vpFREE2 Forums

Poop Talk -- no royals ever

#1

I continue to hear people say they have played video poker for ten or more
years and never hit a royal. Let's say for discussion purposes this once a week
player plays for two hours or 1000 hands a week. 52,000 hands a year or
520,000 hands a year. Could someone play a half million hand and not hit a royal. I
think that may be possible.
But let's just double it to 4 hours per week or 1,040,000 hands in ten years
with no royal. Is this possible? I believe those who have never hit a royal
greatly over estimate the number of hands they have played.

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

#2

jaycee5353 wrote:

I continue to hear people say they have played video poker for ten or
more years and never hit a royal. Let's say for discussion purposes
this once a week player plays for two hours or 1000 hands a week.
52,000 hands a year or 520,000 hands a year. Could someone play a
half million hand and not hit a royal. I think that may be possible.
But let's just double it to 4 hours per week or 1,040,000 hands in
ten years with no royal. Is this possible? I believe those who have
never hit a royal greatly over estimate the number of hands they
have played.

Because of the pain inflicted by any royal drought I am, indeed,
inclined to figure that people exagerate just how long that pain has
extended.

However, severe drought probabilities are higher than many would expect.

To make the numbers simple, let's talking about a royal cycle of
40,000 hands and a 10 cycle drought (400,000 hands). The probability
that this might occur over the NEXT 400,000 hands is pretty slim, just
.0045% -- in other words, of 20,000 people who start counting with
their first hand tomorrow only one will experience such a drought.

But let's say that a little exaggeration was involved and that we were
instead talking about someone who had just suffered a 7 cycle drought
(280,000 hands). In this case, of those who have just completed 7
cycles of play, a full 1 in 1000 players will have experienced a drought.

That means that for those who travel frequently in casino circles and
interact with groups like these, there's a damned good chance that
they know someone who's just suffered such a drought.

And we're talking about those who have just experienced a 7 cycle
drought. Extend the consideration to those who had suffered a 7 cycle
drought at some point over the course of 16 cycles and I suspect we're
talking just 1 in 100 players (of course, we're talking about a circle
of very avid players now, but still short of the 1 mil. threshold you
had set above).

The point here is, of course, that I'm slow to greatly discount just
about any claim in the casino.

- Harry

#3

Well, anything is possible, but it would be highly unlikely that
anyone could play a million hands and never hit a royal, unless
they're intentionally throwing away royal draws! Even then, in games
using a 52 card deck, a royal gets DEALT once every 649,740 hands on
average.

If someone tells me they've played video poker for ten years without
hitting a royal, my first thought is that they probably don't play
more than a few times a year.

I continue to hear people say they have played video poker for ten

or more

years and never hit a royal. Let's say for discussion purposes this

once a week

player plays for two hours or 1000 hands a week. 52,000 hands a

year or

520,000 hands a year. Could someone play a half million hand and

not hit a royal. I

think that may be possible.
But let's just double it to 4 hours per week or 1,040,000 hands in

ten years

with no royal. Is this possible? I believe those who have never hit

a royal

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, jaycee5353@a... wrote:

greatly over estimate the number of hands they have played.

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

#4

I for one am lost in the math again, At what point would a prudent player
assume that either the machines are gaffed or he is star crossed and throw
in the towel ?

···

-------Original Message-------

From: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Date: 09/10/04 05:00:13
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: Poop Talk -- no royals ever

I continue to hear people say they have played video poker for ten or more
years and never hit a royal. Let's say for discussion purposes this once a
week
player plays for two hours or 1000 hands a week. 52,000 hands a year or
520,000 hands a year. Could someone play a half million hand and not hit a
royal. I
think that may be possible.
But let's just double it to 4 hours per week or 1,040,000 hands in ten years
with no royal. Is this possible? I believe those who have never hit a royal
greatly over estimate the number of hands they have played.

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

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/E0TolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

#5

If my statement that I had never hit a royal in 10 years playing at
Harrah's in KC sparked this discussion I may have misled you. I
didn't mean I had not hit a royal at all in 10 years, I have lots of
them but just not at Harrah's. In fact I hit a fat progressive just
last week in Ameristar and got a double royal on a 5-play a month or
so ago. It's not that I am playing less at Harrah's, I have a Diamond
card based on 25 cent VP so you know that represents a lot of hands.
It's just one of those anomalies that pop up in this game.

Rick

I continue to hear people say they have played video poker for ten

or more

years and never hit a royal. Let's say for discussion purposes this

once a week

player plays for two hours or 1000 hands a week. 52,000 hands a year or
520,000 hands a year. Could someone play a half million hand and not

hit a royal. I

think that may be possible.
But let's just double it to 4 hours per week or 1,040,000 hands in

ten years

with no royal. Is this possible? I believe those who have never hit

a royal

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, jaycee5353@a... wrote:

greatly over estimate the number of hands they have played.

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

#6

probability of never hitting a hand is exp(-cycles):

cycles exp(-cycles)
1 36.7879441%
2 13.5335283%
3 4.9787068%
4 1.8315639%
5 0.6737947%
6 0.2478752%
7 0.0911882%
8 0.0335463%
9 0.0123410%
10 0.0045400%

#7

I feel embarrassed to talk about this, and it is
legit, but I have gotten the otherside of the
distribution. Over the last 5 weeks, I have been dealt
a royal flush three times, playing 3 lines. Twice at
an indian casino in tucson, (Casino del sol) and once
at the Rio in Las Vegas. they were all .25 games ($3
grand each). I've also had my share of regular Royals
(one just 45 minutes before on the same machine in the
Rio). I live in fear the streak is over, I play about
3 times a week, 6 hours a day.

My wife plays about a third as much as I do, but she
has hit a royal only once this year (I was on a break
and she hit on my machine).

So for some reason, we are on the other side of the
curve this year.

What are the odds on this side of the track?

Mark

···

--- Harry Porter <harry.porter@verizon.net> wrote:

Because of the pain inflicted by any royal drought I
am, indeed,
inclined to figure that people exagerate just how
long that pain has
extended.

However, severe drought probabilities are higher
than many would expect.

#8

The exact probability of not hitting a royal in x hands
is
           P(X = x) = (39999/40000)^x

where a^b is a to the power x.
hands probability
40000 0.367874843
80000 0.1353319
120000 0.049785201
160000 0.018314723
200000 0.006737526
240000 0.002478566
280000 0.000911802
320000 0.000335429
360000 0.000123396
400000 4.53943E-05
close to the Poisson approximation that you listed.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nightoftheiguana2000"
<nightoftheiguana2000@y...> wrote:

···

probability of never hitting a hand is exp(-cycles):

cycles exp(-cycles)
1 36.7879441%
2 13.5335283%
3 4.9787068%
4 1.8315639%
5 0.6737947%
6 0.2478752%
7 0.0911882%
8 0.0335463%
9 0.0123410%
10 0.0045400%

#9

poisson is not an approximation
both formulas are exactly correct, the differences are caused by
calculator precision

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rosspark100" <rosspark100@h...> wrote:

The exact probability of not hitting a royal in x hands
is
           P(X = x) = (39999/40000)^x

where a^b is a to the power x.
hands probability
40000 0.367874843
80000 0.1353319
120000 0.049785201
160000 0.018314723
200000 0.006737526
240000 0.002478566
280000 0.000911802
320000 0.000335429
360000 0.000123396
400000 4.53943E-05
close to the Poisson approximation that you listed.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nightoftheiguana2000"
<nightoftheiguana2000@y...> wrote:
> probability of never hitting a hand is exp(-cycles):
>
> cycles exp(-cycles)
> 1 36.7879441%
> 2 13.5335283%
> 3 4.9787068%
> 4 1.8315639%
> 5 0.6737947%
> 6 0.2478752%
> 7 0.0911882%
> 8 0.0335463%
> 9 0.0123410%
> 10 0.0045400%

#10

You are wrong, the poisson is an approximation - avery good one
The Posson uses
exp(-1)= lim (1- 1/n)^n as n approaches infinite......
the exact probability is
(39999/40000)^40000 = (1-1/4000)^40000
these are very close for n=40,000
Dale

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

poisson is not an approximation
both formulas are exactly correct, the differences are caused by
calculator precision

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rosspark100" <rosspark100@h...>

wrote:

···

> The exact probability of not hitting a royal in x hands
> is
> P(X = x) = (39999/40000)^x
>
> where a^b is a to the power x.
> hands probability
> 40000 0.367874843
> 80000 0.1353319
> 120000 0.049785201
> 160000 0.018314723
> 200000 0.006737526
> 240000 0.002478566
> 280000 0.000911802
> 320000 0.000335429
> 360000 0.000123396
> 400000 4.53943E-05
> close to the Poisson approximation that you listed.
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nightoftheiguana2000"
> <nightoftheiguana2000@y...> wrote:
> > probability of never hitting a hand is exp(-cycles):
> >
> > cycles exp(-cycles)
> > 1 36.7879441%
> > 2 13.5335283%
> > 3 4.9787068%
> > 4 1.8315639%
> > 5 0.6737947%
> > 6 0.2478752%
> > 7 0.0911882%
> > 8 0.0335463%
> > 9 0.0123410%
> > 10 0.0045400%

#11

Enjoy it as long as you can. Let the rest of the vp world be
envious. I assure you, that as surely as night follows day,
eventually your luck will turn, and you'll be posting pitiful "cheer-
me-up" messages. I hope it takes a very long time to happen and
that you have a zillion royals to fatten your bankroll by then.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Mark Marsh <butnpushr@y...> wrote:

I feel embarrassed to talk about this, and it is
legit, but I have gotten the otherside of the
distribution. Over the last 5 weeks, I have been dealt
a royal flush three times, playing 3 lines. Twice at
an indian casino in tucson, (Casino del sol) and once
at the Rio in Las Vegas. they were all .25 games ($3
grand each). I've also had my share of regular Royals
(one just 45 minutes before on the same machine in the
Rio). I live in fear the streak is over, I play about
3 times a week, 6 hours a day.

My wife plays about a third as much as I do, but she
has hit a royal only once this year (I was on a break
and she hit on my machine).

So for some reason, we are on the other side of the
curve this year.

What are the odds on this side of the track?

Mark

>>>>>>>Can you say EXTREMELY GOOD LUCK!! Don't be embarrassed.

#12

agreed

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rosspark100" <rosspark100@h...> wrote:

You are wrong, the poisson is an approximation - avery good one
The Posson uses
exp(-1)= lim (1- 1/n)^n as n approaches infinite......
the exact probability is
(39999/40000)^40000 = (1-1/4000)^40000
these are very close for n=40,000
Dale

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nightoftheiguana2000"
<nightoftheiguana2000@y...> wrote:
> poisson is not an approximation
> both formulas are exactly correct, the differences are caused by
> calculator precision
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rosspark100" <rosspark100@h...>
wrote:
> > The exact probability of not hitting a royal in x hands
> > is
> > P(X = x) = (39999/40000)^x
> >
> > where a^b is a to the power x.
> > hands probability
> > 40000 0.367874843
> > 80000 0.1353319
> > 120000 0.049785201
> > 160000 0.018314723
> > 200000 0.006737526
> > 240000 0.002478566
> > 280000 0.000911802
> > 320000 0.000335429
> > 360000 0.000123396
> > 400000 4.53943E-05
> > close to the Poisson approximation that you listed.
> > --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nightoftheiguana2000"
> > <nightoftheiguana2000@y...> wrote:
> > > probability of never hitting a hand is exp(-cycles):
> > >
> > > cycles exp(-cycles)
> > > 1 36.7879441%
> > > 2 13.5335283%
> > > 3 4.9787068%
> > > 4 1.8315639%
> > > 5 0.6737947%
> > > 6 0.2478752%
> > > 7 0.0911882%
> > > 8 0.0335463%
> > > 9 0.0123410%
> > > 10 0.0045400%