vpFREE2 Forums

Remember the good old days?

#1

There's been this kinda long discussion about playing slightly
negative EV games vs. "optimal" ones. Now, I agree with the original
poster's basic premise, which seems to have gotten lost in the
mathematical fog, that playing a 99.5% game (JOB) shouldn't produce
a result significantly worse than playing 100.15% (DB) or for that
matter 100.7% (DW), when playing recreationally, as a visitor. This
is true; if you play quarters for, say, a total of 60 hours a year
(three trips x 20 hours/trip), at a decent speed of 600 hands/hour,
this is coin-in of $45,000. The theoretical EV from these plays for
the three games mentioned above is, respectively, -$225, +$6.75, and
+$315. Not a huge spread after all.

This point was countered by the somewhat silly argument(s) that a
royal drought (in this case not getting the one royal that the
player could "expect") could cause significantly higher losses than
the "theo" loss. Well....duh. That's called "variance:, and don't
forget the flip side, that you could hit TWO royals during this
cycle and wind up substantially ahead.

What I synthesize from this debate is that we are now ALL subject to
the whims of the Royal Fairy. Regardless of what game we play, if we
hit more than our share of royals, we win; less, we lose; exactly
the amount we're "supposed" to get, we hope to get the game's EV.

This didn't used to be the case. Remember when we were all happily
playing those 101%+ games, with double or triple points and coupled
with promos and other goodies that pushed the return into the 102%
range? Then, we expected to break even, even if we NEVER hit a
royal! We just sat back, sipped our free drinks, and waited for our
own personal little ATM machines to cough up that royal so we could
take the rest of the day off and go play golf.

It ain't that way no more. Now, a dwindling number of players chase
down an even faster-dwindling number of opportunities. Players play
breakeven or negative EV games, hoping to claw their way back above
that 100% line via cashback or mailers or promos. Every fews days,
the disfavor of the Royal Fairy strikes down someone who was playing
a THEORETICALLY positive game (or play). WE NO LONGER HAVE ANY
CUSHION. We're in the same positon, essentially, as any uninformed
goob who wanders into Assassination Station, stumbles up to a 97% VP
machine, and sits down: if we hit the royal we win; if we don't we
lose. Period.

Kind of rankles when all this effort has been spent on NEGATING the
slings and arrows of Lady Luck, doesn't it?

#2

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rockofjello333" <rockofjello333@y...>
wrote:

Now, a dwindling number of players chase
down an even faster-dwindling number of opportunities. Players play
breakeven or negative EV games, hoping to claw their way back above
that 100% line via cashback or mailers or promos. Every fews days,
the disfavor of the Royal Fairy strikes down someone who was

playing

a THEORETICALLY positive game (or play). WE NO LONGER HAVE ANY
CUSHION. We're in the same positon, essentially, as any uninformed
goob who wanders into Assassination Station, stumbles up to a 97%

VP

machine, and sits down: if we hit the royal we win; if we don't we
lose. Period.

Also, if you end up getting the "right" number of royals, you may
risk being told "sorry, your play's too good for us". You could have
your points revoked, or barred altogether from a NEGATIVE expectation
game. Remeber the old days when "smart players" were a threat to the
casino's bankroll? Now, casinos will bar players if they don't
make "enough" money off of them!

#3

in this case not getting the one royal that the

player could "expect") could cause significantly higher losses than
the "theo" loss. Well....duh. That's called "variance:, and don't
forget the flip side, that you could hit TWO royals during this
cycle and wind up substantially ahead.

Here's a sad AC story. As we all know AC 9/6 JoB is about as good as
it gets. Got into AC last Thur. Hit a $4000 royal first hour. Had a
good evening. Next morning I hit a $4000 royal on a 3 play White Hot
Aces. Never played game before and dropped a 20 to see how the game
plays. Hit $1200 on 4 aces a little while later. Seemed to play OK to
me. Between Friday morning and Saturday nite I spent the whole $9200
back. Played about $800 back thru the triple play White Hot Aces.
Couldn't get anything, but $$ go fast in that game. Played $1500 thru
9/6 $5. Got very little play at all on fives. Gave my wife $500 and
played $500 on slots (I rarely play, but friends were with us and I
played in a joint play session). Somehow I was able to lose remaining
6 Gs playing 9/6 JoB at dollar level. I didn't get over 3 4 kds in
addition to the 4 aces. It wasn't a pretty picture. Now, thinking of
the good old days, sometime I suspect the new generation of games
somehow play different. I can remember latching onto a hot $1 9/6
and play for hours on a couple rolls of dollars. Can't do that today.
But maybe I remember the good and forget the bad old days.
  

This didn't used to be the case. Remember when we were all happily
playing those 101%+ games, with double or triple points and coupled
with promos and other goodies that pushed the return into the 102%
range? Then, we expected to break even, even if we NEVER hit a
royal! We just sat back, sipped our free drinks, and waited for our
own personal little ATM machines to cough up that royal so we could
take the rest of the day off and go play golf.

In the old days I played Frontier. They gave no CB. We got points and
comps were excellent. My gift points I cashed in for silver dollars
from gift shop. I still have at least a couple hundred of them. The
hotel was nicer then. I would walk to Holiday Inn and Sands through
a big open space where Mirage and TI stand today. My Frontier
mainstay was 2 full pay dollar deuces machines. If bankroll was low
there were also 50 cent and 25 cent deuces. I Played probably 6-8
hours a day. Way more time than needed for good comps. There was
always breaks in between for 6 coin prog if it was up. You are right,
Those were THE GOOD OLD DAYS.

It ain't that way no more. Now, a dwindling number of players chase
down an even faster-dwindling number of opportunities. Players play
breakeven or negative EV games, hoping to claw their way back above
that 100% line via cashback or mailers or promos. Every fews days,
the disfavor of the Royal Fairy strikes down someone who was

playing

a THEORETICALLY positive game (or play). WE NO LONGER HAVE ANY
CUSHION. We're in the same positon, essentially, as any uninformed
goob who wanders into Assassination Station, stumbles up to a 97%

VP

machine, and sits down: if we hit the royal we win; if we don't we
lose. Period.

Kind of rankles when all this effort has been spent on NEGATING the
slings and arrows of Lady Luck, doesn't it?

You are 100% right. We never want to be in position to have to play
for comp, but it seems that way now. It's like the gambling joint
will not take a gamble on the customer. The customer has to guarantee
the gambling joint a loss to the house from the customer. The only
benifit we have is comps to bring us to an almost even play. The only
reason house lets us exist is to keep marginal player. They have to
compete with other casinos to get their share of bad players. The are
forced into having these games. The icing on the cake; the house
makes $$ on marginal players, but house begrudes every penny good
players get in comps.

Gee, I loved the good old days too.....Jeep

#4

As depressing as it is (he says, pulling out his dagger and pressing it
squarely against his heart), I unfortunately must agree with you both, at
least as far as the good-old days on the standard games are concerned (By
the way..., you wouldn't happen to have a bottle of Jack Daniels and some
Billie Holiday albums on-hand, would you?).

Even so, I'm wondering if there aren't maybe some new horizons that have yet
to be conquered, in the form of new game configurations, such as
MultiStrike, etc.? While each game in Multistrike is certainly more
volatile than its single-lined counterpart, do the various possibilities in
payouts at different levels offset that volatility enough to make it a
worthwhile challenge? Maybe there are some alternatives to simply pining
away about those lost good-old days (then again... maybe not).

I haven't personally known anyone yet who has shown MultiStrike to be a
consistently winning proposition and I haven't studied the intricacies of
the Multistrike EVs, but I'd love to hear if anyone has found it to be worth
the extra coinage required to play to the 4th level?

If anyone knows of a resource that might include some valuable information
on the ins-and-outs of Multistrike (besides the original Bob Dancer article
on the LedGaming Multistrike site), or even on any newer game configurations
that might be worth a look, I'd appreciate your letting me know.

Thanks!

EltonRon

···

-----Original Message-----
From: whitejeeps [mailto:whiteje…@…com]
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 9:36 PM
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Remember the good old days?

in this case not getting the one royal that the

player could "expect") could cause significantly higher losses than
the "theo" loss. Well....duh. That's called "variance:, and don't
forget the flip side, that you could hit TWO royals during this
cycle and wind up substantially ahead.

Here's a sad AC story. As we all know AC 9/6 JoB is about as good as
it gets. Got into AC last Thur. Hit a $4000 royal first hour. Had a
good evening. Next morning I hit a $4000 royal on a 3 play White Hot
Aces. Never played game before and dropped a 20 to see how the game
plays. Hit $1200 on 4 aces a little while later. Seemed to play OK to
me. Between Friday morning and Saturday nite I spent the whole $9200
back. Played about $800 back thru the triple play White Hot Aces.
Couldn't get anything, but $$ go fast in that game. Played $1500 thru
9/6 $5. Got very little play at all on fives. Gave my wife $500 and
played $500 on slots (I rarely play, but friends were with us and I
played in a joint play session). Somehow I was able to lose remaining
6 Gs playing 9/6 JoB at dollar level. I didn't get over 3 4 kds in
addition to the 4 aces. It wasn't a pretty picture. Now, thinking of
the good old days, sometime I suspect the new generation of games
somehow play different. I can remember latching onto a hot $1 9/6
and play for hours on a couple rolls of dollars. Can't do that today.
But maybe I remember the good and forget the bad old days.
  

This didn't used to be the case. Remember when we were all happily
playing those 101%+ games, with double or triple points and coupled
with promos and other goodies that pushed the return into the 102%
range? Then, we expected to break even, even if we NEVER hit a
royal! We just sat back, sipped our free drinks, and waited for our
own personal little ATM machines to cough up that royal so we could
take the rest of the day off and go play golf.

In the old days I played Frontier. They gave no CB. We got points and
comps were excellent. My gift points I cashed in for silver dollars
from gift shop. I still have at least a couple hundred of them. The
hotel was nicer then. I would walk to Holiday Inn and Sands through
a big open space where Mirage and TI stand today. My Frontier
mainstay was 2 full pay dollar deuces machines. If bankroll was low
there were also 50 cent and 25 cent deuces. I Played probably 6-8
hours a day. Way more time than needed for good comps. There was
always breaks in between for 6 coin prog if it was up. You are right,
Those were THE GOOD OLD DAYS.

It ain't that way no more. Now, a dwindling number of players chase
down an even faster-dwindling number of opportunities. Players play
breakeven or negative EV games, hoping to claw their way back above
that 100% line via cashback or mailers or promos. Every fews days,
the disfavor of the Royal Fairy strikes down someone who was

playing

a THEORETICALLY positive game (or play). WE NO LONGER HAVE ANY
CUSHION. We're in the same positon, essentially, as any uninformed
goob who wanders into Assassination Station, stumbles up to a 97%

VP

machine, and sits down: if we hit the royal we win; if we don't we
lose. Period.

Kind of rankles when all this effort has been spent on NEGATING the
slings and arrows of Lady Luck, doesn't it?

You are 100% right. We never want to be in position to have to play
for comp, but it seems that way now. It's like the gambling joint
will not take a gamble on the customer. The customer has to guarantee
the gambling joint a loss to the house from the customer. The only
benifit we have is comps to bring us to an almost even play. The only
reason house lets us exist is to keep marginal player. They have to
compete with other casinos to get their share of bad players. The are
forced into having these games. The icing on the cake; the house
makes $$ on marginal players, but house begrudes every penny good
players get in comps.

Gee, I loved the good old days too.....Jeep

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

#5

whitejeeps wrote:

Now, thinking of the good old days, sometime I suspect the new
generation of games somehow play different. I can remember latching
onto a hot $1 9/6 and play for hours on a couple rolls of dollars.
Can't do that today. But maybe I remember the good and forget the
bad old days.

I think you're likely on target in your last sentiment. One factor
may simply be greater speed. In my case between faster machines and
faster play with greater skill level I manage 50% more hands each hour
these days and haven't quite steeled myself for the greater hourly
loss that can bring.

Re Jacks: A little over a year ago I was touting the benefits of
smooth Jacks play to a DB/DDB player. To my chagrin I then suffered a
series of trips during which I had frequent losses in the 5%-8% range
on 12K-20K hands/trip, the latter with wife). I found myself eating
my words.

To my relief, play has smoothed out this year. It's nice to begin to
draw comfort again that a royal one trip won't necessarily be wiped
out by completion of the next ;). And a recent overnighter of 9K
hands found myself truly reminiscing to fond memories of simply
kicking back over Jacks and chilling to the music in the casino. On
$.50 play I was never up over $200 nor down over $300 and ended with a
copaetic loss of $200 that cb/bonus cash covered with a comfortable
margin.

I understand why many find Jacks mind dulling beyond belief. But
having a quiet disposition that becomes rather frenetic under the
frequent stresses of life I crave a casino trip as a chance to get
away from it all and a comfortable extended machine session, when
accompanied by good music and an infrequent drink, affords a rare
chance to indulge in much needed meditation.

The excitement of DB quad Aces, often drained within an hour or two,
never gave me the kick that simply getting 200 credits to last an hour
does :wink:

- Harry

#6

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@v...>
wrote:

I understand why many find Jacks mind dulling beyond belief.

My $.02: For a year, I was one who claimed that JoB was designed
for the cardiac patients since it wasn't too exciting. Lately,
however, I have a real appreciation for games with low volatility
and abundance, especially in 3 and 5 play and on games like Multi-
Strike. I'm probably going to have to change my handle on vpFree.
Is vpjacks taken?

Drew

#7

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@v...>
wrote:
a comfortable extended machine session, when

accompanied by good music and an infrequent drink, affords a rare
chance to indulge in much needed meditation.

Harry, as usual, I agree with everything that you wrote except hey,
c'mon, you gotta admit that there's something to be said for loud
music and frequent drinks!

Slowpoke