vpFREE2 Forums

Loosen up Strip casino pay-schedules---increase profits!

#1

Most people say that strip casinos put in horrible pay schedules to
increase profits, but I disagree, I think this is another in a long
line of idiotic casino management decisions. I give a nod to that
excellent Frugal Friday column a few weeks back discussing vp player
gripes and management ineptitude.

My thesis is as follows. Most visitors to Las Vegas limit play
because bankroll issues not time constraints, does anyone sleep in
Vegas. I have never seen strip casinos close to capacity as far as vp
inventory is concerned, this does happen at local casinos around the
country. So all casinos achieve with lousy pay-schedules is beating
the visitors out of their money quicker. If the players could play
longer on the same bank-roll I'm sure it would be a more enjoyable
experience, and hence would foster greater loyalty, return visits.
This would be true across all level of players, from optimal to
totally uninformed players. A rising pay-schedule lifts all players.

Loosen pay-schedules means 99+% not necessarily 100+%, why would
strip casinos want to deal with those who try to earn a living at VP.
Same goes for blackjack, bring back decent rules and 1 1/2 blackjack
pays, just use auto shufflers after each hand, if you're not counting
cards it doesn't matter, if you are, you're not playing at my model
casino.

#2

jaydavidson118 wrote:

Most people say that strip casinos put in horrible pay schedules to
increase profits, but I disagree, I think this is another in a long
line of idiotic casino management decisions.

My thesis is as follows. Most visitors to Las Vegas limit play
because bankroll issues not time constraints, does anyone sleep in
Vegas. I have never seen strip casinos close to capacity as far as
vp inventory is concerned, this does happen at local casinos around
the country. So all casinos achieve with lousy pay-schedules is
beating the visitors out of their money quicker. If the players
could play longer on the same bank-roll I'm sure it would be a more
enjoyable experience, and hence would foster greater loyalty, return
visits. This would be true across all level of players, from optimal
to totally uninformed players. A rising pay-schedule lifts all
players.

I won't argue strongly against you, John ... your arguments hold water.

However, consider that as a whole Strip payouts tend to run about
1%-2% shy of the locals, as reported. Given much higher operating
costs, there doesn't seem to be a sizable margin by which to reduce
this edge without seriously cutting into profits and given the greater
investment risk, Strip casino investors are going to be looking for
strong returns.

The gross Strip hold runs about 5%-6% overall; about a percent higher
at lower .25/.50 denoms (I'm working from data immediately at hand of
about 2 years old). Allow a 25% giveback in comps and promos and
hold before operating expenses is reduced to something in the 4%-5% range.

Now, picking a number out of my ass, let's say operating expenses run
about 1.5% of gross wagers. The flow to the bottom line before taxes
is now around 3%.

Increase payouts by 1% and that bottom line (before taxes) is cut by
33%. It'll take a 33% surge in business to compensate and break even
on the whole proposition. Business will need to jump 40%-50% before
they come out ahead.

Now, I'm playing fast and loose with the numbers. When it comes down
to it though, I can see good reason why the sizable disparity between
strip payouts and locals exists and that simple economics and not poor
management judgement/greed is the source.

Without trying to beat a dead horse, I'll add that additional play on
a bankroll isn't the only factor that induces a player to return,
particularly on the Strip. Comps weigh in very heavily, perhaps just
as strongly. People clearly head for the Strip because the digs are
premium, restaurants are exceptional, and there's considerable more
cache in coming home with a Casaers or Bellagio story than one from
Fiesta or Stations.

Strip manaement may know their business well and have solid experience
that jumping returns by 2% won't bring in the additional business
needed. (NYNY seems to have experimented throughly with these
variables and I doubt it's because they simply don't have a clue.)

