note to Anthony Curtis, he asked me to post the
following here:

If you're on the Huntington Press e-mail list, you probably saw a bit
too much of us this morning. We had a bug in our program that wasn't
discovered until multiple blasts were sent for a free trial of Video
Poker for Winners. The problem has been isolated and corrected, and
safeguards are being put in place to prevent this in the future. We
apologize for the aggravation and thank you for your understanding.

Bob Dancer

For a 3-day free trial of Video Poker for Winners, the best video poker
computer trainer ever invented, go to //www.videopokerforwinners.com

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

#86

i don't believe either of the messages you quoted were claiming moral
superiority. almost everyone on this list is a player. almost everyone
likes winning. if a player wins, the casino loses. it follows
naturally that someone who helps the casino avoid losing will be
disliked. no moral judgement is required.

having said that, i do think casinos are in a much more morally
questionable position than advantage gamblers. exploiting pathological
gamblers ruins lives. exploiting foolish casino promotions lowers Q3
earnings. i don't really see these as equals.

cheers,

five

···

On Dec 16, 2007 6:22 AM, Tom Robertson <madameguyon@embarqmail.com> wrote:

I just don't understand the justification of this sense of moral
superiority of a professional gambler over a casino.

#87

Hamstockman wrote: I believe the triple points on Monday is only
available to those that
are 55 and older (club 55).

Good guess, but incorrect. (Although that would have been fine with me
as I easily qualify for Club 55). The 3x points were from 4 p.m. to
midnight if you are a VIP invited to their Monday Night Football
contest. I had never been there before, but I'd received a $100 free
play and $100 free food offer due to my play at a related property
(Tropicana Express in Laughlin). This offer was way too small to be
attractive enough to make a special trip from Las Vegas, but I'd played
at Harrahs Lake Tahoe the day before for a promo, and Horizon is
essentially next door. The offer was plenty big enough for me to justify
walking 200 yards to claim it.

   When I went to VIP services to pick up the promised goodies, they
also gave me a pass to the MNF party --- and the 3x points. The best
high limit game was 9-6-239 Jacks, but whether or not this game was
decent with 3x points depended on the slot club. Our database said the
slot club rate was 0.10% --- so even with 3x points these games were not
attractive to me. I played two hands on the $25 machine, and the machine
awarded me 125 points for my $250 investment. This told me the rate was
$2 coin in gives you 1 point. When the booth told me 200 points could be
cashed for $1, the combined information told me 0.25% --- and now I
wanted to play during the 3x promotion.

       So I sat down and played four hours on their $25 machine. (I
would have played more but I'd played 12 hours the day before at
Harrah's, slept in a strange bed and wasn't up to my usual stamina.) It
doesn't appear anyone else believed this was a good play (or perhaps the
invited guests to the MNF party thought that going to the party was
better than a $200+ per hour investment opportunity --- to each his
own), but nobody came by looking for a seat on the one $5 / $10 / $25
machine.

  Enough interesting stuff happened during my play there that it's
now written up and will appear in my March Casino Player column.

Bob Dancer

For a 3-day free trial of Video Poker for Winners, the best video poker
computer trainer ever invented, go to //www.videopokerforwinners.com

#88

NOTI wrote: Did they have any comments on their situation in Jersey?

Didn't come up. I was not there as "Bob Dancer," but rather just a
player who'd received an offer. I didn't want to ask penetrating
questions or reveal that I was aware of the gambling scene on a national
basis.

Although I did comment that having a 239-coin straight flush on a $10
and $25 machine was just something to annoy players. Some $5 players
prefer the $1195 jackpot to one for $1250, but no $25 player would
prefer one for $5975 to one for $6250.

Bob Dancer

For a 3-day free trial of Video Poker for Winners, the best video poker
computer trainer ever invented, go to //www.videopokerforwinners.com

#89

       So I sat down and played four hours on their $25 machine. (I
would have played more but I'd played 12 hours the day before at
Harrah's, slept in a strange bed and wasn't up to my usual

stamina.) It

doesn't appear anyone else believed this was a good play (or

perhaps the

invited guests to the MNF party thought that going to the party was
better than a $200+ per hour investment opportunity --- to each his
own), but nobody came by looking for a seat on the one $5 / $10 /

$25

machine.

  Enough interesting stuff happened during my play there that

it's

now written up and will appear in my March Casino Player column.

Bob Dancer

You're probably right that no one recognized the play. However,
even if a party goer happened to be carrying $10K with them to the
party, his/her chance of surviving 4 hours on the $25 game was less
than 50%. (assuming 600 hands/hr, no mistakes). Someone taking a
shot with a "mere" $5000 would have a 78% chance of going broke
within 4 hours.

--Dunbar

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Dancer" <bdancer@...> wrote:

#90

Poor risk/reward ratio, unless they really want to see $25 JOB action
on muliplier days/offers. Did you claim your 25,000 point leather jacket?

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Dancer" <bdancer@...> wrote:

       So I sat down and played four hours on their $25 machine. (I
would have played more but I'd played 12 hours the day before at
Harrah's, slept in a strange bed and wasn't up to my usual stamina.) It
doesn't appear anyone else believed this was a good play (or perhaps the
invited guests to the MNF party thought that going to the party was
better than a $200+ per hour investment opportunity --- to each his
own), but nobody came by looking for a seat on the one $5 / $10 / $25
machine.

#91

Dunbar wrote: You're probably right that no one recognized the play.
However,
even if a party goer happened to be carrying $10K with them to the
party, his/her chance of surviving 4 hours on the $25 game was less
than 50%. (assuming 600 hands/hr, no mistakes). Someone taking a
shot with a "mere" $5000 would have a 78% chance of going broke
within 4 hours.

I don't question your numbers --- although in practice the machines are
slower than that (and $3125 quads and $5975 straight flushes are paid in
cash --- which makes things slower yet.) But running the numbers for the
slower speed will change the numbers but will not alter your general
conclusion that a $25 game requires a significant cash-on-hand bankroll
--- as well as a significant total bankroll.

I think implied in your post, however, was that this 3x point offer was
a surprise and many people wouldn't have that much on hand since they
were coming to party --- not gamble. I think it was only a surprise to
me --- and I'd come to Lake Tahoe ready to play $25 machines for 12
hours. This was week 15 of these MNF parties (maybe more if preseason
games had the same party), and presumably the same VIPs get invited
every week and it's 3x points every week. Any regular $25 players the
casino has would have been invited each week as it can't take a whole
lot to become a VIP there.

The place is shabby compared to Harrah's, but Harrah's and Harvey's have
a LOT of $25 and higher machines and a regular high limit clientele.
You'd think some of them would also have a card at Horizon, since it's
almost right next door. Many Harrah's $25 9/6 Jacks customers are
capable of recognizing the play for what it is --- and have the bankroll
to play it. Even $10 players (for whom this was a $75/hour situation or
so --- plus comps) could have recognized the play for being a good deal.
And nobody was there.

Bob Dancer

For a 3-day free trial of Video Poker for Winners, the best video poker
computer trainer ever invented, go to //www.videopokerforwinners.com

#92

NOTI wrote: Poor risk/reward ratio, unless they really want to see $25
JOB action on muliplier days/offers. Did you claim your 25,000 point
leather jacket?

They gave me two jackets, but thanx for the reminder. (Actually they are
mailing them).

As to the risk/reward ratio, it's not such a bad deal compared to what
is normally available to $25 players. We wouldn't have flown to Tahoe in
the first place unless the Harrah's offer was substantially better than
that, but that offer was over (and additional play at Harrah's has
negative equity) and we were still in town --- for rather complicated
reasons I don't want to get into now. I'll tell you next week if you
care.

We're fortunate that bankroll for $25 Jacks with a 0.75% slot club isn't
an issue for us and this was still a more than $200/hour play plus
almost the same amount in comps. (Shirley never met a gift shop where
she couldn't use $700 in comp dollars if she had to! She might end up
giving 3/4 of the stuff away, but it's against her religion to let the
comp expire unused. I suspect in this regard, Shirley and Jean Scott are
sisters at heart.) Although this play might not meet your standards, it
definitely met mine.

Bob Dancer

For a 3-day free trial of Video Poker for Winners, the best video poker
computer trainer ever invented, go to //www.videopokerforwinners.com

#93

Bob,

Can you go over the math on how you calculate that
this is a $200/hr. play?

Thanks,

Bill
Palms Moderator

···

--- Bob Dancer <bdancer@compdance.com> wrote:

NOTI wrote: Poor risk/reward ratio, unless they
really want to see $25
JOB action on muliplier days/offers. Did you claim
your 25,000 point
leather jacket?

They gave me two jackets, but thanx for the
reminder. (Actually they are
mailing them).

As to the risk/reward ratio, it's not such a bad
deal compared to what
is normally available to $25 players. We wouldn't
have flown to Tahoe in
the first place unless the Harrah's offer was
substantially better than
that, but that offer was over (and additional play
at Harrah's has
negative equity) and we were still in town --- for
rather complicated
reasons I don't want to get into now. I'll tell you
next week if you
care.

We're fortunate that bankroll for $25 Jacks with a
0.75% slot club isn't
an issue for us and this was still a more than
$200/hour play plus
almost the same amount in comps. (Shirley never met
a gift shop where
she couldn't use $700 in comp dollars if she had to!
She might end up
giving 3/4 of the stuff away, but it's against her
religion to let the
comp expire unused. I suspect in this regard,
Shirley and Jean Scott are
sisters at heart.) Although this play might not meet
your standards, it
definitely met mine.

Bob Dancer

For a 3-day free trial of Video Poker for Winners,
the best video poker
computer trainer ever invented, go to
//www.videopokerforwinners.com

      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

#94

Bill asked: Can you go over the math on how you calculate that
this is a $200/hr. play?

Sure. 99.52% (9/6/239 Jacks) + 0.75% cashback = 100.27%

600 hands per hour * $125 per hand = $75,000 per hour of action.

$75,000 (action per hour) * 0.0027 (advantage) = $202.50 per hour

600 hands per hour may be too many, so it might have been only $180 per
hour or so --- but that still exceeded my minimum requirements. And I
also received $720 in comp dollars for four hours of play.

Bob Dancer

For a 3-day free trial of Video Poker for Winners, the best video poker
computer trainer ever invented, go to //www.videopokerforwinners.com

#95

worldbefree22001 wrote:

>"We're of, by, and for losers."

Well, now you're going too far. Obviously, casinos have a lot that
attracts people, which they can truthfully advertise. How about
"losing is more fun at the El Cortez?"

worldbefree22001 wrote:

Ya think? Dude you are a trip. It feels
like you're on tilt a little. Google sarcasm and
take a 24 break from posting. It'll do ya good.

I don't know what it's called, world, so I'll make up my own name, but
you're obviously "reverse sarcasm" challenged. One of my favorite
jokes ever was at a party and it was getting late. I think my parents
had to get up at something like 6:00 the next morning. My father very
straightforwardly and logically said that if they want to get up at
6:00, they'll have to go to bed BEFORE 6:00. I still laugh at it
today, maybe 35 years later. But maybe you had to be there. And
maybe my father used it better than I do.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Tom Robertson <madameguyon@...> wrote:

#96

I don't know what it's called, world, so I'll make
up my own name, but you're obviously "reverse sarcasm"
challenged ....

Yeah, OK. You talk through your hat
then say look over there while I change
the subject. Feel free to make whatever
other nonsense post you want, I won't
respond.

P.S. That story about going to
bed before 6, that is absolute
gold. No really, drop on the floor
roll around funny.

#97

wrote:

I don't know what it's called, world, so I'll make
up my own name, but you're obviously "reverse sarcasm"
challenged ....

worldbefree22001 wrote:

Yeah, OK. You talk through your hat
then say look over there while I change
the subject. Feel free to make whatever
other nonsense post you want, I won't
respond.

