vpFREE2 Forums

Less Than Five Coins Question.

I thought I explained it clearly, but apparently I did not. You
insiste on the Royal. Let me repeat myself with other words since I
don't have a different argument than the above.

And I thought I answered you (see previous message below) and showed
you that the EV of max coin play is always more than the EV of single
coin play, on the same machine.

Since [EV = ER times coin-in], do the math and you'll see that max
coin play is always the optimum choice when you "want as much money
as you can get out of that freeplay".

You have freeplay, that is not money. You are broke, maybe have only
a few dollars. You want most of the money you can get out of the
freeplay.

Being "poor" wasn't in your orginal scenario, but it isn't relevant
to finding the optimum solution that you were/are seeking.

The "need" of the player doesn't fit into EV computations.

Let us take an extreme case. Would you play that $200 freeplay on a
$40 machiine full coin? Your odds to get a Royal on that single play
are the same. It can happen. But you have better of 50% chance of
getting nothing. Just look at any game's statistics, FPDW or JB, or
anything, over 50% of the time you get nothing. Sure, if you get a
Royal on that single play, it's a huge Royal, but your chances are
less than half to get it. Remember your goal? To get the most money
in cash out of your freeplay.

Your extreme example, unless it's the only VP machine in the casino,
is an unsuitable selection for achieving your stated objective.

But, for the sake of discussion, one hand of max coin play on a $40
machine is a better way of achieving your goal than five hands of
single coin play on the same machine. Do the math and you'll see that
max coin play has the higher EV, and EV is what you're trying maximize.

The prescription then is to assume the low probability Royal won't
come out, that most of the hands with high probability will come out
if you play many games, and the way to play many games is to play a
coin at a time. You will more easily be nearer to obtain in fact the
98% payback with no Royal if you play 4,000 games than if you play
800 games.

No that isn't the prescription.

The prescription is that single coin play, with its lower ER, is
always inferior to max coin play on the same machine, if you want to
maximize your EV.

Just remember: [EV = ER times coin-in]

Long term means playing a lot, and even if 4000 games is not
long term, it is closer to it than 800 games.

True, but irrelevant in a one coin versus max coin discussion.

There may be a case that can be made that the variance of a game
should be given more emphasis than ER when trying to get the most
that you can out of a short term free play situation (I don't know,
and it isn't applicable to me because my goal is to maximize my
long term results), but a case can't be made that single coin play
on a particular machine is better than max coin play.

Just remember: [EV = ER times coin-in]

I grant you a big fat Royal is the most fun of all. But if you are
broke and want $180, blowing that freeplay is not fun at all.

Makes sense to me.

I don't understand why the above does not make sense to you.

Mostly for the reason that it falls into the 2 + 1 = 4 category.

                      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

···

mubowor wrote on vpFREE:

To: vpfree@yahoogroups.com
From: Roland Langley <roland0684@yahoo.com>
Date sent: Sun, 20 Jul 2003 02:30:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Less Than Five Coins Question.

mubowor wrote on vpFREE:

Okay, I have a good example of when you might pass on the Royal.
Suppose a casino has offered you a couple of hundred in freeplay
that you can use on an evening. Suppose you want as much money as
you can get out of that freeplay.

OK, although I think you should be considering your video poker play
as one long, continuing game.

Let's be more specific, you take one of those offers TI is making.
What do you do? This is a very definite problem with an optimum
solution.

Agreed.

I believe the solution is to go to the smallest denomination in the
casino that has the best game offered and play it a coin at a time.

I know that the solution is to play maximum coins (unless a smaller #
triggers the royal flush bonus) in the best game offered.

That way at the end of the freeplay, you will have most of the $200,
and perhaps a little more.

How do you arrive at this conclusion?

Say the denomination you choose is nickels. Then $200 will give you
4,000 credits. If you play full coin on a nickel machine, you have
800 games. Your odds of hitting a Royal are pretty low,

Your odds of hitting a royal are always pretty low, but it seems to
happen when you least expect it, and it's essential to get full value
from a royal when it occurs.

The math says that the EV of 800 hands at a quarter per hand times the
max coin ER, is greater than 4000 hands at a nickel a hand times the
one coin ER.

and the variance maybe will make you end up with a
smaller fraction of the freeplay if you play with five
coins as compared with one coin.

And the variance maybe will make you end up with a larger fraction of
the freeplay if you play with five coins as compared with one coin.

Variance can work either way, and you can just as easily end up with
more, plus you have the royal kicker if you play maximum coins.

A justification for varying the number of coins? Well, suppose
midway you have hit a straight flush, some quads, and you already
have most of your $200 freeplay in credits, then you feel like
splurging, and you play more than one coin.

Whatever floats your boat. You've already given up the royal flush ER.

Doesn't the above make sense?

No.

Sure, during the process you started giving up the idea
of hitting a fat five coin Royal, but your goal was to
get the most money out of the limited freeplay. If you
achieve that goal, then you have fun.

You haven't shown that giving up the idea of hitting the
royal is the best way of achieving your goal, but I agree
that having fun is fun.

Hi,

Harry Porter has explained what I intended in a different way. I
agree with your rule EV = ER times coin-in, but I don't agree with it
being the only consideration bearing on the problem presented.

Let me simplify the problem. A casino gives you $5 in freeplay. The
casino has only quarter machines of one type. The machines pay 1.5%
less for one coin than for five coins. You want to play your $5 and
leave as soon as the freeplay is played, with whatever money you made
on that session. You have a choice between playing four games, or
playing 20 games with the lesser return. Let me stress the part that
seems not be digested by the replies I have read. Getting money out
of that freeplay is essential. You want that money, you don't want to
risk not getting money.

What do you do? The answer is obvious and it does not contradict EV =
ER times coin-in.

I did not think of this before, but you can go to Frugal or WinPoker
and make hundreds of simulations. Then construct your distributions.
One for four games of five coins, and another for 20 games with one
coin. In those distributions you will see what is the perecentage
probability of leaving with no money in both cases, of leaving with a
dollar, with two dollars, etc.

Let me change the conditions again to stress what the problem is. You
are broke. You need money for the bus. You don't want to walk three
miles in 110 degree heat. You look at the two distributions you made
with Win or Frugal in a laptop some busy player lent you and you
decide what to do. If you are smart, even if you know that EV=ER
times coin-in, you play 20 games with one coin with that freeplay.

As I said, I will not continue to explain this problem because I
don't want to take a tranquilizer. If you don't agree with me, Mr.
Langley, then we disagree. Nothing earth shaking about that. People
don't always have to agree. I will say that I am glad I most likely
won't walk three miles in 110 degree heat, if I end up with the
situation in the previous paragraph.

Regards,

E

> I thought I explained it clearly, but apparently I did not. You
> insiste on the Royal. Let me repeat myself with other words since

I

> don't have a different argument than the above.

And I thought I answered you (see previous message below) and showed
you that the EV of max coin play is always more than the EV of

single

coin play, on the same machine.

Since [EV = ER times coin-in], do the math and you'll see that max
coin play is always the optimum choice when you "want as much money
as you can get out of that freeplay".

> You have freeplay, that is not money. You are broke, maybe have

only

> a few dollars. You want most of the money you can get out of the
> freeplay.

Being "poor" wasn't in your orginal scenario, but it isn't relevant
to finding the optimum solution that you were/are seeking.

The "need" of the player doesn't fit into EV computations.

> Let us take an extreme case. Would you play that $200 freeplay on

a

> $40 machiine full coin? Your odds to get a Royal on that single

play

> are the same. It can happen. But you have better of 50% chance of
> getting nothing. Just look at any game's statistics, FPDW or JB,

or

> anything, over 50% of the time you get nothing. Sure, if you get a
> Royal on that single play, it's a huge Royal, but your chances are
> less than half to get it. Remember your goal? To get the most

money

> in cash out of your freeplay.

Your extreme example, unless it's the only VP machine in the casino,
is an unsuitable selection for achieving your stated objective.

But, for the sake of discussion, one hand of max coin play on a $40
machine is a better way of achieving your goal than five hands of
single coin play on the same machine. Do the math and you'll see

that

max coin play has the higher EV, and EV is what you're trying

maximize.

> The prescription then is to assume the low probability Royal won't
> come out, that most of the hands with high probability will come

out

> if you play many games, and the way to play many games is to play

a

> coin at a time. You will more easily be nearer to obtain in fact

the

> 98% payback with no Royal if you play 4,000 games than if you play
> 800 games.

No that isn't the prescription.

The prescription is that single coin play, with its lower ER, is
always inferior to max coin play on the same machine, if you want to
maximize your EV.

Just remember: [EV = ER times coin-in]

> Long term means playing a lot, and even if 4000 games is not
> long term, it is closer to it than 800 games.

True, but irrelevant in a one coin versus max coin discussion.

There may be a case that can be made that the variance of a game
should be given more emphasis than ER when trying to get the most
that you can out of a short term free play situation (I don't know,
and it isn't applicable to me because my goal is to maximize my
long term results), but a case can't be made that single coin play
on a particular machine is better than max coin play.

Just remember: [EV = ER times coin-in]

> I grant you a big fat Royal is the most fun of all. But if you are
> broke and want $180, blowing that freeplay is not fun at all.

Makes sense to me.

> I don't understand why the above does not make sense to you.

Mostly for the reason that it falls into the 2 + 1 = 4 category.

                      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

To: vpfree@yahoogroups.com
From: Roland Langley <roland0684@y...>
Date sent: Sun, 20 Jul 2003 02:30:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Less Than Five Coins Question.

> Okay, I have a good example of when you might pass on the Royal.
> Suppose a casino has offered you a couple of hundred in freeplay
> that you can use on an evening. Suppose you want as much money as
> you can get out of that freeplay.

OK, although I think you should be considering your video poker play
as one long, continuing game.

> Let's be more specific, you take one of those offers TI is making.
> What do you do? This is a very definite problem with an optimum
> solution.

Agreed.

> I believe the solution is to go to the smallest denomination in

the

> casino that has the best game offered and play it a coin at a

time.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Roland Langley <roland0684@y...> wrote:

mubowor wrote on vpFREE:
mubowor wrote on vpFREE:

I know that the solution is to play maximum coins (unless a smaller

#

triggers the royal flush bonus) in the best game offered.

> That way at the end of the freeplay, you will have most of the

$200,

> and perhaps a little more.

How do you arrive at this conclusion?

> Say the denomination you choose is nickels. Then $200 will give

you

> 4,000 credits. If you play full coin on a nickel machine, you have
> 800 games. Your odds of hitting a Royal are pretty low,

Your odds of hitting a royal are always pretty low, but it seems to
happen when you least expect it, and it's essential to get full

value

from a royal when it occurs.

The math says that the EV of 800 hands at a quarter per hand times

the

max coin ER, is greater than 4000 hands at a nickel a hand times the
one coin ER.

> and the variance maybe will make you end up with a
> smaller fraction of the freeplay if you play with five
> coins as compared with one coin.

And the variance maybe will make you end up with a larger fraction

of

the freeplay if you play with five coins as compared with one coin.

Variance can work either way, and you can just as easily end up with
more, plus you have the royal kicker if you play maximum coins.

> A justification for varying the number of coins? Well, suppose
> midway you have hit a straight flush, some quads, and you already
> have most of your $200 freeplay in credits, then you feel like
> splurging, and you play more than one coin.

Whatever floats your boat. You've already given up the royal flush

ER.

> Doesn't the above make sense?

No.

> Sure, during the process you started giving up the idea
> of hitting a fat five coin Royal, but your goal was to
> get the most money out of the limited freeplay. If you
> achieve that goal, then you have fun.

You haven't shown that giving up the idea of hitting the
royal is the best way of achieving your goal, but I agree
that having fun is fun.

Hi,

Harry Porter has explained what I intended in a different way. I
agree with your rule EV = ER times coin-in, but I don't agree with it
being the only consideration bearing on the problem presented.

Let me simplify the problem. A casino gives you $5 in freeplay. The
casino has only quarter machines of one type. The machines pay 1.5%
less for one coin than for five coins. You want to play your $5 and
leave as soon as the freeplay is played, with whatever money you made
on that session. You have a choice between playing four games, or
playing 20 games with the lesser return. Let me stress the part that
seems not be digested by the replies I have read. Getting money out
of that freeplay is essential. You want that money, you don't want to
risk not getting money.

What do you do? The answer is obvious and it does not contradict EV =
ER times coin-in.

I disagree that the answer is obvious, because the way to extract maximum
value from the freeplay is to forget about EV and play instead to minimize
cost. This requires a playing strategy that is quite different than the
max-EV strategy that the cards/programs teach.

I did not think of this before, but you can go to Frugal or WinPoker
and make hundreds of simulations. Then construct your distributions.
One for four games of five coins, and another for 20 games with one
coin. In those distributions you will see what is the perecentage
probability of leaving with no money in both cases, of leaving with a
dollar, with two dollars, etc.

Yes, it will give the numbers for the max-EV strategy, but that is the
wrong strategy for this situation.

Let me change the conditions again to stress what the problem is. You
are broke. You need money for the bus. You don't want to walk three
miles in 110 degree heat. You look at the two distributions you made
with Win or Frugal in a laptop some busy player lent you and you
decide what to do. If you are smart, even if you know that EV=ER
times coin-in, you play 20 games with one coin with that freeplay.

If your goal is to win bus fair and no more, than massive strategy
variations can be used to maximize the probability of winning just
enough to board the bus. This strategy might even be neg-EV after
accounting for the freeplay, but I'm not sure about that without
further analysis.

Bottom line: EV isn't everything. For many problems, EV isn't the
main thing either. For a few problems (such as this one) EV isn't
important. To maximize the probability of reaching a finite goal,
when "time" isn't an issue, one should completely forget about EV
and play to minimize risk-of-ruin. The min-ROR strategy gives
the highest probability of reaching a specific finite goal.

Regards,
Steve Jacobs

···

On Monday 21 July 2003 06:53 am, mubowor wrote: