vpFREE2 Forums

Mohegan Sun DW

#1

In a message dated 10/18/06 2:22:20 AM, steviemcc1@yahoo.com writes:

There's nothing good for DW. In my notes I have 10/12/20 at 97.57%,
and 9/15/25 at 98.91% which I believe is in dollars only. You're
better off learning Pick'Em and bringing a cheat sheet with you.

Thanks for your reply. Pardon my ignorance, I am quite new to the world of
video poker. What do the numbers 10/12/20 refer to? Straight, flush, and full
house? And do you recall what the straight flush and five of a kind paid on the
25 cent game? I bought a video poker tutorial software and would like to
plug in the values.

I know 97.57% may sound dismal to some folks, but I live in northern Maine
and all we have is Hollywood Slots in Bangor and their Deuces Wild pays 91.42%!
Now that is dismal!

As for Pick 'Em, I can practice that as well on the tutorial but it seems to
me that there must be a large "luck factor" involved in that game. Am I wrong?

Best wishes,
Cathy B.

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

#2

The luck factor (as you call it) or "variance" (as others may call it) is way smaller in Pick'em
than DW or any other popular VP game. Pick'em's variance is 15, while for full-pay DW it
is 25.8. Another way to look at the "luck factor" is the probability of still playing after a
certain # of hands (This is 100%-RoR = Survivability). Again, Pick'em has a higher
survivability (lower RoR) than even higher EV FP DW (in the short run), and a MUCH,MUCH
higher surriviability than the lower paying variants of DW (always).

···

--- In vpFREE_NewEngland@yahoogroups.com, kitchat123@... wrote:

As for Pick 'Em, I can practice that as well on the tutorial but it seems to
me that there must be a large "luck factor" involved in that game. Am I wrong?

Best wishes,
Cathy B.

#3

Cdfsrule,
A most excellent response. 91% VP in Bangor, Maine, Whoppee.
David T.
haaljo in Boston

--- In vpFREE_NewEngland@yahoogroups.com, "cdfsrule"
<groups.yahoo@...> wrote:

The luck factor (as you call it) or "variance" (as others may call

it) is way smaller in Pick'em

than DW or any other popular VP game. Pick'em's variance is 15,

while for full-pay DW it

is 25.8. Another way to look at the "luck factor" is the

probability of still playing after a

certain # of hands (This is 100%-RoR = Survivability). Again,

Pick'em has a higher

survivability (lower RoR) than even higher EV FP DW (in the short

run), and a MUCH,MUCH

higher surriviability than the lower paying variants of DW

(always).

>
> As for Pick 'Em, I can practice that as well on the tutorial but

it seems to

> me that there must be a large "luck factor" involved in that

game. Am I wrong?

···

--- In vpFREE_NewEngland@yahoogroups.com, kitchat123@ wrote:
>
> Best wishes,
> Cathy B.
>

#4

This is not necessarily true. In the short run, say <500 hands, FPDW
has slightly more survivability than Pick'Em. In fact full-pay JoB
(with both less EV and higher variance) has more survivability than
Pick'Em for several thousand hands. Again I refer to Jazbo's
http://www.jazbo.com/videopoker/halflife.html
Variance is one catch-all number that does not completely describe
everything. Success at Pick'Em requires more money to get over the 4
of a Kind camel hump (avg. every 2360 hands) which contributes a
large % to the return; after that, it's very smooth sailing. You
don't ever have top hit a Royal, which in DBDJ (and other games
somewhat) is absolutely essential. Even a straight flush drought
won't cripple you. I for one was a casualty of the quad, having gone
many cycles without one; that's why a moderate bankroll is still
often required even though it is the lowest variance of VP.

--- In vpFREE_NewEngland@yahoogroups.com, "cdfsrule"
<groups.yahoo@> wrote:
>
> The luck factor (as you call it) or "variance" (as others may

call

it) is way smaller in Pick'em
> than DW or any other popular VP game. Pick'em's variance is

15,

···

while for full-pay DW it
> is 25.8. Another way to look at the "luck factor" is the
probability of still playing after a
> certain # of hands (This is 100%-RoR = Survivability). Again,
Pick'em has a higher
> survivability (lower RoR) than even higher EV FP DW (in the short
run), and a MUCH,MUCH
> higher surriviability than the lower paying variants of DW
(always).

#5

Hey Everybody,
Let's take a VP poll/New England VPFREE members.

I'll go first.
Lifetime number of hands played:
I have played in my 7 year VP "hobby" = 4,000 hands/day x 333 days -
=1,333,000 hands.

Lifetime winnings/losings:
I figure I have won one cent/hand x 4,000 hands/day x 333 days =
=$13,333 over seven years.

Lifetime VP lesson learned:
My winnings are from the "extras" like tournaments and drawings.

haaljo in Boston

···

___________________________________________________________________

--- In vpFREE_NewEngland@yahoogroups.com, "steviemcc1" <steviemcc1@...>
wrote:

This is not necessarily true. In the short run, say <500 hands, FPDW
has slightly more survivability than Pick'Em. In fact full-pay JoB
(with both less EV and higher variance) has more survivability than
Pick'Em for several thousand hands. Again I refer to Jazbo's

#6

How well have you done on tournaments and drawings?

#7

Hmm.. wow, right you are. I guess. It's a good thing (1) I didn't define what the
mysterious short run is, and (2) I didn't claim that "Variance is everything." (What I did try
to say is that surrivability was just 1 of many ways to address the mysterious "luck factor")
But then again, you didn't say I was wrong, but just that "That is not necessarily true"--
that word "necessarily" is a good one. Thanks. Certainly if I had enough money for just 1
bet, and simply wanted the highest probability of not losing that one bet, I'd play Job over
FPDW over Pick'em (assuming I knew how to play them all and was forced to play max-EV
strategy for each). But if I planned to play a game at MS regularly (not defined) with a
moderate bankroll (again not defined), I'd play pick'em over all other choices there at the
$0.25 level. I have MY reasons for this, and they don't depend on variance (per se)

So what should we advise Cathy (assuming she wants our advice)? I'd still tell her to play
pick'em (trying to provoke discussion) since it is probably an easier game to master. But I
am dealing with incomplete information. The surivability curves as a proxy for "luck
factor" (or is it the other way around) aren't particually useful here, since we don't know
what Cathy considers a session (number of hands), only that she has 160-bet session
bankroll. And moreover, we still don't know enough about what she means by "luck
factor" to connect it to real, computable quantities, and the other things she thinks are
important to her ("the boring factor")

···

--- In vpFREE_NewEngland@yahoogroups.com, "steviemcc1" <steviemcc1@...> wrote:

This is not necessarily true. In the short run, say <500 hands, FPDW
has slightly more survivability than Pick'Em. In fact full-pay JoB
(with both less EV and higher variance) has more survivability than
Pick'Em for several thousand hands. Again I refer to Jazbo's
http://www.jazbo.com/videopoker/halflife.html
Variance is one catch-all number that does not completely describe
everything. Success at Pick'Em requires more money to get over the 4
of a Kind camel hump (avg. every 2360 hands) which contributes a
large % to the return; after that, it's very smooth sailing. You
don't ever have top hit a Royal, which in DBDJ (and other games
somewhat) is absolutely essential. Even a straight flush drought
won't cripple you. I for one was a casualty of the quad, having gone
many cycles without one; that's why a moderate bankroll is still
often required even though it is the lowest variance of VP.

> --- In vpFREE_NewEngland@yahoogroups.com, "cdfsrule"
> <groups.yahoo@> wrote:
> >
> > The luck factor (as you call it) or "variance" (as others may
call
> it) is way smaller in Pick'em
> > than DW or any other popular VP game. Pick'em's variance is
15,
> while for full-pay DW it
> > is 25.8. Another way to look at the "luck factor" is the
> probability of still playing after a
> > certain # of hands (This is 100%-RoR = Survivability). Again,
> Pick'em has a higher
> > survivability (lower RoR) than even higher EV FP DW (in the short
> run), and a MUCH,MUCH
> > higher surriviability than the lower paying variants of DW
> (always).

#8

--- In vpFREE_NewEngland@yahoogroups.com, "steviemcc1" <steviemcc1@...>
wrote:

How well have you done on tournaments and drawings?

Stevie,
Have been in 100's of tournaments and drawings.
Between the two of us:

$20K at Foxwoods
$300. at Mohegan Sun :-)(swiping my card)
$13K at Green Valley
$1K at LV Caesars
$1K at Laughlin Golden Nugget
$300. at Colorado Belle
$1K at Laughlin Edgewater
$30K FIRST PLACE at LV Hilton slot tournament.

This does not include things like 100 beanie babies in a big basket,
Cruises to Mexico and other non-cash winnings.
Also, thousands of dollars in bounceback, cashback and gifts but those
are not prizes from contests.

So, two people almost $70K in cash prizes. I know for us it is the
difference between winning and losing over the long run.
haaljo in Boston

#9

Stevie,
Have been in 100's of tournaments and drawings.
Between the two of us:

$20K at Foxwoods
$300. at Mohegan Sun :-)(swiping my card)
$13K at Green Valley
$1K at LV Caesars
$1K at Laughlin Golden Nugget
$300. at Colorado Belle
$1K at Laughlin Edgewater
$30K FIRST PLACE at LV Hilton slot tournament.

This does not include things like 100 beanie babies in a big

basket...

Are you sure you didn't mean 'big beanies in a baby basket'?

Well, I guess that's better than 100 big babies in a beanie basket :slight_smile:

Anyways, I thought you would have done better than $300 at the Sun.

···

--- In vpFREE_NewEngland@yahoogroups.com, "haaljo" <haaljo@...> wrote: