vpFREE2 Forums

New Progressive Video Poker information available

#21

First let me say, I'm not disagreeing with what you said. Your points were valid. It's very hard to say for sure how teams affect casino drop, because there is no way to do controlled studies. It's like attributing the improvement in your headache to taking an aspirin. You can't go back in time and not take the aspirin, to see if the headache would have gone away on its own.

The way we always thought of it was this:

A casino's regular patrons have X number of dollars to lose playing. Depending on what they play, they will lose it quickly or slowly. The station resorts discovered this when they raised the average return of their games by 2% and discovered, much to their surprise, almost no change in their bottom line, but a huge increase in the head count in their casinos. Rather than losing less, the customers just took longer to lose the same.

A team, or progressive pros bring in outside cash the casino would not have gotten otherwise, and add to the total drop. It's extra action. Extra action = extra money.

Also, if you're are talking about the team I ran, our players were well dressed, well behaved, polite and unobtrusive. This was not the case with most of the other teams. I can certainly understand some of the heat they got, as it was well deserved.

The best way for casinos to avoid their regular players from not being able to get seats is have large linked banks of progressives, too large for any team to lock up.

One thing I believe is true, of all they ways people can get an edge in a casino, simply playing when a progressive gets high, is the only method that does not take money directly out of the casinos pocket.

You could make an argument that if it discourages non-professional play, it could have some indirect effect. But it would be just that, an argument. You could also make an argument that seeing pros win, encourages play. I don't think there's anyway to be sure of either.

I'm going to think we, or at least I, helped casinos. I certainly turned in enough over-payers over the years to have offset my winnings and then some. They didn't call me "The Error Corrector" for nothing.

FK

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "vp_wiz" <harry.porter@...> wrote:

vpFREE Administrator wrote:
> I don't believe casinos are, or should be, very concerned
> about the size of video poker progressives since the casino's
> hold is determined by the paytables at reset values. And,
> most progressives have a negative ER at reset and are
> thereby immune from burnout play by pros.
>
> In any event, the sharing of information about good video
> poker opportunities is welcomed and encouraged on vpFREE.
> The publicizing of good plays may be unwelcome to a few, but
> it's in the best interest of vpFREE as a group.

I'm inclined to largely disagree with you on this one on the count of "pro immmunity".

To be clear, the casino hold is a function of the reset paytable plus the advance on the progressive meter. We're in agreement that casino net theo profitability from a player is largely a constant, irrespective of the meter value. As such, pro "burnout" at a high meter shouldn't be a factor.

But it should be self-evident that high meters draw in players and it's to the casino's advantage that the bank not be packed with highly skilled players. To the extent that pro activity crowds out other players at peak periods, the casino definitely comes out on the short end of the stick.

An even more salient point is the satisfaction of the casino's bread and butter players. To the extent that they find themselves crowded out at the most attractive times, sometimes made all the more evident when pros actively engage in conversations and cell phone calls in which they plan play "shifts", the "bread and butter" can become a pretty dissatisfied sort and bitterly bend the ear of casino managers.

In my book, all of this points directly to why pro participation on a progressive bank would be of keen interest to an enlightened management.

As far as the wisdom of publishing high meters, I'll largely keep my peace. This is predominantly a LV issue; not my arena.

But, generally speaking, I can readily see why someone who makes the investment of time and effort to keep their ear to the ground, and foster a network of acquaintances who are willing to share such information, would object to info on plays with limited availability being distributed in a free-wheeling manner, perhaps begging the image of someone slopping the pigs.

As a "recreational" player, I'm not personally terribly concerned about the welfare of pros, since most make clear that it's a dog-eat-dog world. But, in an arena of limited opportunities, there's still room to show consideration for someone who puts in an effort to gain a play advantage vs someone who scavenges for clues haphazardly.

#22

Well first you have the base return of the machine. Then you have the meter-rise adding to that base. On a machine with 98% return and 1% Meter-Rise you would calculate the approximate return as 99%...for the casino.

That's not exactly correct because as the meter gets higher people alter strategy, which has the effect of increasing the hold and hitting the jackpot faster. Hitting the Jackpot faster, makes the average meter amount lower, taking a little off the top of the theoretical return. Making the machines better for the casino overall. FOR THE CASINO!

To you it's a different story. Take the current Jackpot amount and re-run the game on a VP trainer, this will give you the current return without meter-rise. If you intend to play the progressive until it hits, and no one else starts playing after you do, then you can also add in the meter-rise to this current return.

This topic covers three chapter of my book, sorry that was the best I could do here.

"Some say, the secret to financial success is thinking 'outside the box.' I say, thinking inside the box is fine, as long as you sell the box after you're done."

~Frank Kneeland, former manager of the largest Vegas slot team and Author of The Secret World of Video Poker Progressives--A History and How-To of Video Poker Slot Teams in Las Vegas. www.progressivevp.com

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "deuceswild1000" <deuceswild1000@...> wrote:

Would someone be so kind as to explain how the casino's hold is determined on a progressive vp machine

#23

Thanks for the intelligent, thought provoking reply.

Let me get to the crux of the problem. As you highlight, there's no real issue with pro play given an adequate supply of machines such that "bread and butter" play isn't squeezed out.

But, in my experience, where a progressive is juicy enough to attract even a small team, that's rarely the case. So, I'd assert that generally speaking, pro participation is a profit issue (as well as a "bread and butter" player satisfaction issue) for casino management.

I'll tell you what I would see as an ideal solution. In this age of
server based gaming availability, the technology exists to dynamically expand progressive seating. It would be a textbook application of the technology ... although I gather that widespread implementation of server gaming is still a few years off.

- H.

Frank wrote:

···

First let me say, I'm not disagreeing with what you said. Your
points were valid. It's very hard to say for sure how teams affect
casino drop, because there is no way to do controlled studies. It's
like attributing the improvement in your headache to taking an
aspirin. You can't go back in time and not take the aspirin, to see
if the headache would have gone away on its own.

The way we always thought of it was this:

A casino's regular patrons have X number of dollars to lose
playing. Depending on what they play, they will lose it quickly or
slowly. The station resorts discovered this when they raised the
average return of their games by 2% and discovered, much to their
surprise, almost no change in their bottom line, but a huge
increase in the head count in their casinos. Rather than losing
less, the customers just took longer to lose the same.

A team, or progressive pros bring in outside cash the casino would
not have gotten otherwise, and add to the total drop. It's extra
action. Extra action = extra money.

Also, if you're are talking about the team I ran, our players were
well dressed, well behaved, polite and unobtrusive. This was not
the case with most of the other teams. I can certainly understand
some of the heat they got, as it was well deserved.

The best way for casinos to avoid their regular players from not
being able to get seats is have large linked banks of progressives,
too large for any team to lock up.

One thing I believe is true, of all they ways people can get an
edge in a casino, simply playing when a progressive gets high, is
the only method that does not take money directly out of the
casinos pocket.

You could make an argument that if it discourages non-professional
play, it could have some indirect effect. But it would be just
that, an argument. You could also make an argument that seeing pros
win, encourages play. I don't think there's anyway to be sure of
either.

I'm going to think we, or at least I, helped casinos. I certainly
turned in enough over-payers over the years to have offset my
winnings and then some. They didn't call me "The Error Corrector"
for nothing.

#24

IGT's math department is so underrated since they never make "mistakes" like the other vp gaming company. Here's are two current examples of non-IGT manufacturers that can't get the math right for bi-modal vp games:
(A) first game has a computer perfect play of 102.25% but is listed as have a return less than 95%. I've being playing this game for over 9 years and btw the super full-pay version was 105.7% -- and
(B) the second game is from a different manufacturer has a payback of ~109% game. I played the short pay version and stumpled on the 109% verison by accident when searching on the internet. Btw, this game has around for at least 3 years based on posts on various vp message boards!

The good news is that the first game is TomSki-certified (I'm using TomSki's special vp analyzer since he is a freaky vp genius) and the second game is almost TomSki certified. Besides TomSki, I would trust only Jazbo's (along with Jazbo's silent partner) work. Also, please don't make fun of IGT math department since they know how to produce near 100% games (APDW, SA, 9/6-450 JOB, DDB-40, etc) since by law the games must be below 100% in those states, respectively.

As for VP progressives that pay 30 million dollars, IGT already has the patent for it. Trust me on that (hint, hint!!)-- it's a multi-line vp game that has NO COVARIANCE like Moody's N-Play.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nightoftheiguana2000" <nightoftheiguana2000@...> wrote:

I wonder if IGT can be convinced to do some state wide or region wide progressive on video poker or keno like they do now with slots. Sounds like a win-win, the casinos don't have to worry about paying off the big jackpots, and IGT gets to collect some of the drop in exchange. IGT's math department obviously knows how progressives work.

#25

Ha! You're a kid. I figured you were an old geezer like the rest of us. Great to have you aboard VPFree, Frank.

···

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

Thank you for the praise on my book. I can't take credit for the sense of humor. My Dad was a comedy writer for Bob Hope in his early days, and wrote about half the skits for the The Alcoa Hour TV Show. Mom did stand-up. So it runs in the family.

I'm just turning 43 and have been in VP since age 21, making me young and old at the same time.

Here's a pic: https://www.progressivevp.com/about_the_author.php

For the record, I really was a cocktail server at Harvey's in lake Tahoe to facilitate playing the Mountain Bar, a 4.5% progressive. The uniform was a tux.

#26

Harry, you are confused and you like to quibble over things you do not understand. What is SELF-EVIDENT is your lack of understanding of "hold" in this discussion. I checked my slot management textbook and here's the definition of "hold" as it pertains to slots:

"Since slot machines have the capability of providing total coin-in, management is able to calculate the percentage of total wagered that is actually won by the slot. This calculation is called the hold." (source is "Casino Operations Management" written by Jim Kilby and Jim Fox, 1998 edition, page 108.)

In plain English, the hold is the hold -- it's purely a random number since people can hit the jackpot early and the hold is NEGATIVE and if people hit the jackpot late, then the hold is POSITIVE when the hold is measured from jackpot to jackpot, respectively. If people play poorly or play short-coin, the hold will probably be higher (ceteris paribus), etc. What I am saying is that the hold is INDEPEDENT of theo; for video poker games, the industry standard is the hold approaches theo around "10 million" hands. We know to be true because games that have low (or negative) holds are pulled out before the 10 million hand cycle time and thus hold and theo never intersect! Therefore, if you understand the "hold" is determined after the fact(!) and it is a random number (that the actual hold is all over the map and only know after the fact), then the VP administer's arguments are correct**.

Harry, the rest of us consult experts or other reliable sources (here, I used a textbook) when we don't understand something. Harry, why do you always have to quibble???

** When the "holds" are negative, the jackpot was hit early implying the pro's did not play the machines, thus shooting down your argument completely. Recall casinos are inclined to remove games with negative holds; however, the casino is okay with this situation because the negative "holds" occurred on a game with a negative ER. So why take out games where the pros had NO IMPACT!

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "vp_wiz" <harry.porter@...> wrote:

I'm inclined to largely disagree with you on this one on the count of "pro immmunity".

To be clear, the casino hold is a function of the reset paytable plus the advance on the progressive meter. We're in agreement that casino net theo profitability from a player is largely a constant, irrespective of the meter value. As such, pro "burnout" at a high meter shouldn't be a factor.

But it should be self-evident ...

#27

I'm still confused about the need for anyone to put together a team. Seems to me a team is not any more important for progressives than it would be for any other typical good promotion. If some players want to pool their bankrolls, fine. But if a player is used to playing alone and just wants to put in X amount of hours a day playing at a positive expectancy, he can still do so if there are plenty of plays out there. When I get tired, I'm going home. There is no desire for me to try to hit this extra large progressive jackpot. There's always another day. I just want to put in the hours, and make good strategy decisions. Scouting and helping out a couple other friends with information is another matter.

···

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

A team, or progressive pros bring in outside cash the casino would not have gotten otherwise, and add to the total drop. It's extra action. Extra action = extra money.

#28

[Would someone be so kind as to explain how the casino's hold is determined on a progressive vp machine]

Well first you have the base return of the machine. Then you have the meter-rise adding to that base. On a machine with 98% return and 1% Meter-Rise you would calculate the approximate return as 99%...for the casino.

You made the same mistake as Harry and shame on you since you are an "expert." As an expert you are expected to be held to a higher standard than a civilian. Holds are not theos; however, holds may intersect theos.

That's not exactly correct because as the meter gets higher people alter strategy, which has the effect of increasing the hold and hitting the jackpot faster. Hitting the Jackpot faster, makes the average meter amount lower, taking a little off the top of the theoretical return. Making the machines better for the casino overall.

You are very confused on this subject of holds. A high progressive meter implies a positive hold. A hold is really just an accounting term (this is my opinion).

What you meant to write in the previous paragraph is the computer-perfect EV is the computer-perfect EV and to get that EV, you have to alter strategy because the jackpot is dynamic. However, neither the computer-perfect EV nor strategy alterations explain the hold.

In summary, if your book is like your posts, then your book is filled with inaccuracies.

···

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

#29

A kid? I haven't been called that in awhile. I certainly don't feel young. I predate folks like Bob by about 6 years in the biz, so at the very least I'm an old gambler. When talking to friends I use sayings like, "back in my day" and reminisce about the good old days...doesn't that qualify me for old age?

I know, to increase my credibility, I'll get a rocker.

···

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

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Frank" <frank@> wrote:
>
> Thank you for the praise on my book. I can't take credit for the sense of humor. My Dad was a comedy writer for Bob Hope in his early days, and wrote about half the skits for the The Alcoa Hour TV Show. Mom did stand-up. So it runs in the family.
>
> I'm just turning 43 and have been in VP since age 21, making me young and old at the same time.
>
> Here's a pic: https://www.progressivevp.com/about_the_author.php
>
> For the record, I really was a cocktail server at Harvey's in lake Tahoe to facilitate playing the Mountain Bar, a 4.5% progressive. The uniform was a tux.

Ha! You're a kid. I figured you were an old geezer like the rest of us. Great to have you aboard VPFree, Frank.

#30

bobbartop wrote:

I'm still confused about the need for anyone to put together a
team. Seems to me a team is not any more important for progressives
than it would be for any other typical good promotion.

Progressives typically concentrate much more return in infrequent jackpots than most other plays/promotions.

Team play w/ shared bankroll spreads that added risk. Further, to the extent a team monopolizes a bank, the risk of coming away without a successful jackpot hit is reduced. Lastly, as with any play, shared bankroll play can open access to some high denom progressives that are otherwise "playable" only with well-padded bankrolls.

#31

deuceswild1000 wrote:

Would someone be so kind as to explain how the casino's hold is determined on a progressive vp machine

If the progressive jackpot goes up a fixed amount with each hand, it's simple - it's determined the same was as on a non-progressive machine, except that you assume (a) that whatever hand pays out the progressive actually pays out the progressive's starting value, and (b) the machine pays out the gain in the progressive with each play.

If it goes up a fixed amount over a period of time, on the other hand, then the hold is based on the rate of play, and is different from one player to the next (or even for the same player if he/she starts playing faster or slower). Calculate the average amount that the progressive increases with each play, and assume that each play paid off that amount. ("Eventually," it will pay out that amount, albeit all at once.)

For example, if you are on a 25-cent JOB progressive that goes up 5 cents with each 5-credit play (whether because it goes up that amount automatically or the progressive meter just happens to be going at the speed where it would be 5 cents higher after each of your 5-credit plays), calculate the hold under the assumption that all losing hands pay 5 cents, a high pair pays $1.30 (assuming you are playing 5 credits, the normal $1.25 payout plus the extra 5 cents), two pair pays $2.55 (the normal $2.50 plus the extra 5 cents - note that the extra 5 cents is not multiplied, as the progressive does not go up 10 cents instead of 5 just because you got two pair), three of a kind pays $3.80 (the normal $3.75 plus the extra 5 cents), and so on.

#32

"bi-modal vp games"

what does that mean?

#33

There is a theoretical hold and an actual hold. I'm sure Harry and Frank
understand that. I suspect you do too.

I'm not sure how the accountants at the casino handle progressive jackpots.
By Nevada law, that money belongs to the players, so conservative accounting
would consider the money lost at the time it is added to the progressive
meter.

Cogno

···

-----Original Message-----
From: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vpF…@…com] On Behalf Of
fordscks
Sent: Monday, September 6, 2010 7:03 AM
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: New Progressive Video Poker information available

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Frank" <frank@...> wrote:
[Would someone be so kind as to explain how the casino's hold is determined
on a progressive vp machine]

Well first you have the base return of the machine. Then you have the

meter-rise adding to that base. On a machine with 98% return and 1%
Meter-Rise you would calculate the approximate return as 99%...for the
casino.

You made the same mistake as Harry and shame on you since you are an
"expert." As an expert you are expected to be held to a higher standard
than a civilian. Holds are not theos; however, holds may intersect theos.

That's not exactly correct because as the meter gets higher people alter

strategy, which has the effect of increasing the hold and hitting the
jackpot faster. Hitting the Jackpot faster, makes the average meter amount
lower, taking a little off the top of the theoretical return. Making the
machines better for the casino overall.

You are very confused on this subject of holds. A high progressive meter
implies a positive hold. A hold is really just an accounting term (this is
my opinion).

What you meant to write in the previous paragraph is the computer-perfect EV
is the computer-perfect EV and to get that EV, you have to alter strategy
because the jackpot is dynamic. However, neither the computer-perfect EV
nor strategy alterations explain the hold.

In summary, if your book is like your posts, then your book is filled with
inaccuracies.

------------------------------------

vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm

Yahoo! Groups Links

#34

I believe we are saying almost the same thing, but I'm not sure. I hope this email clears up everything. This was exciting, my very first negative post reply. I think you'll find I take constructive criticism very well. And your comments, I believe, are indeed constructive, if for no other reason than to shed light on the differences in pro/non-pro/ and "Team" nomenclature.

(You wrote: You made the same mistake as Harry and shame on you since you are an "expert." As an expert you are expected to be held to a higher standard than a civilian.
Holds are not theos; however, holds may intersect theos.)

Well actually "experts" tend to teach or share knowledge. I come from 22 years of living in a microcosm of professional gamblers that talk to no one, and horde their knowledge like blood. I would like to become an "expert" and be able to share what I know with others. I am absurdly experienced with this topic, but to become a true "expert" I must be able to impart my knowledge to others. There are differences in terminology used inside and outside of the teams. So I'm going to need folks like you to point out the differences. When editing my book Dan Paymar fixed these sorts of foibles. I'm afraid I don't have Dan to edit my posts at the moment, as he is busily working on the new version of OpVP.

The poster asked how to calculate the "casino's hold" and I gave them the way to calculate the return of the game...assuming they knew how to convert it. That is a rookie error...assuming. It always gets you in trouble. Thank you for elaborating on this. I should remember, not everyone reading these posts would know stuff like that. The hold is obviously 100% less the return. Or at least that's how we used the term.

On a 99% return game the casino's hold would be 1%. I do explain our usage of the term "hold" in detail in the book, there simply isn't space in an email to go into everything and include a glossary.

(Also you said, "You are very confused on this subject of holds. A high progressive meter implies a positive hold. A hold is really just an accounting term (this is my opinion).")

I think the source of this confusion is just your understanding of how we used the term "holds" in the progressive teams. I'm not saying our way was right or wrong, I'm just explaining how we did it.

We would say that "The Hold" is what the casino keeps for itself. This is expressed in our system as a positive number. A 2% hold means a machine is a 2% loser for the player. On high progressives that were in the players favor, the hold was negative. However, no one ever talked about negative holds. We used instead the term, "overlay".

Also, in the teams, when we talk about the hold of the game, we discounted the Jackpot. I forget that this is not the common practice. Keep in mind, we only played progressives and nothing else, so our terminology reflected this. Again I explain this in the book, but its large and I just don't type that fast. To tell the truth, we never used percentage return or holds much in our discussions of VP games and almost exclusively used costs. When referring to a 5/8 JoB we called the cost $9600, with no more explanation. And this number had errors and wages for the players factored in. However, only ex-team team personnel would know that. Or now, someone that had read my book, or this post.

I will be careful to try to use non-team terminology in the future ,or explain it better if I do. Thank you for catching this, and bringing it to my attention. I've been so sequestered in the progressive team world I have next to no idea how normal gamblers talk.

(Next you wrote, "What you meant to write in the previous paragraph is the computer-perfect EV is the computer-perfect EV and to get that EV, you have to alter strategy because the jackpot is dynamic. However, neither the computer-perfect EV nor strategy alterations explain the hold.)

WHOOPS, NO THAT'S NOT WHAT I WAS SAYING AT ALL. And for the record, there is no computer program that tells you how to play perfectly on a progressive, so it is not possible to play "computer-perfect"...Yet...

Here's what I was saying, hopefully better worded. Honestly, it's too complicated a topic to explain in a post. It takes up an entire chapter of my book. But I'll try:

When you bend strategy to hit a high Jackpot you increase the cost per hand while shortening the time it takes to hit the jackpot. The "cost" is the return without the jackpot factored in. If you intend to leave when the jackpot gets hit, then you end up making more per hand, but over a much shorter period of time. This actually reduces your overall profit on the play. It is the age old argument between hourly earn and total earn. But this is not a complete statement!

A complete explanation of all this is covered in the chapter "Is That a Calculator in Your Pocket or are You Just Happy to See me". And this particular point is given attention in the subheading, "Zen and the Art of Preserving Play Time" and "Opportunity Cost".

(Lastly you wrote, In summary, if your book is like your posts, then your book is filled with
inaccuracies.)

Well I didn't put any in on purpose, I promise. I think it's just terminology differences. Like many professions, progressives have some terms that are unique in their usage to that field. I have tried to explain them in detail. Sorry for the confusion.

At least I didn't do a Clinton and say, "that depends on what your definition of is, is?"

Oh and what's a "theos"? I have never heard the term.

FK

Sometimes, only in the shadow of criticism, does ignorance wither.

#35

I assert that casinos do not do as well with a pro team playing than without.

In my experience when A progressive gets good it gets busy with players.
It seems obvious to me that if those playing are not experts the casino will make more money than if experts are playing. The non experts will probably lose more money trying to win the progressive than the experts will lose in the same pursuit.
I base this on the assumption that good play will lose less money than poor play.
I have seen enough players banging away on multi game progressives playing the worst game available rather than a better game on the machine to feel very cofident in my assertion that casinos do not do as well with pro teams playing as they do with the regular casino customers.

Regards

A.P.

···

--- On Mon, 9/6/10, Frank <frank@progressivevp.com> wrote:

From: Frank <frank@progressivevp.com>
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: New Progressive Video Poker information available
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, September 6, 2010, 4:57 AM

First let me say, I'm not disagreeing with what you said. Your points were valid. It's very hard to say for sure how teams affect casino drop, because there is no way to do controlled studies. It's like attributing the improvement in your headache to taking an aspirin. You can't go back in time and not take the aspirin, to see if the headache would have gone away on its own.

The way we always thought of it was this:

A casino's regular patrons have X number of dollars to lose playing. Depending on what they play, they will lose it quickly or slowly. The station resorts discovered this when they raised the average return of their games by 2% and discovered, much to their surprise, almost no change in their bottom line, but a huge increase in the head count in their casinos. Rather than losing less, the customers just took longer to lose the same.

A team, or progressive pros bring in outside cash the casino would not have gotten otherwise, and add to the total drop. It's extra action. Extra action = extra money.

Also, if you're are talking about the team I ran, our players were well dressed, well behaved, polite and unobtrusive. This was not the case with most of the other teams. I can certainly understand some of the heat they got, as it was well deserved.

The best way for casinos to avoid their regular players from not being able to get seats is have large linked banks of progressives, too large for any team to lock up.

One thing I believe is true, of all they ways people can get an edge in a casino, simply playing when a progressive gets high, is the only method that does not take money directly out of the casinos pocket.

You could make an argument that if it discourages non-professional play, it could have some indirect effect. But it would be just that, an argument. You could also make an argument that seeing pros win, encourages play. I don't think there's anyway to be sure of either.

I'm going to think we, or at least I, helped casinos. I certainly turned in enough over-payers over the years to have offset my winnings and then some. They didn't call me "The Error Corrector" for nothing.

FK

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

#36

If everything in this email is general consensus, then it diverges greatly from how the teams and other progressive pros I know think of hold. I'm not in anyway disagreeing with this email. Just letting you know there is a large (albeit quiet) slice of the community out there that uses this term differently.

To us the hold of a game never changes, unless the casino alters the pay-table or increases the meter-rise. The return can change if the jackpot is up. But we don't use hold and return interchangeably. We also don't use the term "theo", which I am still not familiar with.

Once again I'm not disagreeing, just trying to make sure we are all on the same page when talking. I was not aware, until joining this forum that there were any other uses of the common terms I'd been using for 22 years. It's been an eye opener and a real surprise to see how different the general publics knowledge of VP, and the teams knowledge are so different, yet obviously cut from the same cloth.

And here I thought I'd be doing all the teaching.

~To know where you are going, you must first know where you are.

FK

···

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

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "vp_wiz" <harry.porter@> wrote:
> I'm inclined to largely disagree with you on this one on the count of "pro immmunity".
>
> To be clear, the casino hold is a function of the reset paytable plus the advance on the progressive meter. We're in agreement that casino net theo profitability from a player is largely a constant, irrespective of the meter value. As such, pro "burnout" at a high meter shouldn't be a factor.
>
> But it should be self-evident ...

Harry, you are confused and you like to quibble over things you do not understand. What is SELF-EVIDENT is your lack of understanding of "hold" in this discussion. I checked my slot management textbook and here's the definition of "hold" as it pertains to slots:

"Since slot machines have the capability of providing total coin-in, management is able to calculate the percentage of total wagered that is actually won by the slot. This calculation is called the hold." (source is "Casino Operations Management" written by Jim Kilby and Jim Fox, 1998 edition, page 108.)

In plain English, the hold is the hold -- it's purely a random number since people can hit the jackpot early and the hold is NEGATIVE and if people hit the jackpot late, then the hold is POSITIVE when the hold is measured from jackpot to jackpot, respectively. If people play poorly or play short-coin, the hold will probably be higher (ceteris paribus), etc. What I am saying is that the hold is INDEPEDENT of theo; for video poker games, the industry standard is the hold approaches theo around "10 million" hands. We know to be true because games that have low (or negative) holds are pulled out before the 10 million hand cycle time and thus hold and theo never intersect! Therefore, if you understand the "hold" is determined after the fact(!) and it is a random number (that the actual hold is all over the map and only know after the fact), then the VP administer's arguments are correct**.

Harry, the rest of us consult experts or other reliable sources (here, I used a textbook) when we don't understand something. Harry, why do you always have to quibble???

** When the "holds" are negative, the jackpot was hit early implying the pro's did not play the machines, thus shooting down your argument completely. Recall casinos are inclined to remove games with negative holds; however, the casino is okay with this situation because the negative "holds" occurred on a game with a negative ER. So why take out games where the pros had NO IMPACT!

#37

Well I'm guessing you haven't read my book, or you would know that playing progressives in anything but a team, is far less profitable. It is possible to play solo, but you lose about 80% of the value. I offer all the math to explain this assumption.

Part of the problem is scouting. It takes roughly 90 man hours a week to properly scout all the progressives in and around town. If you were doing this for yourself, you wouldn't have any time to play. If you did pay the 90 hours of labor a week to a scout or scouts, you'd have to have enough people on staff to play the found progressives to offset the scouting costs. Each player nets you the fraction of the the value of the play divided by the number of seats. On a bank on 10 machines you'd need 5 players to capture half of the total value of the found progressive.

You'd need a minimum of about 6 players just to break-even on scouting.

I offer several solutions to this and the other problems associated with progressive play in the book.

It is said that a leaf honors the tree, yet when it falls the tree trembles.

~Frank Kneeland, former manager of the largest Vegas slot team and Author of The Secret World of Video Poker Progressives--A History and How-To of Video Poker Slot Teams in Las Vegas. www.progressivevp.com

···

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

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

>
> A team, or progressive pros bring in outside cash the casino would not have gotten otherwise, and add to the total drop. It's extra action. Extra action = extra money.
>

I'm still confused about the need for anyone to put together a team. Seems to me a team is not any more important for progressives than it would be for any other typical good promotion. If some players want to pool their bankrolls, fine. But if a player is used to playing alone and just wants to put in X amount of hours a day playing at a positive expectancy, he can still do so if there are plenty of plays out there. When I get tired, I'm going home. There is no desire for me to try to hit this extra large progressive jackpot. There's always another day. I just want to put in the hours, and make good strategy decisions. Scouting and helping out a couple other friends with information is another matter.

#38

And you know Station raised their returns 2% how? 2% or 200 basis points by the way - their video poker has shown no improvement

···

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

First let me say, I'm not disagreeing with what you said. Your points were valid. It's very hard to say for sure how teams affect casino drop, because there is no way to do controlled studies. It's like attributing the improvement in your headache to taking an aspirin. You can't go back in time and not take the aspirin, to see if the headache would have gone away on its own.

The way we always thought of it was this:

A casino's regular patrons have X number of dollars to lose playing. Depending on what they play, they will lose it quickly or slowly. The station resorts discovered this when they raised the average return of their games by 2% and discovered, much to their surprise, almost no change in their bottom line, but a huge increase in the head count in their casinos. Rather than losing less, the customers just took longer to lose the same.

A team, or progressive pros bring in outside cash the casino would not have gotten otherwise, and add to the total drop. It's extra action. Extra action = extra money.

Also, if you're are talking about the team I ran, our players were well dressed, well behaved, polite and unobtrusive. This was not the case with most of the other teams. I can certainly understand some of the heat they got, as it was well deserved.

The best way for casinos to avoid their regular players from not being able to get seats is have large linked banks of progressives, too large for any team to lock up.

One thing I believe is true, of all they ways people can get an edge in a casino, simply playing when a progressive gets high, is the only method that does not take money directly out of the casinos pocket.

You could make an argument that if it discourages non-professional play, it could have some indirect effect. But it would be just that, an argument. You could also make an argument that seeing pros win, encourages play. I don't think there's anyway to be sure of either.

I'm going to think we, or at least I, helped casinos. I certainly turned in enough over-payers over the years to have offset my winnings and then some. They didn't call me "The Error Corrector" for nothing.

FK

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "vp_wiz" <harry.porter@> wrote:
>
> vpFREE Administrator wrote:
> > I don't believe casinos are, or should be, very concerned
> > about the size of video poker progressives since the casino's
> > hold is determined by the paytables at reset values. And,
> > most progressives have a negative ER at reset and are
> > thereby immune from burnout play by pros.
> >
> > In any event, the sharing of information about good video
> > poker opportunities is welcomed and encouraged on vpFREE.
> > The publicizing of good plays may be unwelcome to a few, but
> > it's in the best interest of vpFREE as a group.
>
>
> I'm inclined to largely disagree with you on this one on the count of "pro immmunity".
>
> To be clear, the casino hold is a function of the reset paytable plus the advance on the progressive meter. We're in agreement that casino net theo profitability from a player is largely a constant, irrespective of the meter value. As such, pro "burnout" at a high meter shouldn't be a factor.
>
> But it should be self-evident that high meters draw in players and it's to the casino's advantage that the bank not be packed with highly skilled players. To the extent that pro activity crowds out other players at peak periods, the casino definitely comes out on the short end of the stick.
>
> An even more salient point is the satisfaction of the casino's bread and butter players. To the extent that they find themselves crowded out at the most attractive times, sometimes made all the more evident when pros actively engage in conversations and cell phone calls in which they plan play "shifts", the "bread and butter" can become a pretty dissatisfied sort and bitterly bend the ear of casino managers.
>
> In my book, all of this points directly to why pro participation on a progressive bank would be of keen interest to an enlightened management.
>
> As far as the wisdom of publishing high meters, I'll largely keep my peace. This is predominantly a LV issue; not my arena.
>
> But, generally speaking, I can readily see why someone who makes the investment of time and effort to keep their ear to the ground, and foster a network of acquaintances who are willing to share such information, would object to info on plays with limited availability being distributed in a free-wheeling manner, perhaps begging the image of someone slopping the pigs.
>
> As a "recreational" player, I'm not personally terribly concerned about the welfare of pros, since most make clear that it's a dog-eat-dog world. But, in an arena of limited opportunities, there's still room to show consideration for someone who puts in an effort to gain a play advantage vs someone who scavenges for clues haphazardly.
>

#39

Frank wrote:

If everything in this email is general consensus, then it diverges
greatly from how the teams and other progressive pros I know think
of hold. I'm not in anyway disagreeing with this email. Just
letting you know there is a large (albeit quiet) slice of the
community out there that uses this term differently.

I'll attempt to clarify my use of the term "hold". My assertion is that concentrated play by pro teams of a progressive bank weakens casino "hold" ... i.e., the profit a casino expects to retain over a given period. (Casino "win" may be a preferred term here.)

Fill a bank with ploppies and you expect the casino will win more than when a team of pros monopolizes it.

Again, I'll assert that so long as there's no contention for seats, pro participation isn't an issue. But that tends to be the exception at high meters.

I'm using the term loosely and if some other term better suits than "hold", that's fine. It's the argument itself that's key.

- H.

#40

Good reply to the question BTW. Everything you said was spot on.

Let me chime in with just a little more info, learned the hard way. As an independent playing flattops, getting free-play, and sucking down the occasional promotion, I lose most days. I only make any real money once or twice a week when I hit an RF or luck out and beat the drop.

When I ran the team with 88 players, we never had a losing week, and made money about 5 out of 6 times we left our houses. It was not uncommon to turn a profit 28 out of the 31 days in a month. Think...printing money.

If you are used to team-play there is no substitute. Risk, fluctuation and stress fall to the wayside, like sparrows in the path of a 747.

Even when I was a quasi-independent with only a couple of partners, I only logged 3 losing months in 9 years...Playing high progressives exclusively.

The problem most people seem to have is they equate playing VP with sitting down at a machine and actually playing a machine. When I think of VP, I think of about a week of driving around in my car (listening to RUSH and Jethro Tull) punctuated by a brutal long play-session ending in media worthy triumph.

I have gone as long as a week and a half without putting a coin in a machine, played only once in that month, and still cleared 5 figures for that same month.

It is a totally different business model and lifestyle. We called being a progressive player being "at the mercy of the meters" and playing non-progressives as being, "back on the chain gang".

FK

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "vp_wiz" <harry.porter@...> wrote:

bobbartop wrote:
> I'm still confused about the need for anyone to put together a
> team. Seems to me a team is not any more important for progressives
> than it would be for any other typical good promotion.

Progressives typically concentrate much more return in infrequent jackpots than most other plays/promotions.

Team play w/ shared bankroll spreads that added risk. Further, to the extent a team monopolizes a bank, the risk of coming away without a successful jackpot hit is reduced. Lastly, as with any play, shared bankroll play can open access to some high denom progressives that are otherwise "playable" only with well-padded bankrolls.