I just got the new Strictly Slots. There is an article about
Guaranteed Play. It states that the feature costs 1/10th of a percent
"to guarantee that players won't lose." The example is 9/6 Job, 150
hands for $20. The return is said to be reduced to 99.44%.
Has anyone seen a GP with anywhere near as good a deal/paytable as
this?
At Palace Station they now have it in 8/6 JOB for .25 and $1 plays.
GimmeaQuad
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Sally" <tribbles@...> wrote:
I just got the new Strictly Slots. There is an article about
Guaranteed Play. It states that the feature costs 1/10th of a percent
"to guarantee that players won't lose." The example is 9/6 Job, 150
hands for $20. The return is said to be reduced to 99.44%.Has anyone seen a GP with anywhere near as good a deal/paytable as
this?
First, since Stations has a 7 month exclusive in Las Vegas there are none here.
More importantly, see the Wizard of Odds analysis to show that it is impossible for anyone to memorize (or even reference) a strategy for the game.
However, Strictly Slots has a history of providing incorrect information (I believe through ignorance, not malice). I would never rely on anything in that magazine unless verified elsewhere.
Full disclosure: I used to write for them freelance. After I continued to point out factual mistakes they decided not to publish any more articles from me, including a number that they'd paid for. I don't know if there was a causal relationship between these events or not.
Regards,
Bill
At 06:06 PM 11/2/2007, you wrote:
I just got the new Strictly Slots. There is an article about
Guaranteed Play. It states that the feature costs 1/10th of a percent
"to guarantee that players won't lose." The example is 9/6 Job, 150
hands for $20. The return is said to be reduced to 99.44%.Has anyone seen a GP with anywhere near as good a deal/paytable as
this?vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
that it is impossible for anyone to memorize (or even reference) a
strategy for the game.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bill Coleman <vphobby2@...> wrote:
More importantly, see the Wizard of Odds analysis to show
However, Strictly Slots has a history of providing incorrect
You are being much too kind to them, Bill. I don't believe the
cause of their mis/dis information to be either ignorance or malice;
I believe it is pure greed. SS flagrantly panders to the best
interests of their largest advertisers.
Full disclosure: I used to write for them freelance. After
You are apparently much too honest and knowledgable for SS to
allow you to properly inform their basically ploppie readership.
Full disclosure from me: I am one of the SS charter subscribers.
This is due to sheer laziness on my part, some curiousity as to what
they will write about next, as well as a desire to derive my
monthly amusement by perusing the inaccurate drivel they usually
publish.
My subscription renews automatically. Every month I vow to cancel
my "auto-subscription" when it expires at year end. But, I'm
embarrassed to say that I don't follow through. Maybe this year!
~Babe~
First, since Stations has a 7 month exclusive in Las Vegas there are
none here.
More importantly, see the Wizard of Odds analysis to show that it is
impossible for anyone to memorize (or even reference) a strategy for
the game.
However, Strictly Slots has a history of providing incorrect
information (I believe through ignorance, not malice). I would never
rely on anything in that magazine unless verified elsewhere.Full disclosure: I used to write for them freelance. After I
continued to point out factual mistakes they decided not to publish
any more articles from me, including a number that they'd paid for. I
don't know if there was a causal relationship between these events
or not.
Yes, but essentially, you play Guaranteed Play like you're playing a
VP Tourney. You are playing for a big score, as it were, especially as
you reach the end of the session. If you can parameterize, say, in
Jacks, what the optimal play for the royal would be (somewhere between
6000 and 10000 depending on your credit balance and credits
remaining), it obviously would cut down the neg EV greatly. Probably
not enough to make it positive, I trust IGT's programmers, but
certainly a lot more than the 8-10% some people claim.
As for your relationship with Strictly Slots, well, we can't be
criticizing the advertisers now, can we? The situation with Dancer and
MGM was a completely different issue than the one you had.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bill Coleman <vphobby2@...> wrote: