vpFREE2 Forums

Multihand games

#1

I'm new to video poker, so please forgive me if this is a dumb
question. I like multihand games because they're much more exciting
than playing an "easy" game like JoB on a single line machine. And I
also know that speed is an important factor in VP play. Common sense
tells me that I'm much more likely to land that RF or other
high-paying hand in a limited session on a 50 or 100 play machine. But
it also tells me that playing multiple hands with a poor pay table is
simply pissing my money away more quickly.

Walking around two AC casinos recently, I couldn't find any 10, 50 or
100 play machines with pay tables matching the better single or triple
line machines. Is a big boost in the number of hands per hour I can
play accurately a mitigating factor for a lower pay table, or is it
just idiotic to play on such a machine?

#2

I enjoy playing multihand VP JorB too, but refuse to play any
machine less than 6/8 or 5/9 (approx. 1.6% casino favor) as I really
feel you are giving too much % to the casino. I would only play the
6/9 machines if I could find any, but as far as I can tell there
have been no 6/9's here in Council Bluffs, IA for a couple of years
or more. The 50-play and 100-play machines here are terrible odds so
I never touch them.
I have found some 10-play 25-cent (actually MD) 5/9 machines at
Ameristar which have an option of betting a 6th coin for an
occasional multiplier of 2x to 10x. I avoid that like the plague
because I think it is like all the so-called bonus bets in the
casino. To me bonus bets in the casino mean the casino gets an extra
bonus if you take the bet.
I also play only 25-cent machines because when I hit a Royal I do
not have to do the income tax thing.
Hope this helps and would appreciate any feedback.
Thank you.

I'm new to video poker, so please forgive me if this is a dumb
question. I like multihand games because they're much more exciting
than playing an "easy" game like JoB on a single line machine. And

I

also know that speed is an important factor in VP play. Common

sense

tells me that I'm much more likely to land that RF or other
high-paying hand in a limited session on a 50 or 100 play machine.

But

it also tells me that playing multiple hands with a poor pay table

is

simply pissing my money away more quickly.

Walking around two AC casinos recently, I couldn't find any 10, 50

or

100 play machines with pay tables matching the better single or

triple

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Jed Weber" <jed_weber@...> wrote:

line machines. Is a big boost in the number of hands per hour I can
play accurately a mitigating factor for a lower pay table, or is it
just idiotic to play on such a machine?

#3

zzyxx5 wrote:
        I have found some 10-play 25-cent (actually MD) 5/9 machines at
        Ameristar which have an option of betting a 6th coin for an
        occasional multiplier of 2x to 10x. I avoid that like the plague
        because I think it is like all the so-called bonus bets in the
        casino. To me bonus bets in the casino mean the casino gets an extra
        bonus if you take the bet.

Actually, according to wizard of odds, the extra coin on the super times pay machines improves the payout.
http://wizardofodds.com/videopoker/tables/super-times-pay.html

Around here (Colorado) quarter triple plays do have good paytables, but anything with more lines than that is nickles or less and has a bad paytable. That five dollar max bet thing, you know. All the new, fun machines like super times pay, multi-strike or spin poker always have bad tables.

Jon

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

#4

Jon and zzyxx5, thanks for the feedback. I really like the Super Times
Pay machines you mention, because I got lucky on one of those my first
time playing VP in Atlantic City a few months ago. (Actually it was my
second VP experience - the first was years earlier in an illegal VP
parlor in Taiwan which paid out in cartons of Marlboro cigarettes, but
that's another story...) Anyway, I wandered into the Tropicana and
cluelessly started playing a quarter STP machine, when I quickly hit
an RF with the multiplier for a $4000+ payout. This definitely sparked
a further interest in VP! Later I came across Linda Boyd's book in my
local library and learned I had been playing a very low-paying game,
with no strategy to boot, so I had truly been lucky. (By the way, I
found her book to be very informative and extremely helpful, even
though someone had already ripped out the strategy cards...) On my
next trip to AC I knew enough to avoid the STPs and 50/100-hand games
after finding that payouts were typically as low as 7/5 or 6/5 JoB. I
stuck to the 9/6 JoB I found on 25c and $1 singles and 3-lines in
Bally's. (By the way, I hit a $4000 RF again, so I may have a very
unrealistic view of VP. I hope I'm not headed for a painful lesson...)

I don't plan on visiting the Tropicana again, since it seems to be a
VP wasteland outside of a few games in the high-limit room. It's too
bad most casinos don't want to offer decent payouts on more games,
including any STPs, multistrikes, etc. They might not make much off my
VP business (or so I'd like to think!) but I do tend to stick around
and drop some money on other games when I take a break from VP.

