Could you give some examples of these overstated numbers
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bill Coleman <vphobby2@c...> wrote:
IGT also provides sheets to casinos with expected actual holds for
each game. For example, they tell customers that 10/7 DB holds 2 -
3%. These are the numbers that most casinos use. So the slot
departments rely on those numbers, not the theoretical max. These
numbers are, in some cases, reasonably accurate. In others they are
wildly overstated.
Due to confidentiality agreements I can't speak in specifics but I
can set up the general circumstances.
The accuracy of those IGT predictions is dependent on the skill level
of the customer base playing those games. Let's say you have a bank
of FPDW, a game very easy to learn well. If you have attractive
policies (bounce-back, cash-back, etc.) and a large locals customer
base your hold will be somewhere around break-even or even slightly
negative. IGT predicts the hold on that game is definitely positive.
I haven't seen the sheets on this game but I understand that the hold
is supposed to be about 2 or 3%. Let's assume it is 2%. The casino is
now evaluating the player as losing 2% of total coin-in and giving
comps and other benefits based on that number. Yet their actual
results show that at best they are earning nothing! For various
reasons including the knowledge that during an audit Gaming will
always accept IGT's estimates they give the customer credit for 2%
hold. But these numbers don't take into account the customer mix or
even the differences experienced at different denominations.
Hope this clarifies, somewhat.
B
At 09:12 PM 8/23/2005, you wrote:
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bill Coleman <vphobby2@c...> wrote:
> IGT also provides sheets to casinos with expected actual holds for
> each game. For example, they tell customers that 10/7 DB holds 2 -
> 3%. These are the numbers that most casinos use. So the slot
> departments rely on those numbers, not the theoretical max. These
> numbers are, in some cases, reasonably accurate. In others they are
> wildly overstated.Could you give some examples of these overstated numbers
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
vpFREE wrote:
I interpreted the 98% to refer to the casino's hold.
-----------------------------------------------
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@v...>
A game where the casino holds 98% of wagers? Hot damn, somebody clue
Wynn in! 
- H.
----------------------------------------
I found that very machine the last time I was in LV !!
Babe
I beg to disagree. Coming from JoB, DB can be learnt without
a lot of strategy adjustments, and without any adjustment a good
JoB player can play DB over 99.5%.
Playing DB without knowing anything about penalty cards yields
good results........................
JBQ
In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Jean-Baptiste Queru <jbqueru@g...> wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
However, besides penalty card differences (between JOB & DB) there
are several other proper strategy plays in DB that are totally
different than correct plays in JOB. For example, holding 3 card
non-straight flushes, holding inside straights, holding open ended
straights instead of a small pair, holding flush4, which includes
RF3, instead of RF3, holding suited AK/AQ/AJ with small suited card,
are the ones that come to mind immediately. I would think that,
using JOB strategy on ALL of the above DB hands, in addition to
ignoring the penalty card differential, must cause more than a .05%
shortfall on the EV.
Babe
Yes, playing an exact JoB strategy on DB costs about 0.5%, resulting
in an EV that's still above that of JoB. It's far from perfect DB, but
it's already an improvement over JoB. It means that a JoB player can
learn DB one change at a time, with absolutely no big "first step" to
go through.
I honestly don't have the breakdown of the cost of every category of
strategy differences.
What I meant is that the overall strategy feels the same. At the top,
middle and bottom of the strategy chart are essentially the same
hands. Change the ordering of a few lines, sprinkle in the few F3 and
S4 hands, and that takes care of the major differences. Yes, there are
some extra differences, like KQJs, QJ9s, QJT, but those aren't costly
to ignore while mastering the basic diferences.
JBQ
On 8/25/05, jackessiebabe <jackessiebabe@yahoo.com> wrote:
In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Jean-Baptiste Queru <jbqueru@g...> wrote:
I beg to disagree. Coming from JoB, DB can be learnt without
a lot of strategy adjustments, and without any adjustment a good
JoB player can play DB over 99.5%.Playing DB without knowing anything about penalty cards yields
good results........................
JBQ
-------------------------------------------------------
However, besides penalty card differences (between JOB & DB) there
are several other proper strategy plays in DB that are totally
different than correct plays in JOB. For example, holding 3 card
non-straight flushes, holding inside straights, holding open ended
straights instead of a small pair, holding flush4, which includes
RF3, instead of RF3, holding suited AK/AQ/AJ with small suited card,
are the ones that come to mind immediately. I would think that,
using JOB strategy on ALL of the above DB hands, in addition to
ignoring the penalty card differential, must cause more than a .05%
shortfall on the EV.Babe
vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
Someone mentioned that DB "has the same feel of JoB." I have played DB for many, many years and it used to be my core game - I would have to disagree with that. Keeping inside straights and 3-card flushes and "spoiling" royals by often adding another flush card to some 3-card royals - doing this VERY frequently in DB makes it seem much different than what you would do in JoB.
I do agree with the idea of starting with JoB strategy and learning the 5 or 6 basic changes first. It is a VERY difficult game to learn and you need to practice a lot on a software tutor program. Most people probably will not want to learn the penalty cards - and thus the strategy chart that Frugal VP generates will be great to get you very close in EV to "perfect strategy." And you can practice in the "strategy mode" and you aren't being forever dinged for tiny penalty-card errors.
Once you can play the penalty-free strategy "in your sleep," only then do I suggest you learn the penalty-card strategy. The way I learned it was with Bob Dancer Winner's Guide for DB. I took one penalty-card situation at a time, concentrating on it until I had it mastered, before picking up the next one. If you play long enough, then you will eventually go through all of them. You can practice the "perfect" strategy on WinPoker or on FVP. FVP offers both modes, with or without penalty cards.
________________________________________
Jean $�ott - http://www.FrugalGambler.biz
for VP software and strategy cards.
NEW - Blackjack Strategy Cards +
Updated Second Edition of
"The Frugal Gambler."
Well, I guess that it's all relative. If you were to play a JoB
strategy on FPDW you wouldn't be playing over 99.5%.
So, what are the "major" differences (in my opinion)
4F jumps over 3RF (not surprising, flushes pay 16% more, and we know
that 4F and 3RF are close in JoB since there's a penalty card
situation between them).
4OS jumps over LP (once again, not a surprise, straights pay 25% more,
and in JoB 4OS and LP are known to be close (KQJT vs TT)).
HHs fall at the bottom of the "middle" part of the strategy, below
3SF+1, where they are joined by 3F+2 (better than HHs, obviously) and
4S+2 and 4S+1 (worse than HHs).
3F+1 and A (in that order) appear above AH.
hold 4S and 3F (in that order) instead of discarding everything.
It's not perfect, it's not even penalty-free perfect, but it's not a
lot to learn for a JoB player and yields good results. Had I known
that when I was in LV I would have played a lot more. Try to learn
FPDW or PKM by modifying a JoB strategy, just for the fun of it (how
intuitive is it for a JoB player to split two pairs in FPDW?)...
So, what's missing in that strategy? 3RF+4 above JJ QQ KK, 3SF+3 above
55-TT, QJs KJs QKs are played "too low", QJT, 3SF is played "too low",
JTs QTs are played "too low", and obviously the penalty cards.
Of course, and any mistakes I've made.
Personally, I don't see that as a huge effort. Plop in 500-hand
practice session every evening when coming back from work, and in a
couple of weeks it'll have sunk in.
That's all a personal opinion, of course, feel free to disagree...
JBQ
On 8/25/05, Jean Scott <QueenofComps@frugalgambler.biz> wrote:
Someone mentioned that DB "has the same feel of JoB." I have played DB for
many, many years and it used to be my core game - I would have to disagree
with that.