vpFREE2 Forums

how the cards are dealt

#1

Since Hask was disagreeing with Rob I suspect Hask was implying that
the shuffle continued between the original deal and the draw. I have
not seen the exact quote from the American Casino Guide 2003, so it
would be nice if the exact text was given to clear up any confusion.

Dick

I hadn't drawn that implication, but it's possible that's what he was referring to. As I understand it, on some new machines the shuffle resumes after the deal, with the remaining 47 cards (48 on a Joker game) being shuffled until the player hits Draw.

But none of this matters. Whether the cards are dealt in serial or parallel, whether the shuffle resumes after the deal, etc., does not change the probabilities or the correct strategy. That card you need to complete your royal is just as likely to be in the proper place to appear on the draw no matter what the dealing method.

Dan

···

--

Dan Paymar, author of the book, "Video Poker - Optimum Play"
Editor and Publisher of "Video Poker Times" newsletter
Web site at http://www.OptimumPlay.com

"Chance favors the prepared mind."
-- Louis Pasteur

#2

I've always thought of this from a programming point of view. If you have a
decent RNG algorithm, you only need to select 10 random numbers. You could
then actuallly "stop" the RNG and select another 10 for the next hand. The
concept of "shuffling" does not make much sense from a progarmming point of
view, but I guess letting the RNG run continuously would prevent anyone from
guessing the algorithm and exploiting it.

It seems there is at least one question every month on Strictly Slots
concerning how the RNG in slot machines work. Since there is nothing you
can do to change/guess the outcome, why are do people want to know this?

Another point of confusion comes from the term psuedo RNG. The term psuedo
does not imply that the the RNG has streaks or is not random or anything
else except that it is a computer algorithm that can be repeated by using
the same seed number. This is a useful tool in many applications where you
want the same stream of random numbers to test different strategies in some
field. (Before computers, scientists used tables of random numbers in
experiments.) You can easily make it not repeatable by seeding the RNG
every time it generates a new number using a clock, or a noise level, or
somthing else not repeatable.

Dick

···

>Since Hask was disagreeing with Rob I suspect Hask was implying that
>the shuffle continued between the original deal and the draw. I have
>not seen the exact quote from the American Casino Guide 2003, so it
>would be nice if the exact text was given to clear up any confusion.
>
>Dick

I hadn't drawn that implication, but it's possible that's what he was
referring to. As I understand it, on some new machines the shuffle
resumes after the deal, with the remaining 47 cards (48 on a Joker
game) being shuffled until the player hits Draw.

But none of this matters. Whether the cards are dealt in serial or
parallel, whether the shuffle resumes after the deal, etc., does not
change the probabilities or the correct strategy. That card you need
to complete your royal is just as likely to be in the proper place to
appear on the draw no matter what the dealing method.

Dan
--

#3

Question to those familiar with programming: Is either method
(selection of 10 cards at a time vs. 5 before and 5 after the draw)
easier to program? Is there any reason that a manufacturer and/or
casino would prefer one over the other from an ease or cost
standpoint?

lb

#4

I hadn't drawn that implication, but it's possible that's what he

was

referring to. As I understand it, on some new machines the shuffle
resumes after the deal, with the remaining 47 cards (48 on a Joker
game) being shuffled until the player hits Draw.

But none of this matters. Whether the cards are dealt in serial or
parallel, whether the shuffle resumes after the deal, etc., does

not

change the probabilities or the correct strategy. That card you

need

to complete your royal is just as likely to be in the proper place

to

appear on the draw no matter what the dealing method.

Dan

I agree completely. However, I believe this thread was originally
prompted by an individual that would 'try' to hit the draw button at
precisely the right time. Even though we know this is impossible
under either implementation I thought it might help this person relax
a little if they knew it did not matter.

Dick

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Dan <vptimes@l...> wrote:

#5

I've been a programmer for many years and neither approach would seem
to be significantly easier than the other. The 10 cards at a time
method is probably slightly easier. I don't think the 'cost'
difference would be measurable.

Dick

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "lawrenceboxer" <ljboxer@e...> wrote:

Question to those familiar with programming: Is either method
(selection of 10 cards at a time vs. 5 before and 5 after the draw)
easier to program? Is there any reason that a manufacturer and/or
casino would prefer one over the other from an ease or cost
standpoint?

lb

#6

Obviously, from a practical point of view, it doesn't matter.
However, from a psychological point of view, it does matter, at
least to me. If I am playing FPDW and am dealt AKQ suited and two
other queens, keep the queens and draw the two cards that would have
delivered a royal, I feel a lot better knowing that the royal wasn't
sitting there waiting for me (spoken from bitter experience!). I
respect Dan and other professionals who would not think twice if
something like that happened.

The exact quote is as follows:

Vasquez: It's serial and the five later cards aren't determined
until there is more player interaction at the time of the draw.

Author (Steve Bourie): They aren't determined at the time of the
deal?

Vasquez:No. They're determined at the time of the draw. That varies
with the jurisdictional regulation actually. Some lottery
jurisdictions tell you you have to draw all 10 at once. Different
jurisdictions write into their rules how they want it done,
specifically on poker, because it's a simpler game and they
understand it. They say they either want all 10 done at once, or
however they want.

Author: How is it done in Nevada? All 10 at once or five and five?

Vasquez: In Nevada it's five and five.

Hask

>Since Hask was disagreeing with Rob I suspect Hask was implying

that

>the shuffle continued between the original deal and the draw. I

have

>not seen the exact quote from the American Casino Guide 2003, so

it

>would be nice if the exact text was given to clear up any

confusion.

>
>Dick

I hadn't drawn that implication, but it's possible that's what he

was

referring to. As I understand it, on some new machines the shuffle
resumes after the deal, with the remaining 47 cards (48 on a Joker
game) being shuffled until the player hits Draw.

But none of this matters. Whether the cards are dealt in serial or
parallel, whether the shuffle resumes after the deal, etc., does

not

change the probabilities or the correct strategy. That card you

need

to complete your royal is just as likely to be in the proper place

to

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Dan <vptimes@l...> wrote:

appear on the draw no matter what the dealing method.

Dan
--

Dan Paymar, author of the book, "Video Poker - Optimum Play"
Editor and Publisher of "Video Poker Times" newsletter
Web site at http://www.OptimumPlay.com

"Chance favors the prepared mind."
-- Louis Pasteur

#7

from a psychological point of view, it does matter, at
least to me......
I feel a lot better knowing that the royal wasn't
sitting there waiting for me <<

Understandable. For the same kind of psycho(logical) reason, I'd prefer all
ten at once, only because it more closely mimics a real deck.

lb

#8

< If I am playing FPDW and am dealt AKQ suited and two > other queens, keep
the queens and draw the two cards that would have

delivered a royal, I feel a lot better knowing that the royal wasn't
sitting there waiting for me

I call this situation "I don't wanna look!" Although I don't recall ever
getting that near-miss.
-- Steve in LV

#9

Hask, thanks for the exact quote. What this means is that the VP
programs provide for either approach. This somewhat complicates
matters for the manufacturers since they must know the destination
location of each machine before installing the correct chip (or
downloading the correct firmware). From a programming point of view
this could be handled quite easily with a compile time option.

This does raise the question of how used machines are handled. I know
that machines often move state-state in this market.

I think this also means if you play in a state outside Nevada that
doesn't have any specific regulation then you probably have no idea
how any particular machine works. It could be two side-by-side
machines operate differently.

Dick

Obviously, from a practical point of view, it doesn't matter.
However, from a psychological point of view, it does matter, at
least to me. If I am playing FPDW and am dealt AKQ suited and two
other queens, keep the queens and draw the two cards that would

have

delivered a royal, I feel a lot better knowing that the royal

wasn't

sitting there waiting for me (spoken from bitter experience!). I
respect Dan and other professionals who would not think twice if
something like that happened.

The exact quote is as follows:

Vasquez: It's serial and the five later cards aren't determined
until there is more player interaction at the time of the draw.

Author (Steve Bourie): They aren't determined at the time of the
deal?

Vasquez:No. They're determined at the time of the draw. That varies
with the jurisdictional regulation actually. Some lottery
jurisdictions tell you you have to draw all 10 at once. Different
jurisdictions write into their rules how they want it done,
specifically on poker, because it's a simpler game and they
understand it. They say they either want all 10 done at once, or
however they want.

Author: How is it done in Nevada? All 10 at once or five and five?

Vasquez: In Nevada it's five and five.

Hask

> >Since Hask was disagreeing with Rob I suspect Hask was implying
that
> >the shuffle continued between the original deal and the draw. I
have
> >not seen the exact quote from the American Casino Guide 2003, so
it
> >would be nice if the exact text was given to clear up any
confusion.
> >
> >Dick
>
> I hadn't drawn that implication, but it's possible that's what he
was
> referring to. As I understand it, on some new machines the

shuffle

> resumes after the deal, with the remaining 47 cards (48 on a

Joker

> game) being shuffled until the player hits Draw.
>
> But none of this matters. Whether the cards are dealt in serial

or

> parallel, whether the shuffle resumes after the deal, etc., does
not
> change the probabilities or the correct strategy. That card you
need
> to complete your royal is just as likely to be in the proper

place

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "haskd89052" <haskd89052@y...> wrote:

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Dan <vptimes@l...> wrote:
to
> appear on the draw no matter what the dealing method.
>
> Dan
> --
>
> Dan Paymar, author of the book, "Video Poker - Optimum Play"
> Editor and Publisher of "Video Poker Times" newsletter
> Web site at http://www.OptimumPlay.com
>
> "Chance favors the prepared mind."
> -- Louis Pasteur

#10

Thanks. I'll have to explain that to my wife. She's looking at it from the other end, if she only had delayed or sped up a fraction of a second, she would have hit.
   Either way, the odds are the same in the long run. But there is that psychological factor, and it run's in two directions.

Ned C.
The Wild Joker

···

haskd89052 <haskd89052@yahoo.com> wrote:
Obviously, from a practical point of view, it doesn't matter.
However, from a psychological point of view, it does matter, at
least to me. If I am playing FPDW and am dealt AKQ suited and two
other queens, keep the queens and draw the two cards that would have
delivered a royal, I feel a lot better knowing that the royal wasn't
sitting there waiting for me (spoken from bitter experience!).

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more

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