JD

zzyxx5 wrote:
     I have found some 10-play 25-cent (actually MD) 5/9 machines at
        Ameristar which have an option of betting a 6th coin for an
        occasional multiplier of 2x to 10x. I avoid that like the plague
        because I think it is like all the so-called bonus bets in the
        casino. To me bonus bets in the casino mean the casino gets an
        extra bonus if you take the bet.

Actually, according to wizard of odds, the extra coin on the super

> times pay machines improves the payout.

http://wizardofodds.com/videopoker/tables/super-times-pay.html

Around here (Colorado) quarter triple plays do have good paytables,

but anything with more lines than that is nickles or less and has a
bad paytable. That five dollar max bet thing, you know. All the new,
fun machines like super times pay, multi-strike or spin poker always
have bad tables.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Holdman" <jon@...> wrote:

Jon

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

#5

What I'm still wondering is whether the number of hands affects the
mathematical odds of the game. For every randomly dealt hand on a
multiline machine, I'm receiving a much higher number of hands whose
odds have presumably been improved by my holds. Besides that, I'd be
running through the RF cycle much more quickly. Is there any
justification for the casino offering somewhat lower paytables on a
50/100 hand game?

JD

#6

What I'm still wondering is whether the number of hands affects the
mathematical odds of the game. For every randomly dealt hand on a
multiline machine, I'm receiving a much higher number of hands whose
odds have presumably been improved by my holds. Besides that, I'd be
running through the RF cycle much more quickly. Is there any
justification for the casino offering somewhat lower paytables on a
50/100 hand game?

JD

We have discussed this before.
1. On standard multi-line games: 3 play/5 play /10 play etc. The number
of hands has no affect on the odds or the correct strategy.

2. Spin Poker: Also no changes in the odds or strategy but since the
draw is coming from one deck there will be greater short term swings
that will balance out over the long run.

3. Super Times Pay: Also no changes in the strategy but if you read the
help screen you can eventually figure out that the multiplier improves
the odds. The normal payback is multiplied by 18.05 and divided by 18
to get the payback for STP. (ex 9-6 jacks goes up from 99.544% to
99.821%)

4. Multi-Strike: Two things work to change the odds here! Free Ride
percentages which are not casino adjustable but are part of the game
program. The importance of advancing to each level makes for some major
strategy changes. (See Bob Dancer's article at lcdgaming.com for more
on this.

···

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

#7

Thanks for the clear statements. My brain was telling me that the
number of standard hands has absolutely no affect on odds, but my
"intuition" couldn't completely shake the notion that 50 or 100
chances to improve on each dealt hand had some mathematical advantage
over one.

That being the case, why do casinos seem to be far more reluctant to
offer payouts on 50/100 hand machines that match their better
single/triple machines (in my limited experience)?

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "howardwstern" <howard.w.stern@...> wrote:

We have discussed this before.
1. On standard multi-line games: 3 play/5 play /10 play etc. The number
of hands has no affect on the odds or the correct strategy.

2. Spin Poker: Also no changes in the odds or strategy but since the
draw is coming from one deck there will be greater short term swings
that will balance out over the long run.

3. Super Times Pay: Also no changes in the strategy but if you read the
help screen you can eventually figure out that the multiplier improves
the odds. The normal payback is multiplied by 18.05 and divided by 18
to get the payback for STP. (ex 9-6 jacks goes up from 99.544% to
99.821%)

4. Multi-Strike: Two things work to change the odds here! Free Ride
percentages which are not casino adjustable but are part of the game
program. The importance of advancing to each level makes for some major
strategy changes. (See Bob Dancer's article at lcdgaming.com for more
on this.
>

#8

<<Thanks for the clear statements. My brain was telling me that the
number of standard hands has absolutely no affect on odds, but my
"intuition" couldn't completely shake the notion that 50 or 100
chances to improve on each dealt hand had some mathematical advantage
over one.

That being the case, why do casinos seem to be far more reluctant to
offer payouts on 50/100 hand machines that match their better
single/triple machines (in my limited experience)? >>

That is a big problem, says Ernie Moody, developer of multi-line. He has asked me several times to try to get the word out to casinos. Most players go to multi-line very under funded. They think they can play quarter Triple or Five Play with the same bankroll as quarter single line. Their money goes so fast even if it has the same paytable. And then it is even worse with lower ones. So they just don't play multi-lines anymore. The casinos are going to get most players session bankroll anyway, but better paytables (not 100% +) would allow players to have more entertainment time.