P.S. That story about going to
bed before 6, that is absolute
gold. No really, drop on the floor
roll around funny.

Knock, knock! Is anybody home? Google "humor," world. I'm not
saying that your proposed ads were too unrealistic to be legitimate
ads. I'm saying they were too unrealistic to be funny.

#98

Hmm these bankroll requirements are much higher than other postings
have been. I remember Harry Porter saying that for $1 JOB you would
need a bankroll of $17,500 or something like that, I'd have to look
it up for the exact number. So why is paymar coming up with such
large numbers?

Here are some RoR and EV figs for the triple point days.

Assuming no tips, no play errors, and no tax consequences, and
assuming no positive perks, someone who plays $1 JOB at 600

hands/hr

only on triple point days would earn just under $9/hr. He or she
would need a little more than a $71,000 bankroll to have a longterm
RoR of 1%. If the player plans to tip $40 for a royal, the

bankroll

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "dunbar_dra" <h_dunbar@...> wrote:

requirement climbs to just over $75,000.

A $5 JOB player (on the 250-coin SF game) could expect to earn
$44/hr. But the bankroll required for a 1% RoR is a sobering
$357,000. To allow for a $100 tip for RF's, you'd need to add
$10,000 to the 1% RoR bankroll.

--Dunbar

#99

dunbar_dra wrote:

> Here are some RoR and EV figs for the triple point days.
>
> Assuming no tips, no play errors, and no tax consequences, and
> assuming no positive perks, someone who plays $1 JOB at 600
> hands/hr only on triple point days would earn just under $9/hr.
> He or she would need a little more than a $71,000 bankroll to have
> a longterm RoR of 1%.
> --Dunbar

markhaslem wrote:

Hmm these bankroll requirements are much higher than other postings
have been. I remember Harry Porter saying that for $1 JOB you would
need a bankroll of $17,500 or something like that, I'd have to look
it up for the exact number. So why is paymar coming up with such
large numbers?

Paymar/Dunbar -- "a rose by any other name ...", eh? (Just ribbing you )

I don't think you saw a number of $17K from me in this context. For
any play such as this (with just .25% player advantage, or 1/8 of a
royal for every cycle played), you're going to need a hefty bankroll
cushion to see you through potential down cycles with 99% confidence
you won't bust.

$17K represents a cushion of just over 4 royals. Look for bankroll
requirements to be that thin only when you have a very strong game
and/or promotion, bringing the player edge to over 1% (and if the game
is "streaky" like double bonus, even that isn't likely to cover it.

(FWIW, when I do cite a bankroll requirement it's likely that I
obtained the number from Dunbar's VP Risk Analyzer - available from LVA.)

- H.

- Harry

#100

the edge is very thin. thin edges mean big bankroll requirements.

risk of ruin on JoB with 0.75% cashback for a bankroll of X bets is
approx exp(-0.00032*X). for the $17500 you suggest, X=3500, and RoR is
about 30.1%. if you solve for RoR to be 1%, you need X=14340, or a
bankroll of $71700.

if you were getting 1.5% cashback, then the RoR coefficient is 0.0014
instead of 0.00032, and $17500 would get you a 0.74% RoR.

keep in mind that 1% is a very very low RoR. for most of us who are
not professional video poker players, busting the amount we've set
aside for video poker is more "gee, that sucks" than "oh no this is a
disaster my life is ruined", and we can step out a little more. that
said i still wouldn't play $1 JoB with 0.75% cb on a $17500 bankroll.
:slight_smile:

cheers,

five

···

On Dec 19, 2007 2:32 PM, markhaslem <markhaslem@yahoo.com> wrote:

Hmm these bankroll requirements are much higher than other postings
have been. I remember Harry Porter saying that for $1 JOB you would
need a bankroll of $17,500 or something like that, I'd have to look
it up for the exact number. So why is paymar coming up with such
large numbers?