PKremen,
I wanted to comment on the last part of your posting and say that
it is probably an illusion these days that, in your example, the JQAs
would have come up on the draw regardless if you had held the KTs or
the lone Ace.
It is my understanding that, at least with moderately new (and
newer) machines, the cards are being constantly shuffled at a
lightning-fast speed on *both* the deal and draw. If this is true, it
would have been highly unlikely you would have caught the same three
cards if you had held the Ace because the "draw" button would have
been pressed at a different microsecond....
Anyway, congrats on your royal! Always nice to hit 'em
(especially progressives).
Jim
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, pesach kremen <royalflush2222@...>
wrote:
Agree and disagree. Once a play is done, it's done. You are either
the $5200 ahead of one bet behind. No amount of posturing by the math
experts or amateurs or money management players can change past
results. You are correct there.
The math does make a real difference, especially in multi strike.
One unit of a full house on several days play, definitely is
significant thus the math can't really be ignored if you play a lot.
I am sure that if you have a choice of better pay tables, no one would
say no.
As to short and long term, over the years my play at FPDW (rarer now
as it's is being removed most places) is close to the statistical norm.
But if one is playing for fun (of course we all want to win) it does
make best sense to play the games with the lowest house PC's,
especially if you visit and play a lot. But within that, let's have
fun. I chose Lenny's Royal Buster Strategy Article as how to try for
the good hits with minimal cost. As you mentioned no one can play
perfectly although I do admit that some can come pretty close on games
where this is easy to do (FPDW) but extremely difficult on others (DB)
thus a close approximation of play geared towards getting the Royal
loses little in expected value. Of course never make the typical
tourist plays, i.e, in the above example play both the Ace and King
unsuited (except in multistrike to move up to the next row) as this
way you reduce your chances of AAAA and can't get the
Royal. I do know, and have noticed that making the right plays does
make you last longer but minor differences to many decimal points at
the quarter level are meaningless. If one sits down at a progressive
it is to go for the Royal. One must also deal with the psychological
feelings if you make a play and then realize that if you played it the
other way you would of got the Royal. Thus we agree and disagree,
robsinger1111 <robsinger1111@...> wrote:
That's not a play I'd make with an Ace showing (the only correct
Singer-play is to hold the lone Ace in that game) but even if you hit
the $5200 RF you'll get chastised by the so-called math people
saying "That was a very stupid play and you didn't win anything at
all because it really COST you $X, and in the long run you'll end up
losing because of it".
Now you can see how stupid a statement that is yet I get that stuff
all the time, even though my plays that deviate from optimal-strategy
have made me hundreds of thousands of dollars throughout the years.
The problem the gurus and math folks have is they apply long-term
rules to short-term play -- completely contradicting everything else
they say about the game. And worse, they don't see it. Imagine trying
to make sense out of telling a player who just won $5200 that if they
see that hand a million times and always play it that way, they'll
end up in the red! It is, hands down, the main reason I continually
make them look so dumb week after week after week.
BTW--Lenny Frome may have had the math down right, but he told my
book publisher several times (after he gave up video poker) that no
one could ever beat the game playing mathematically perfect because
it can't be done, he couldn't do it, and anyone who says they do it
or it can be done, is a flat-out liar. Ever since I was told that in
2000, he has been my idol. Yet his son, Elliot, remains so misled
about everything in video poker, and you have to wonder if the genes
are the same. Or maybe it'll just take a little while for him to wake
up like his dad finally did.
--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, pesach kremen <royalflush2222@>
wrote:
>
> The Late Lenny Frome in his book about VP Nat'l game of Chance had
one column (this book is composed of his columns) about what he
called the "Royal Buster" strategy. This was where, for a very small
cost, you could increase your chances of a royal. He used examples
that would cost about 1/2 of 1 %. To me this is similar to
progressive strategy modifications. Recently, for example, I had a
situation of K-T suited with an off suit A and XX in a 9/7 DB
progressive. Progressive was at $5200 (reset $4K) - I thought about
it and played K-T. Fortunate Decision!!!
> But how far was I off with this gamble?? I know I will be
chastised if it was the wrong play but was it really that bad?
>
> Note, FWIW, play value to me was 9/7 DB, slot club of 0.3, plus
value from getting stays and meals due my play at this casino.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
Try it now.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
Try it now.
···
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]