vpFREE2 Forums

Proposal of a low-variance VP game.

The wizardofodds states that it's extremely difficult to get a new
game put into a casino. We do however see new incarnations of
classic JOB video poker. Before I waste my time with this, I just
thought I'd throw this out to you first: it's just a basic JOB game
with a different paytable, thereby allowing existing hardware to be
used with minimal changes in software and cosmetics. The purpose is
to create the lowest variance game for avid regular VP players at a %
amenable to both the house and player, especially at the dollar level.

Straight Flush (including royals): 239 (200 at short coin)
Four of a Kind 25
Full House 7
Flush 6
Straight 5
Three of a Kind 3
Two Pairs 2
Jacks or Better 1
                Total Return=99.85%

The lowering of the full house is partially mtigated by raising of
the straight. Royal money is thrown into the straight flush which
allows for almost a five-fold increase. There will be some strategy
variations like playing to inside straights and upping the rank of 3
card SF's but nothing too alien to a JOB player.

The variance is a very low 13.49 which is lower than PKM at 15.01,
JOB at 19.51, JWD at 22.1, and DB at 28.26. But variance is one
catch-all number that does not tell the whole story. The jackpot
cycle in PKM is 352,000 hands. Many will play a million hands in a
lifetime and never get that top prize. (I went over 5 quad cycles
before I got my first quad.) The jackpot cycle in my game (the
straight flush) is a mere 5530 hands -- one good weekend of play. In
other conventional VP games, the royal cycle is about 40,000-50,000
hands and the straight flush cycle in normal JOB is 9150 hands. PKM
was a game designed for high volume VP players who require a good
return and where variance becomes a stumbling block; it is also
perhaps the most boring game around.

Like PKM, 239 in 5 coins yields $1195 in a $1 game which eliminates
the need to wait to get hand-paid and fill out an income tax form.
$1195 is substantially higher than the $250 one receives`in normal
JOB. Also in PKM, where an SF pays the same amount, a player has to
wait 38,500 hands instead of 5530!

This game would be marketed to avid high volume VP players like us;
as opposed to the vacationing tourist. The game could be called "Low-
Variance Poker" which would have more meaning for us. A regular
player truly knows how much of a long-shot getting a royal is
anyways. The lack of a high jackpot would actually be a plus for the
casino because it could be placed near lower paying games with the
higher royal jackpots which would are more attracted by the tourists
and vacationers who do not know better and look for a dream win.

The payback fills the void of the dearth of machines that fall
between 99.7 and 99.9 %. It is clearly better than full-pay JOB at
99.54% yet almost to the level of PKM at 99.95%, however 99.85% will
yield 3 times more profit to the casino for those who play perfect.
It's a managable concession considering it's extremely rare to get a
casino to maintain a positive $1+ game w/o decreasing comps; and even
many casinos like Mohegan Sun got rid of their full-pay $1 PKM's
because they did not yield enough. Yet at 99.85%, the player is at a
high enough % to play for comps and might even play for a
denomination higher given the very low variance and cycle period;
this can be a win/win situation for both the casino and the
discriminating player. High variance hurts the casino as well as the
player when a player has to slow way down or stop playing because of
bankroll limitations. I myself would rather sacrifice .1% point to
play this low-variance low-cycle game over full-pay PKM or JWD where
my bankroll might get busted.

Any thoughts on this paytable game will be appeciated before I show
it to a larger audience.

See $1199 Royal Flushes Poll:

http://members.cox.net/vpfree/P_1199.htm

vpFREE Administrator

···

On 26 Jun 2005 at 0:37, steviemcc1 wrote:

Any thoughts on this paytable game will be appeciated
before I show it to a larger audience.

--- In vpFREE_NewEngland@yahoogroups.com, "steviemcc1"
<steviemcc1@y...> wrote:

The wizardofodds states that it's extremely difficult to get a new
game put into a casino. We do however see new incarnations of
classic JOB video poker. Before I waste my time with this, I just
thought I'd throw this out to you first: it's just a basic JOB

game

with a different paytable, thereby allowing existing hardware to

be

used with minimal changes in software and cosmetics. The purpose

is

to create the lowest variance game for avid regular VP players at

a %

amenable to both the house and player, especially at the dollar

level.

Straight Flush (including royals): 239 (200 at short coin)
Four of a Kind 25
Full House 7
Flush 6
Straight 5
Three of a Kind 3
Two Pairs 2
Jacks or Better 1
                Total Return=99.85%

The lowering of the full house is partially mtigated by raising of
the straight. Royal money is thrown into the straight flush which
allows for almost a five-fold increase. There will be some

strategy

variations like playing to inside straights and upping the rank of

3

card SF's but nothing too alien to a JOB player.

The variance is a very low 13.49 which is lower than PKM at 15.01,
JOB at 19.51, JWD at 22.1, and DB at 28.26. But variance is one
catch-all number that does not tell the whole story. The jackpot
cycle in PKM is 352,000 hands. Many will play a million hands in

a

lifetime and never get that top prize. (I went over 5 quad cycles
before I got my first quad.) The jackpot cycle in my game (the
straight flush) is a mere 5530 hands -- one good weekend of play.

In

other conventional VP games, the royal cycle is about 40,000-

50,000

hands and the straight flush cycle in normal JOB is 9150 hands.

PKM

was a game designed for high volume VP players who require a good
return and where variance becomes a stumbling block; it is also
perhaps the most boring game around.

Like PKM, 239 in 5 coins yields $1195 in a $1 game which

eliminates

the need to wait to get hand-paid and fill out an income tax

form.

$1195 is substantially higher than the $250 one receives`in normal
JOB. Also in PKM, where an SF pays the same amount, a player has

to

wait 38,500 hands instead of 5530!

This game would be marketed to avid high volume VP players like

us;

as opposed to the vacationing tourist. The game could be

called "Low-

Variance Poker" which would have more meaning for us. A regular
player truly knows how much of a long-shot getting a royal is
anyways. The lack of a high jackpot would actually be a plus for

the

casino because it could be placed near lower paying games with the
higher royal jackpots which would are more attracted by the

tourists

and vacationers who do not know better and look for a dream win.

The payback fills the void of the dearth of machines that fall
between 99.7 and 99.9 %. It is clearly better than full-pay JOB

at

99.54% yet almost to the level of PKM at 99.95%, however 99.85%

will

yield 3 times more profit to the casino for those who play

perfect.

It's a managable concession considering it's extremely rare to get

a

casino to maintain a positive $1+ game w/o decreasing comps; and

even

many casinos like Mohegan Sun got rid of their full-pay $1 PKM's
because they did not yield enough. Yet at 99.85%, the player is

at a

high enough % to play for comps and might even play for a
denomination higher given the very low variance and cycle period;
this can be a win/win situation for both the casino and the
discriminating player. High variance hurts the casino as well as

the

player when a player has to slow way down or stop playing because

of

bankroll limitations. I myself would rather sacrifice .1% point

to

play this low-variance low-cycle game over full-pay PKM or JWD

where

my bankroll might get busted.

Any thoughts on this paytable game will be appeciated before I

show

it to a larger audience.

Steve,
I for one would like this game. However, when you consider comps I
don't think casino's will think the same way we do. I have been
staying at the same hotel in Vegas for about 5 years and have met
most of the higher ups and the definite trend is away from higher ev
games. The hotel (Orleans) has .03% cash back so this play is
positive for us and not for them. With double point days the pros
would be out in force and management hates that.
Just my opinion
Mel

Steve,
I for one would like this game. However, when you consider comps I
don't think casino's will think the same way we do. I have been
staying at the same hotel in Vegas for about 5 years and have met
most of the higher ups and the definite trend is away from higher

ev

games. The hotel (Orleans) has .03% cash back so this play is
positive for us and not for them. With double point days the pros
would be out in force and management hates that.
Just my opinion
Mel

Their could be small variations in paytable like other games. This
one yields 99.70% with the same variance (13.5) and also has closer
strategy to normal JOB:
Straight Flush (including royals): 239 (200 at short coin)
Four of a Kind 25
Full House 8
Flush 6
Straight 4
Three of a Kind 3
Two Pairs 2
Jacks or Better 1

Further, this one yields 99.65% with 13.65 variance:
Straight Flush (including royals): 239 (200 at short coin)
Four of a Kind 25
Full House 9
Flush 5
Straight 4
Three of a Kind 3
Two Pairs 2
Jacks or Better 1

After that I don't think we'd want to promote any lower game with
99.54% JOB around. The casino could reduce the 40AK payout to 20
which would reduce the above percentages by ~1.2% where they'd need
it. My purpose was to provide a better replacement to PKM -- one
that would be more fun to play, give slightly more to the house, yet
still be of more value to the player because of the low
variance/cycle.

Steve,
I for one would like this game. However, when you consider comps I
don't think casino's will think the same way we do. I have been
staying at the same hotel in Vegas for about 5 years and have met
most of the higher ups and the definite trend is away from higher

ev

games. The hotel (Orleans) has .03% cash back so this play is
positive for us and not for them. With double point days the pros
would be out in force and management hates that.
Just my opinion
Mel

I just wanted to throw one other paytable at you, that I came up with
before, if you thought the other was too high:

Straight Flush (including royals): 239 (200 at short coin)
Four of a Kind 40
Full House 13
Flush 8
Straight 7
Three of a Kind 3
Two Pairs 2

Total Return=99.64% Variance=17.67 Straight Flush cycle=5700 hands

By throwing away single high pairs which are a push anyways, the
middle hands can become very attracive. It raises the variance some,
but keeps the cycle very low.

--- In vpFREE_NewEngland@yahoogroups.com, "steviemcc1"
<steviemcc1@y...> wrote:

> Steve,
> I for one would like this game. However, when you consider comps

I

> don't think casino's will think the same way we do. I have been
> staying at the same hotel in Vegas for about 5 years and have

met

> most of the higher ups and the definite trend is away from

higher

ev
> games. The hotel (Orleans) has .03% cash back so this play is
> positive for us and not for them. With double point days the

pros

> would be out in force and management hates that.
> Just my opinion
> Mel

I just wanted to throw one other paytable at you, that I came up

with

before, if you thought the other was too high:

Straight Flush (including royals): 239 (200 at short coin)
Four of a Kind 40
Full House 13
Flush 8
Straight 7
Three of a Kind 3
Two Pairs 2

Total Return=99.64% Variance=17.67 Straight Flush cycle=5700 hands

By throwing away single high pairs which are a push anyways, the
middle hands can become very attracive. It raises the variance

some,

but keeps the cycle very low.

Steve,
This is probably more to their liking. Getting casinos to change is
so difficult. They love the status quo but take forever to put in
games with new schedules. There is a new game called pick a pair
(sort of like pickum with other games including dueces) than has not
even been picked up in any casino in Vegas that I am aware of.
Good luck in your venture
Mel