I have a whole chapter on multi-line games in my latest book, "Frugal Video Poker" - their joys and their dangers. I also give bankroll estimates for various number of lines. I also have another whole chapter on odd-ball games, 21 of them, including SpinPoker, One-Eyed Jacks and Super Times Pay, explaining how they are played and where you can get more information for each one. I dedicate one whole chapter to the ins and outs of Multi-Strike and another to progressives, with special emphasis on how a recreational gambler might want to approach them.

That whole section in the book, "Broadening Your Game Choices," can be especially helpful, both for the beginner and the more experienced VP player. We need all the help we can get in this age of decreasing choices for the VP player who wants higher EVs.

···

________________
Jean $�ott
The new " FRUGAL VIDEO POKER
SCOUTING GUIDE" and other frugal
products are available at my Web site,
http://queenofcomps.com/.

#9

Thanks for the clear statements. My brain was telling me that the
number of standard hands has absolutely no affect on odds, but my
"intuition" couldn't completely shake the notion that 50 or 100
chances to improve on each dealt hand had some mathematical advantage
over one.

That being the case, why do casinos seem to be far more reluctant to
offer payouts on 50/100 hand machines that match their better
single/triple machines (in my limited experience)?

I had a typo in my last reply. The web site for multi-strike is

ledgaming.com.

As to your other question. People absolutely love the multi-hand games
and the vast majority of them have no clue as to the house edge they
are facing or the correct strategies. The casinos can get greedy. In
fact the typical multi-hand player is playing for greater stakes than
they did as a single hand player so the casino will improve it's bottom
line without having to tighten the pay tables but of course the casinos
are looking to sueeze as much profit as possible from every gaming
position.

···

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

> >
>

#10

Viktor and Bettie and Brad and I will be at the Clark County Library (1401 E. Flamingo) on August 29 at 6:30 p.m. I will be speaking and then Viktor and I will field your questions. Books and other gaming products will be available for sale. We will also be glad to sign any books you bring in. There will be a computer there for you to try out the Frugal Video Poker software program.

A reception will follow the Q-and-A session and we will stick around to chat person-to-person. We look forward to seeing old frugal friends and making the acquaintance of new frugalites!

···

________________
Jean $�ott
The new " FRUGAL VIDEO POKER
SCOUTING GUIDE" and other frugal
products are available at my Web site,
http://queenofcomps.com/.

#11

The Wizard of Odds says that a random multiplier will appear on STP approx
every 15 hands.

At Palace Station last week, I put $200 into one of these machines and was
down to $60 before I got the first hand with a multiplier, playing max coins
at the 3-play $0.25 level.

That's $140, or a little over 41 hands.

The thing is, I obviously didn't play 41 straight hands without winning
anything. I was going up and down in terms of credit in the machine, so I
actually played much more than 41 hands without getting a multiplier.

I actually kept looking down to see if I was actually betting all 18
coins...I was, even though I had a hard time believing it!!

I recall similar streaks without multipliers as well that seemed bad, if not
quite so extreme.

So, what gives? Surely this can't be commonplace, but I've never seemed to
have much luck with STP.

#12

<< so I

actually played much more than 41 hands without getting a multiplier.

As Tomski used to frequently say, "Congratulations, you beat the
odds!" I think you addressed your own concern when you refered to it
as a "random multiplier". I believe it falls under the category "If
you play long enough, you will see everything". This includes dealt
royals, royals on the redraw when holding nothing, and I bet even
random multipliers on three consecutive hands of STP to balance out
this occasion when you saw none in approximately 45 consecutive hands.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Nathan O. Roemer" <public@...> wrote:

#13

jd_weber:

> That being the case, why do casinos seem to be far more reluctant
> to offer payouts on 50/100 hand machines that match their better
> single/triple machines (in my limited experience)?
>
> I had a typo in my last reply. The web site for multi-strike is
> ledgaming.com.

howardwstern wrote:

As to your other question. People absolutely love the multi-hand
games and the vast majority of them have no clue as to the house edge
they are facing or the correct strategies. The casinos can get
greedy. In fact the typical multi-hand player is playing for greater
stakes than they did as a single hand player so the casino will
improve it's bottom line without having to tighten the pay tables but
of course the casinos are looking to sueeze as much profit as
possible from every gaming position.

Howard, I imagine you've called this correctly. Casinos might reason
that if multi-line players are relatively indifferent to paytables,
there's no reason to offer anything but the weakest.

But every time I walk by a 100-play machine it's typcially played at
very few lines, generating far less coin-in than would be expected
were the paytables stronger (even 9/5 Jacks would seem a reasonable
stretch to attract players who are moderately paytable conscious. I
might expect this to give a casino reason to consider a stronger paytable.

However, it's occurred to me that there's one other good reason a
casino might wish to steer clear of a very strong paytable --
multi-line games at lower denoms can played at a relatively high wager
per play by players who otherwise often can't manage the bankroll
necessary to play single line play at half the wager per play. The
hazard to the casino is that it now has higher exposure should a
promotion inadvertently make play of the multi-line machine
particularly attractive (given significantly higher total wager per hour).

These are the machines that are prone to being banged on around the
clock at a time when the average $1 machine with the same paytable
evokes passing interest during a decent, but otherwise slimly
advantaged promotion. Given the frequency with which the typical
casino seems to misjudge the value of a promotion, were I a slot
manager I'd be a little gun shy of a multi-line with a strong paytable.

On the other hand, I'm likely giving the average slot manager far too
much credit for aforethought. Any paytable cut is likely an
afterthought -- when they find that a machine is getting a lot of
action, but shockingly little hold.

- Harry

#14

jd_weber:

> That being the case, why do casinos seem to be far more reluctant
> to offer payouts on 50/100 hand machines that match their better
> single/triple machines (in my limited experience)?

Harry and Howard brought up valid points. Another factor is that the
casino must pay IGT (sometimes $25) per machine per day on these
machines. This fee bugs the heck out of some slot directors and they
take it out on the players. The appropriate calculation (to my mind) for
the slot director is if the machines bring in at least $15 a day more in
revenue, they're worth keeping. If they don't, they aren't.

But some slot directors aren't any smarter than some players. When they
write that multi-thousand-dollar check at the end of the month for these
games, it REALLY irritates them. And it affects their judgement.

Also, what pay schedule to offer is as much art as science for the slot
director. Since many do not understand video poker particularly well,
they tend to copy what others have done. And since most casinos offer
worse pay schedules for the Triple Play through Hundred Play games, this
is copied by other casinos.

Another point related to what Harry was talking about is the fear of the
dealt royal. A 25¢ Hundred Play with a good pay schedule will be played
by a lot more people than a $25 single line game with the same pay
schedule. Partly for affordability reasons and partly for fun reasons. A
dealt royal on the first is $100,000, and all royals on the second are
that amount. Unless the casino has a lot of high end play, a $100,000
royal really messes up their monthly totals. Casinos that are afraid of
that tend to make these games less attractive so as to provide the house
with a bigger cushion.

Bob Dancer

For a 3-day free trial of Video Poker for Winners, the best video poker
computer trainer ever invented, go to //www.videopokerforwinners.com

#15

If I was a slot director, I think I would have these machines set so
that there was a minimum number of coins that had to be played. It
seems that the person playing one line with one coin is costing the
casino money. Anyone who has played these machines much has seen this
many times while waiting to get on a machine. A number which comes to
mind for me would be that I might require at least 1/2 a coin per line
(let's hear the comments on how do you play 1/2 a coin) e.g. a minimum
of 25 coins on a 50-play machine, or some other reasonable number.

Harry and Howard brought up valid points. Another factor is that the
casino must pay IGT (sometimes $25) per machine per day on these
machines. This fee bugs the heck out of some slot directors and they
take it out on the players. The appropriate calculation (to my mind)

for

the slot director is if the machines bring in at least $15 a day more

in

···

revenue, they're worth keeping. If they don't, they aren't.

#16

Ozy wrote: If I was a slot director, I think I would have these machines
set so
that there was a minimum number of coins that had to be played. . .

Your point is understandable, and many slot directors would agree, but
this is not a legal option in most jurisdictions. Any game that is
offered must be allowed to be played for one coin.

Bob Dancer

For a 3-day free trial of Video Poker for Winners, the best video poker
computer trainer ever invented, go to //www.videopokerforwinners.com

#17

It is worth mentioning that it is not always the case that multiplays have
poorer paytables than their singleplay counterparts. I have encountered
several instances where the best paytable/game was only placed on multiplay
machines. Sometimes the machine is a higher denomination than I am
comfotable playing a lot of hands on. I'm sure some bigger players are
gnashing their teeth behind me. I have been in their shoes with smaller
players on other multis and sympathize, but I didn't create the situation
and I am there to make the best play with my given bankroll.

Chandler

···

-----Original Message-----
From: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vpF…@…com]On Behalf Of
ozymandias77096
Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2007 7:26 PM
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Multihand games

If I was a slot director, I think I would have these machines set so
that there was a minimum number of coins that had to be played. It
seems that the person playing one line with one coin is costing the
casino money. Anyone who has played these machines much has seen this
many times while waiting to get on a machine. A number which comes to
mind for me would be that I might require at least 1/2 a coin per line
(let's hear the comments on how do you play 1/2 a coin) e.g. a minimum
of 25 coins on a 50-play machine, or some other reasonable number.