John, this is all idle speculation on my part and you may be dead on.
But I'll go with the house on this one (to my frequent disappointment :frowning:

- Harry

#3

My conjecture is based on the idea that the limiting factor is
bankroll, e.g. I'll budget $500 per day, once I lose that I'm done
gambling for the day or I'll budget $1,500 for the trip once I lose
that I'm done gambling for the trip. Of coure if you have a winning
trip then time is the constraint, but most trips are losing trips.
I'm trying to say is in the long run and averaged over thousands
(millions) of visits the net effect of tight pay schedules is that
the casino takes my money after 2 hours of play each day instead of 4
hours of play. Now, one of the reasons I come to Vegas is that I
enjoy playing video poker, I don't consider it an vocation, I would
have a much more enjoyable experience if I could play for 4 hours a
day on my budget rather than 2 hours. Over the long run that would be
the effect if you shifted from 98% machines to 99%. The revenue or
profit to the casinos is the same in either case, just my
satisfaction is increased in the latter situation. Hence, I'm more
likely to return to this particular casino, externalities being
equal. The variable costs ot slot machines are effectively zero.

If you believe most people are time contrained rather than budeget
constrained, my argument falls apart.

You do risk losing some advantage on the time constrained visitors,
Again I'm betting that these players are in the small minority.

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@v...>
wrote:

I won't argue strongly against you, John ... your arguments hold

water.

However, consider that as a whole Strip payouts tend to run about
1%-2% shy of the locals, as reported. Given much higher operating
costs, there doesn't seem to be a sizable margin by which to reduce
this edge without seriously cutting into profits and given the

greater

investment risk, Strip casino investors are going to be looking for
strong returns.

The gross Strip hold runs about 5%-6% overall; about a percent

higher

at lower .25/.50 denoms (I'm working from data immediately at hand

of

about 2 years old). Allow a 25% giveback in comps and promos and
hold before operating expenses is reduced to something in the 4%-5%

range.

Now, picking a number out of my ass, let's say operating expenses

run

about 1.5% of gross wagers. The flow to the bottom line before

taxes

is now around 3%.

Increase payouts by 1% and that bottom line (before taxes) is cut by
33%. It'll take a 33% surge in business to compensate and break

even

on the whole proposition. Business will need to jump 40%-50% before
they come out ahead.

Now, I'm playing fast and loose with the numbers. When it comes

down

to it though, I can see good reason why the sizable disparity

between

strip payouts and locals exists and that simple economics and not

poor

management judgement/greed is the source.

Without trying to beat a dead horse, I'll add that additional play

on

a bankroll isn't the only factor that induces a player to return,
particularly on the Strip. Comps weigh in very heavily, perhaps

just

as strongly. People clearly head for the Strip because the digs are
premium, restaurants are exceptional, and there's considerable more
cache in coming home with a Casaers or Bellagio story than one from
Fiesta or Stations.

Strip manaement may know their business well and have solid

experience

that jumping returns by 2% won't bring in the additional business
needed. (NYNY seems to have experimented throughly with these
variables and I doubt it's because they simply don't have a clue.)

John, this is all idle speculation on my part and you may be dead

on.

But I'll go with the house on this one (to my frequent

disappointment :frowning:

···

- Harry

#4

I think I'll finally chime in on this topic too.

The strip casinos derive a large income from Joe tourist, and Joe convention goer.

The Joes comes to Las Vegas once every few years. They do not consider themselves to be gamblers.
They are here to party and may do some gambling because it is there. They do not know that anything
exists in Las Vegas besides the strip, they have never read anything on how to gamble.

If you took a survey of how many people play video poker in the U.S. and Canada you would probably come up with a
fairly significant number of people.
If you took a survey of how many of these same players have ever researched and studied how to play the game you
would come up with a fairly insignificant number of people. Just look at how many people are on this group or any other gambling
group on the internet.

The thing is folks, the majority of gamblers think that they know everything about gambling (how many times have you overheard someone giving
out bad information) .
I would sincerely doubt that more than 5 % of those that gamble have even the most basic set of playing skills .

If I ran a casino on the strip I would do exactly what the Big casinos are doing now. If I was one of the smaller casinos on the strip I would
give a better gamble to attract those that are not going to the fancy places, and that is exactly how things are run in Las Vegas today.
You offer to the public what is the minimum requirement to earn your profit targets. That is how all businesses run.

Tough break for us gamblers, but that is the reality of it.

If I ran a casino I would not want me as a customer, nor anybody else form this group. Luckily we are too small a group for the casinos to worry about.

Regards
A.P.

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

#5

I think I'll finally chime in on this topic too.
The strip casinos derive a large income from Joe tourist, and Joe
convention goer.

The Joes comes to Las Vegas once every few years. They do not
consider themselves to be gamblers. They are here to party and may
do some gambling because it is there. They do not know that anything
exists in Las Vegas besides the strip, they have never read anything
on how to gamble.

Hi Albert.

Once again I find myself in total agreement with your post.

I don't think that most recreational gamblers/tourists have
the self control or money management skills, that Jay Davidson
outlines in his post. (I do congratulate Jay on his disciplined
play!) Therefore, I think the average player will continue to
gamble (whether winning or losing) past his/her self-imposed
session/trip limits (which are often forgotten in an actual casino
setting.)

If you accept this hypothesis, than it would follow that the
casino's theo win would be higher on a poor pay schedule, than
a better one.

Babe

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Albert Pearson" <a-p@s...> wrote:
------------------------------------

<snip>

If I ran a casino on the strip I would do exactly what the Big
casinos are doing now. If I was one of the smaller casinos on the
strip I would give a better gamble to attract those that are not
going to the fancy places, and that is exactly how things are run in
Las Vegas today............... You offer to the public what is the
minimum requirement to earn your profit targets. That is how all
businesses run..............
Tough break for us gamblers, but that is the reality of it........
If I ran a casino I would not want me as a customer, nor anybody
else form this group. Luckily we are too small a group for the
casinos to worry about.

Regards

A.P.

#6

If I ran a casino on the strip I would do exactly
what the Big casinos are doing now.

I tend to agree with this line of thinking. The strip hotels act like
a cartel. As long as no one cheats, for example one of the large
strip hotels agressively advertising a better gamble, they all win. I
don't think they're having trouble filling their hotel rooms hence,
little need to provide a sucker an even break.

#7

Not to belabor the the point, but, I can't resist chiming in one
final time. I think I pretty much agree with all the responses to
this topic, except the one the suggests that knowlegable players are
a large fraction of all players.

Being budget constrained, doesn't mean necessarily sticking to your
budget, it means, finally saying uncle, I've lost all I'm willing to
lose on this trip, with time left and desire to play more. Most
casual visitors, "visitng Joes", who are not in Vegas primarily to
gamble, don't play video poker. Video Poker seems to be a game people
gravitate to after they become more comfortable with the whole
gambling arena. Even if most vp playders don't become knowlegable
about pay-schedules, they will still have a better experience on
games with better pay-schedules.

If a casinos vp inventory is far from being 100% utilized, which is
my observation of strip casinos, how does it benefit them to beat you
out of your money quickly? It's one thing to have a losing session,
it really rubs salt into the wound when you feel like you didn't even
get a fair amount of play for your loss.

I think I'll finally chime in on this topic too.

The strip casinos derive a large income from Joe tourist, and Joe

convention goer.

The Joes comes to Las Vegas once every few years. They do not

consider themselves to be gamblers.

They are here to party and may do some gambling because it is

there. They do not know that anything

exists in Las Vegas besides the strip, they have never read

anything on how to gamble.

If you took a survey of how many people play video poker in the

U.S. and Canada you would probably come up with a

fairly significant number of people.
If you took a survey of how many of these same players have ever

researched and studied how to play the game you

would come up with a fairly insignificant number of people. Just

look at how many people are on this group or any other gambling

group on the internet.

The thing is folks, the majority of gamblers think that they know

everything about gambling (how many times have you overheard someone
giving

out bad information) .
I would sincerely doubt that more than 5 % of those that gamble

have even the most basic set of playing skills .

If I ran a casino on the strip I would do exactly what the Big

casinos are doing now. If I was one of the smaller casinos on the
strip I would

give a better gamble to attract those that are not going to the

fancy places, and that is exactly how things are run in Las Vegas
today.

You offer to the public what is the minimum requirement to earn

your profit targets. That is how all businesses run.

Tough break for us gamblers, but that is the reality of it.

If I ran a casino I would not want me as a customer, nor anybody

else form this group. Luckily we are too small a group for the
casinos to worry about.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Albert Pearson" <a-p@s...> wrote:

Regards
A.P.

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

#8

john
i tend to agree with you. My budget for a trip is 300 a day, 1500
for a 5 day trip. Some days are done very early. But if I can make
the entire day with that money it goes home with me starting again
with another 300. With that budget I don't even think of going down
to the strip. But I'll take a 15 dollar cab ride from the golden
nugget to the locals because of the value of the machines. Maybe
just to play nickel vp. The value of a trip is in the time on the
machines. It makes your judgement easy, valueable machine time over
lights and operating expenses.
My wife a I say every trip that we should go to the strip but we
never do. We want to have that strip casino story, but we just won't
go. I guess my backroll is big enough for the lights, food and
shopping. But I know its enough to win and have fun all day
somewhere.
   
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "jaydavidson118"
<jaydavidson118@y...> wrote:

My conjecture is based on the idea that the limiting factor is
bankroll, e.g. I'll budget $500 per day, once I lose that I'm done
gambling for the day or I'll budget $1,500 for the trip once I

lose

that I'm done gambling for the trip. Of coure if you have a

winning

trip then time is the constraint, but most trips are losing trips.
I'm trying to say is in the long run and averaged over thousands
(millions) of visits the net effect of tight pay schedules is that
the casino takes my money after 2 hours of play each day instead

of 4

hours of play. Now, one of the reasons I come to Vegas is that I
enjoy playing video poker, I don't consider it an vocation, I

would

have a much more enjoyable experience if I could play for 4 hours

a

day on my budget rather than 2 hours. Over the long run that would

be

the effect if you shifted from 98% machines to 99%. The revenue

or

profit to the casinos is the same in either case, just my
satisfaction is increased in the latter situation. Hence, I'm more
likely to return to this particular casino, externalities being
equal. The variable costs ot slot machines are effectively zero.

If you believe most people are time contrained rather than budeget
constrained, my argument falls apart.

You do risk losing some advantage on the time constrained

visitors,

···

Again I'm betting that these players are in the small minority.

#9

i would image it doesn't cost the casino much more to have a machine
being played than one sitting idle...so why not give the avg tourist
some entertainment value for their bankroll...surveys have been done
showing they play til they lose it...seems like they would come back
to lv and your casino more often if they got more entertainment
value...and with all the other segments of the resort being profit
centers the hotels aren't solely dependent on the casino...the
mentality seems to be they had better suck it out the them quickly
before they give their competitor down the street a chance to get it...

#10

In my opinion...

The strip casinos have slightly less payout schedules due to the fact
that they know that they don't have to have many positive payout
schedules on their games to get their clients attracted to their
video poker games and in gambling at their casino.

The serious video poker player likes to hang out at places like both
of the Fiesta's and at the Palms, where the payout schedules are
higher, however, a drive is required.

I also think that most video poker players play the way they "feel
they should play", instead of playing per the Bob Dancer WinPoker
rules to maximize return.

As far as all the no smoking chatter goes...

Remember what happended to Silver City after they went to totally all
non-smoking?

#11

i tend to agree with you. "My budget for a trip is 300 a day, 1500
for a 5 day trip. Some days are done very early."

well to put your $300 in perspecitve...boyd recently reported earnings
and stated they make over $300 per day profit on each machine on their
floor...

#12

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "worldbefree22001"
<krajewski.sa@p...> wrote:
I

don't think they're having trouble filling their hotel rooms

hence,

little need to provide a sucker an even break.

I think you have the answer here. Today, these casinos are making
record profits while constantly tweaking their games slowly but
constantly in a manner worse for the players. Get rid of the FPDW
machines and profits go up, get rid of some 10/7 machines and
profits go up, 6/5 blackjack, s-17 changed to h-17 and profits
continue to rise. Someone, right now in some casino is figuring
what game they will now make slightly worse and as long as profits
continue to go up they will take advantage of it.
Right after 9/11 many games were better than today and profits were
way down. As soon as people began filling up the rooms in Vegas and
the money starting flowing, this slow destruction of games went into
action. If you wish to see it reversed. If you wish to see better
games out there; first you will need to see casino profits go down.

Right now the thinking is, our rooms are full so how can we get more
money out of these people.
If people were not filling up these rooms, the thinking would be,
what do we have to do to get more people to come to our hotel and
play our games.
Victoria

#13

Here is a question for the math Gurus out there...

Scenario is Joe 6 pack playing video poker with a $300/ day budget.

Scenario 1 he is playing seat of your pants strategy playing 8/5 jacks or better .
Scenario 2 he is playing the same strategy but 9/6 jacks or better.

Question : How much longer will he last on the 9/6 machine on average , than on the 8/5 machine, assume that both machines are being played 5 quarters per hand.

My guess is that the difference will not be significant. If you are having a bad day you may last a few more hands but that is all.
The difference in pay tables will not bring a significant improvement to the outcome of the average tourist.

My rough calculations say that if you were going to have a session where you lose your $300 in 3 hours of play on an 8/5 machine, the same type of hands
will give you 30 more hands to play on the 9/6 machine, probably 10 more minutes of play unless you get a big hand.

Regards
A.P.

···

----- Original Message -----
  From: jaydavidson118
  To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 1:08 PM
  Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Loosen up Strip casino pay-schedules---increase profits!

  Not to belabor the the point, but, I can't resist chiming in one
  final time. I think I pretty much agree with all the responses to
  this topic, except the one the suggests that knowlegable players are
  a large fraction of all players.

  Being budget constrained, doesn't mean necessarily sticking to your
  budget, it means, finally saying uncle, I've lost all I'm willing to
  lose on this trip, with time left and desire to play more. Most
  casual visitors, "visitng Joes", who are not in Vegas primarily to
  gamble, don't play video poker. Video Poker seems to be a game people
  gravitate to after they become more comfortable with the whole
  gambling arena. Even if most vp playders don't become knowlegable
  about pay-schedules, they will still have a better experience on
  games with better pay-schedules.

  If a casinos vp inventory is far from being 100% utilized, which is
  my observation of strip casinos, how does it benefit them to beat you
  out of your money quickly? It's one thing to have a losing session,
  it really rubs salt into the wound when you feel like you didn't even
  get a fair amount of play for your loss.

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

#14

From the casino's perspective the results are much different, with a
perhaps thousand joe six packs a day, over the course of a year the
experience of the two groups would be quite different. Granted some
visitors will "feel" no improvement, but I would suggest that a
strong plurality would have a much enhanced experience. Look at it
this way, using your numbers...and mine...30 extra hands a day per
Joe, 1,000 Joes a day,(I'm getting that deja vu feeling) 365 days a
year= 10,950,000 extra hands which include approx 16 dealt royals,
2,737 dealt 4 of a kinds, plus around 275 extra royals...can you feel
the happiness? En mass the results are really more dramatic, if you
up the pay schedule from 98% to 99% as a group, you'll double the
play of the group for any given bank-roll level e.g. for $100 bank-
roll I would expect to be able to theoretically play through $5,000
on a 98% machine and $10,000 on a 99% machine...

Here is a question for the math Gurus out there...

Scenario is Joe 6 pack playing video poker with a $300/ day budget.

Scenario 1 he is playing seat of your pants strategy playing 8/5

jacks or better .

Scenario 2 he is playing the same strategy but 9/6 jacks or better.

Question : How much longer will he last on the 9/6 machine on

average , than on the 8/5 machine, assume that both machines are
being played 5 quarters per hand.

My guess is that the difference will not be significant. If you are

having a bad day you may last a few more hands but that is all.

The difference in pay tables will not bring a significant

improvement to the outcome of the average tourist.

My rough calculations say that if you were going to have a session

where you lose your $300 in 3 hours of play on an 8/5 machine, the
same type of hands

will give you 30 more hands to play on the 9/6 machine, probably 10

more minutes of play unless you get a big hand.

Regards
A.P.
  From: jaydavidson118
  To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 1:08 PM
  Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Loosen up Strip casino pay-schedules---

increase profits!

  Not to belabor the the point, but, I can't resist chiming in one
  final time. I think I pretty much agree with all the responses to
  this topic, except the one the suggests that knowlegable players

are

  a large fraction of all players.

  Being budget constrained, doesn't mean necessarily sticking to

your

  budget, it means, finally saying uncle, I've lost all I'm willing

to

  lose on this trip, with time left and desire to play more. Most
  casual visitors, "visitng Joes", who are not in Vegas primarily

to

  gamble, don't play video poker. Video Poker seems to be a game

people

  gravitate to after they become more comfortable with the whole
  gambling arena. Even if most vp playders don't become knowlegable
  about pay-schedules, they will still have a better experience on
  games with better pay-schedules.

  If a casinos vp inventory is far from being 100% utilized, which

is

  my observation of strip casinos, how does it benefit them to beat

you

  out of your money quickly? It's one thing to have a losing

session,

  it really rubs salt into the wound when you feel like you didn't

even

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Albert Pearson" <a-p@s...> wrote:

  ----- Original Message -----
  get a fair amount of play for your loss.

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

#15

I completely agree. My point, however, was that the poor machines will not chase away the uneducated gambler. He will not see a great difference in his play time at the machines if the paytables are improved.

Regards
A.P.

···

----- Original Message -----
  From: jaydavidson118
  To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 7:10 PM
  Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Loosen up Strip casino pay-schedules---help out joe 6 pack

  From the casino's perspective the results are much different, with a
  perhaps thousand joe six packs a day, over the course of a year the
  experience of the two groups would be quite different. Granted some
  visitors will "feel" no improvement, but I would suggest that a
  strong plurality would have a much enhanced experience. Look at it
  this way, using your numbers...and mine...30 extra hands a day per
  Joe, 1,000 Joes a day,(I'm getting that deja vu feeling) 365 days a
  year= 10,950,000 extra hands which include approx 16 dealt royals,
  2,737 dealt 4 of a kinds, plus around 275 extra royals...can you feel
  the happiness? En mass the results are really more dramatic, if you
  up the pay schedule from 98% to 99% as a group, you'll double the
  play of the group for any given bank-roll level e.g. for $100 bank-
  roll I would expect to be able to theoretically play through $5,000
  on a 98% machine and $10,000 on a 99% machine...

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

#16

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "jaydavidson118" <jaydavidson118@y...>
wrote:

From the casino's perspective the results are much different, with a
perhaps thousand joe six packs a day, over the course of a year the
experience of the two groups would be quite different. Granted some
visitors will "feel" no improvement, but I would suggest that a
strong plurality would have a much enhanced experience. Look at it
this way, using your numbers...and mine...30 extra hands a day per
Joe, 1,000 Joes a day,(I'm getting that deja vu feeling) 365 days a
year= 10,950,000 extra hands which include approx 16 dealt royals,
2,737 dealt 4 of a kinds, plus around 275 extra royals...can you feel
the happiness?

I agree with your numbers and believe it would have some positive
effect on 'Joe sixpacks' experience overall.

En mass the results are really more dramatic, if you
up the pay schedule from 98% to 99% as a group, you'll double the
play of the group for any given bank-roll level e.g. for $100 bank-
roll I would expect to be able to theoretically play through $5,000
on a 98% machine and $10,000 on a 99% machine...

are we forgetting that 'joe sixpack' doesnt play perfectly and is
probably playing at 5-10 points below max EV, so changing a game from
98% EV to 99% EV for the average 'joe sixpack' would really be a
change from say 91% to 92%. Still a little better for 'joe', but not
doubling his play. The closer you play to perfect, the more important
the EV and the more important that the EV be as close to or over 100%.

Jim

#17

Here's what the gambling joints in AC have done for Joe and he likes
the concept. In AC with Joker Wild AC style the jackpot comes around
about 4 times as often as a royal on JoB. So the day trippers have a
better chance at going home with some cash. So what if % return is low,
the folks who drive to AC have a good experience when they hit 5 of a
kind. Most people forget the 100s lost most trips and remember the good
days. As the years go by we always talk about the 3 royals or the 3, 5
of a kinds, we got 3 years ago. Believe me, 3 5kds are easier to get
than 3 royals.

Thus, enter the bonus games. Now we call it gambling. No more slow 9/6
jacks. We have bonus aces, kickers, and many other combos. When the
cards flow right one can hit the equivalent, in $$, of 2 or 3 jackpots.
No more waiting 40,000 game cycle. Only problem; you lose 3 times as
fast. Guess what, many locals who used to be pretty good at the basic
games have converted to gambling vp players. They go out in evening and
play for the kickers etc. IF we get a 5 day session of a quad run with
some kickers and sprinkle a royal or two in; the player is hooked, no
matter what the pay schedule is. I believe even "smart" players can be
corrupted by some of the new games. They are exposed to more of those
gambling highs(good sessions) and block the losing sessions out of
their minds.

One more thing, not aimed toward your post. Why do so many of these
folks believe Joe and others who drink sixpacks play vp bad. An
interesting thing; If your a pro live poker or bj player it's one of
the few jobs where it's not frowned on to drink on the job. I guess us
poor vp players have to stay away from the booze.

Cheers....Jeep

···

are we forgetting that 'joe sixpack' doesnt play perfectly and is
probably playing at 5-10 points below max EV, so changing a game from
98% EV to 99% EV for the average 'joe sixpack' would really be a
change from say 91% to 92%. Still a little better for 'joe', but not
doubling his play. The closer you play to perfect, the more important
the EV and the more important that the EV be as close to or over 100%.

Jim

#18

Now here is a point we totally agree on. The Bonus type VP games are
much more 'exciting' for any VP player, especially the uneducated
ones. They can be dealt something that has a good chance to pay a big
'jackpot' and that 'feels' good. We have a bank of 8 9/5 DDB machines
with a progressive, and they are very busy, the other day the RF was
at $17,000 (very unusual) and when it hit most of the players just
kept right on pounding away, most likely oblivious to the fact that
the game just changed from 105% to 98%. I definitly consider the
volitilty of a game, but our pickens here in STL are pretty slim and
you have to play what few decent plays there are, or not play at all.

as far as poor old 'joe sixpack' goes, he isnt any worse the the other
millions of drinking/non drinking VPers out there, just uneducated
about VP and most likely happy that way. Personally I really enjoy a
full bodied/full flavor beer (no light/lite), just not too many while
testing my skill against the VP gods.

Happy Royals
Jim

···

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

Here's what the gambling joints in AC have done for Joe and he likes
the concept. In AC with Joker Wild AC style the jackpot comes around
about 4 times as often as a royal on JoB. So the day trippers have a
better chance at going home with some cash. So what if % return is low,
the folks who drive to AC have a good experience when they hit 5 of a
kind. Most people forget the 100s lost most trips and remember the good
days. As the years go by we always talk about the 3 royals or the 3, 5
of a kinds, we got 3 years ago. Believe me, 3 5kds are easier to get
than 3 royals.

Thus, enter the bonus games. Now we call it gambling. No more slow 9/6
jacks. We have bonus aces, kickers, and many other combos. When the
cards flow right one can hit the equivalent, in $$, of 2 or 3 jackpots.
No more waiting 40,000 game cycle. Only problem; you lose 3 times as
fast. Guess what, many locals who used to be pretty good at the basic
games have converted to gambling vp players. They go out in evening and
play for the kickers etc. IF we get a 5 day session of a quad run with
some kickers and sprinkle a royal or two in; the player is hooked, no
matter what the pay schedule is. I believe even "smart" players can be
corrupted by some of the new games. They are exposed to more of those
gambling highs(good sessions) and block the losing sessions out of
their minds.

One more thing, not aimed toward your post. Why do so many of these
folks believe Joe and others who drink sixpacks play vp bad. An
interesting thing; If your a pro live poker or bj player it's one of
the few jobs where it's not frowned on to drink on the job. I guess us
poor vp players have to stay away from the booze.

Cheers....Jeep