Multi Game, Multi Denomination.

[mubowor]

I see from two replies that the idea of trying to catch a higher
paying quad in multi game or multi denomination machines has not met
with much favor.

One objection is that quads come at random. Often hours can go by
quadless, and it can happen too that there can be a rain or shower of
quads at times. This is true, and I have experienced both cases. It
is also true that it can happen quads come almost on the dot every
430 games, give or take a few dozen games. I have experienced this
quite often during hours of play. Of course, before playing, you
can't predict what the particular machine you sit at would do. It is
also true that older machines were more reliable as far as observing
the second mode of providing the gambler with his quads.

The other observation has to do with correct bankroll and strategy. I
agree both are vital, the sine qua non of VP playing, so to speak.

My post had to do with introducing a little variety in the multi game
and/or multi denomination machine playing with the uncertain but by
no means improbable goal of making an evening's session quite
profitable. I know, the other objection is that I suggested changing
from a positive EV game to a negative one with high volatility. It is
a gamble, I suggested doing it for a few number of games, to see if
it worked. Now, this objection would apply to the multi game example.
As far as the multi denomination, if you remain with a game in the
same paytable, then I don't see any objection. If you are playing
quarters, and your credits are up, and you feel a quad is coming,
isn't it better to switch to dollars and get paid more?

I feel people seem to be here wary of adventure. I'm not saying that
is bad, one could jump and fall and regret jumping. I just wonder if
I have explored all the edges and am missing something. Famous
successful gamblers often take risks. I take a dollar's worth of risk
every week with my lotto tickets. This might not ever work, but there
it is. I wonder, though, about good risks in VP that might produce
green moolah and do not take an eternity.

Regards,

E

[eecounter]

>..... It is also true that older machines were more reliable as

far as observing the second mode of providing the gambler with his
quads.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

I'm not sure what you mean by this statement. Are you saying
that "older" VP machines tended to produce quads at more or less
regular predictable intervals - as though they were operating on a
cycle? I find this very difficult to believe, and I think most of
the other posters here would say the same thing. IF this were true,
then these machines would be easy to beat. Just play one coin at a
time until you play close to 400 hands without a quad, then switch to
max. coins and collect your quad within the next few hands. It'd be
nice if it worked this way, but it doesn't.

As far as the multi denomination, if you remain with a game in

the same paytable, then I don't see any objection. If you are playing

quarters, and your credits are up, and you feel a quad is coming,
isn't it better to switch to dollars and get paid more?

Sure. It's always a good strategy to bet big on the hands that you
win. But there's a difference between feeling a quad is coming and
KNOWING that a quad is coming.

Sorry to be so negative about your idea, but people have been trying
to beat casinos with various schemes such as this for years and
years. If they really worked, then the casinos would have all gone
bankrupt a long time ago. Can your idea increase the "fun factor"
and provide more excitement to the game? Yes. Does it increase the
volatility of your results? Yes. Does it improve your expectation?
No.

Unfortunately, there's no nice shortcut to "beating" video poker,
aside from wacking the machine with a big hammer and stealing the
money from inside. The only legal winning strategy that I know of
that really works is to stick to games that provide a reasonably good
edge, play them with near perfection, play at a denomination that
matches your bankroll and gives you a negligible risk of ruin, and
play lots and lots and lots of hands. And even then there are no
absolute guarantees. You always have some risk of ruin (although it
might be very tiny) unless you have an infinite bankroll, but that's
just part of the nature of gambling.

EE

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "mubowor" <erchalb@c...> wrote: