Is there any reason to play multiple hands in video poker? Does
it depend a little upon the type of game (wild cards or not)? Do
serious players only play one hand at a time and increase the size of
their bet if they want more dollars at risk? I notice the payoff
schedules sometimes change depending upon the number of hand played.
What is the reason for the house using this tactic? I am interested
in any information or opinions on this subject.
Bob
Bob (futrend) wrote:
Is there any reason to play multiple hands in video poker? Does
it depend a little upon the type of game (wild cards or not)? Do
serious players only play one hand at a time and increase the size
of their bet if they want more dollars at risk? I notice the payoff
schedules sometimes change depending upon the number of hand played.
What is the reason for the house using this tactic?
You raise some very intelligent questions here. I'm going to address
them one at a time in some detail, and I apologize in advance if I
offer up more than what you were looking for or than is helpful 
Is there any reason to play multiple hands in video poker?
The number one reason is simply because it's an interesting and fun
variation on single line play.
There are few more exciting moments than the pause before hitting the
draw button on a 4 to a royal hold in multiplay -- or for that matter,
a dealt 4 of a kind (especially of the bonus kind!). And then there's
the eternal dream of a dealt multiplay royal !!
Do serious players only play one hand at a time and increase the
size of their bet if they want more dollars at risk?
Trust me when I say that serious players have a particular fondness
for some multiplay situations. They can be distinctly advantageous
for a player who's trying to squeeze out every benefit.
If the goal is to increase coin-in for each trip while reducing the
related loss risk, multiplays are a great opportunity. By way of
example (using very round estimates), a player who plays single line
$1 machines, $5 per hand, faces about a 50% greater exposure to losses
than a player who plays same amount of total coin-in on a 4-play $.25
machine (still $5 per hand).
This is because for each dealt hand, the 4-play will smooth out the
expected win on that play. For example, you'll expect to have a wash
out (0 win) much more infrequently in 4-play than in single play,
given the greater number of shots for a win.
For the player who wants to boost their coin in but keep trip risk
moderate, multiplay can be ideal. Plus, many multiplays feature a
progressive payout on the top pays which occasionally present
exceptional jackpot shots.
Having said this, 3-plays present far less opportunity to boost coin
in while reducing risk over single play. Resorting again to round
numbers, a $.25 3-play and a $.50 single play both offer a moderately
paced player around $1600-2000 per hour of coin in. The 3-play has a
higher bet per play, but each play takes longer. And it turns out
that while the loss exposure for 3-play per $ coin in is smaller than
for $.50, the numbers run reasonably close.
So, with 3-plays being the most readily available multiplay in AC,
most players should look to them for play simply because they enjoy
the game format or, in addition, because the progressive meters at a
given time present a very attractive opportunity.
I notice the payoff schedules sometimes change depending upon the
number of hand played.
What is the reason for the house using this tactic?
If you're referring to machines where the paytable increases as the
player selects more hands to play, the rationale is akin to why
machines jump the royal payout when a full 5 coins are played -- it's
done to induce the player to play maximum coin.
A shortfall in the strategy is that the paytables increase with
additional hands whether the player is playing max coin on each hand
or just one.
- Harry
When reading this post, please assume the writer has a direct or
indirect interest in the issues discussed below; nonetheless, all
answers are fact-based.
Is there any reason to play multiple hands in video poker?
A1. Some people like high variance games (think a BIG jackpot
amount), which is the case in the the Moody's Patent (IGT games)
given the covariance between the initial line and subsequent lines.
However, this is not true for Sigma; the Sigma multi-line games does
not have this covariance effect given each hand is
determined "independently" from a basket of 7 cards. Lastly, in the
case of IGT, some people like to have 100 or more shot(s) when dealt
a good starting hand like 3-aces in double bonus structure.
A2. The game can be more challenging because (1) breaking pat hands
need to be revisted under the IGT game as demonstrated with TomSki's
TSI and (2) Sigma's game allows for 10 initial cards, which allows
for greater hand choices. Because of the ten initial cards, Sigma
advises the player the possible winning hands based on which card(s)
to be discarded.
Do serious players only play one hand at a time and increase the
size of their bet if they want more dollars at risk?
A. Generally no if you mean serious players in the sense of
advantage players ("AP"). Typically, AP need to get the action in.
I notice the payoff schedules sometimes change depending upon the
number of hand played. What is the reason for the house using this
tactic? I am interested in any information or opinions on this
subject.
A. I would say the main reason is because of extreme difficulties in
vp to develop a range of the returns, i.e. there is much less
flexibility than slots. Slots have secondary bonus rounds,
multiplers, scatter bonuses, etc, that the manufacturer can use to
determine various game returns. In traditional vp games, the
manufacturer alters returns via straights, flushes, full houses,
quads, etc. Giving a bonus for the RF in max coins mode is just one
way.
I know Sigma gives a Royal Flush consolation prize of say, 1,000
coins (the amount of the actual prize depends on the game), which is
another way to change the return. The way the Sigma bonus works is
that if there is a RF possibilty in the 7-card basket, and you don't
catch at least 1 RF in the 10-lines, then the machine gives you
1,000 coins. I was told this feature while slightly increases the
variance for the game, it materially cuts down on the royal flush
drought. One way of understanding this Sigma's "no royal flush
drought" concept is supposed IGT awarded its players on dealt 4-
cards RF, i.e. a dealt 4-card RF is paid even money if it fails to
convert into a winning hand.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "futrend" <futrend@y...> wrote: