vpFREE2 Forums

Seats added at M

#1

<<There is no need for me to ask. I was already told they have something in the works.

···

From: Frank <frank@progressivevp.com>
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Seats added at M
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, June 29, 2011, 10:47 AM

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
May I presume that "something in the works" does NOT include The M's former FPDW
and FPKBJW machines?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<<Why you would want to play a low return non-progressive over a high return progressive is beyond me, but you are not alone and they know this and are taking steeps to accommodate you and others like you.
~FK
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also presume that you are not referring to the above two games when you mention "low
return non-progressive". If you do, in fact, include those games in your definition, I would
certainly be interested in reading about the basis for your reasoning.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<<P.S. No need to explain your position. I accept that people are different and different people gamble for different reasons.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although "Sai Sai" was the OP who asked about the games that M offered when they
first opened, I completely agree with him. I also don't much care playing on bankroll busting, sub-par paytables, in order to try popping a long shot high EV prog. I don't
accept the notion that feeling as I do, means that I am gambling for any other reason
than to win.

IMO, our position requires less explanation than does yours. I'd appreciate your comments.

Respectfully,

~Babe
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<<--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Sai Sai" <gofastnismo@...> wrote: Hey Frank how about asking them to add some regular full pay machines like they had when they opened. Then I actually would have an excuse to go there and play while dragging gf, family or friends. Right now I just have no desire to go when every other casino in the area, except Silverton, has better games. They need bodies in there. I know the progressives are positive at times but Im not willing to play with those tables. So what about the rest of us?

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

#2

Replies in-line

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, patricia swenson <jackessiebabe@...> wrote: May I presume that "something in the works" does NOT include The M's former FPDW and FPKBJW machines?

FK reply: No I believe NSUD and similar games are in consideration.

···

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

I also presume that you are not referring to the above two games when you mention "low return non-progressive". If you do, in fact, include those games in your definition, I would certainly be interested in reading about the basis for your reasoning.

FK Reply: Yes I am. I have always considered FPDW and FPKBJW to be Low return and I have never played them throughout my 23 year career. I typically don't play anything under a 2% edge unless there are extenuating circumstances. Just my own criteria, not advice.

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

Although "Sai Sai" was the OP who asked about the games that M offered when they first opened, I completely agree with him. I also don't much care playing on bankroll busting, sub-par paytables, in order to try popping a long shot high EV prog. I don't accept the notion that feeling as I do, means that I am gambling for any other reason than to win.

FK Reply: The Royal is part of the pay-table, there is nothing sub-par about machines where you are frequently getting over 12,000 coin Royals. I'm not sure I understand peoples point of view on this. 95% of my lifetime play has been done on high progressives. To me non-progressives are far more risky. The low return eats you away slowly if you run even slightly bad. I know independent pros that did nothing but play $ FPDW back in the day and booked losing years. As a progressive player my only worry was losing months.

In 1996 I ran 2.5% under expectancy and still made good money for the year. Try doing that playing LOW-RETURN non-progressives.

In my opinion you all have this backwards. High progressives are safer than low-return non-progressives. Either that or myself and all the people I know having just been running good for the last two decades.

Of course none of what I just said takes into consideration the recreational aspect of VP. For some, they may not be willing to lose 6 days a week and hit a GIGANTIC Jackpot only once a week. It doesn't fit with their model for a good time.

I do understand this. However, if tying to profit from VP is your primary (or only) goal, progressives are far better and safer than conventional AP...IN MY EXPERIENCE.

Bigger edge = more profit. It's simple math.
____________________________________

IMO, our position requires less explanation than does yours. I'd appreciate your comments.

Respectfully,

~Babe

FK: I hope I answered them. My POV is very different. Sometimes I have a hard time with answering things because I can't understand the questions. I hope that didn't happen this time.

#3

Frank:

What are the variances on the M progressives (or are they a moving target) and what type of bankroll would one need to safely play the 25c and $1.00 progressives.

I know each game will be different, but I'm just trying to get a feel of how big a bankroll would be reasonable say at only 5% chance to go bust or say a 2% chance to go bust or less.

I'm a little rusty on my terminolgy so if I haven't used the correct terminolgy in my questions, sorry.

ST

···

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

Replies in-line

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, patricia swenson <jackessiebabe@> wrote: May I presume that "something in the works" does NOT include The M's former FPDW and FPKBJW machines?

FK reply: No I believe NSUD and similar games are in consideration.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I also presume that you are not referring to the above two games when you mention "low return non-progressive". If you do, in fact, include those games in your definition, I would certainly be interested in reading about the basis for your reasoning.

FK Reply: Yes I am. I have always considered FPDW and FPKBJW to be Low return and I have never played them throughout my 23 year career. I typically don't play anything under a 2% edge unless there are extenuating circumstances. Just my own criteria, not advice.

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

Although "Sai Sai" was the OP who asked about the games that M offered when they first opened, I completely agree with him. I also don't much care playing on bankroll busting, sub-par paytables, in order to try popping a long shot high EV prog. I don't accept the notion that feeling as I do, means that I am gambling for any other reason than to win.

FK Reply: The Royal is part of the pay-table, there is nothing sub-par about machines where you are frequently getting over 12,000 coin Royals. I'm not sure I understand peoples point of view on this. 95% of my lifetime play has been done on high progressives. To me non-progressives are far more risky. The low return eats you away slowly if you run even slightly bad. I know independent pros that did nothing but play $ FPDW back in the day and booked losing years. As a progressive player my only worry was losing months.

In 1996 I ran 2.5% under expectancy and still made good money for the year. Try doing that playing LOW-RETURN non-progressives.

In my opinion you all have this backwards. High progressives are safer than low-return non-progressives. Either that or myself and all the people I know having just been running good for the last two decades.

Of course none of what I just said takes into consideration the recreational aspect of VP. For some, they may not be willing to lose 6 days a week and hit a GIGANTIC Jackpot only once a week. It doesn't fit with their model for a good time.

I do understand this. However, if tying to profit from VP is your primary (or only) goal, progressives are far better and safer than conventional AP...IN MY EXPERIENCE.

Bigger edge = more profit. It's simple math.
____________________________________

IMO, our position requires less explanation than does yours. I'd appreciate your comments.

Respectfully,

~Babe

FK: I hope I answered them. My POV is very different. Sometimes I have a hard time with answering things because I can't understand the questions. I hope that didn't happen this time.

#4

I would be terrified with a 5% chance to go bust. I prefer working in the .1% range. As you say the games are all different, but here's a ballpark BR to give you about a 1 in a 1000 chance of going bust.

Quarters: $20,000
Dollars: $100,000

This assumes you are playing with about a 2.5% edge on quarters and at least a 1.5% edge on dollars.

To have an equally small chance of going bust playing small edge non-progressives the BR requirement is probably larger depending on the specific game.

My acquaintance that used to play $FPDW full time, said he would not have considered it with less than $200,000. And apparently he took a $120,000 down swing once during his career. He also said overall he made very close to expectancy during a 5 year period.

~FK

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "straub4" <straub@...> wrote:Frank:
What are the variances on the M progressives (or are they a moving target) and what type of bankroll would one need to safely play the 25c and $1.00 progressives.

I know each game will be different, but I'm just trying to get a feel of how big a bankroll would be reasonable say at only 5% chance to go bust or say a 2% chance to go bust or less.

I'm a little rusty on my terminolgy so if I haven't used the correct terminolgy in my questions, sorry.

ST

#5

There is a mathematical stat in OpVP (Dan Paymar's Software) that combines variance and return called "Attractiveness Index".

FPDW has an Attractiveness Index of: 145

The M progressives that I have been playing have had Attractiveness Index numbers between 300 & 500. In other words, much better and much safer than FPDW.

You can use any of the modern trainers to give you similar stats. Try running it yourselves using VPW or WVP if you don't own OpVP, I think you'll be surprised. Rather than continuing to muck around with opinion, I'm recommending some self motivated number crunching.

No one is taking my word for anything, so don't. I support that. Do the math yourselves.

~FK

P.S. If you aren't familiar with the math behind risk evaluation, something is terribly wrong. Everyone should know their risk level before walking into a casino and considering gambling.

#6

Hi Frank...love the show and your book but....
I'm not sure I can believe these stats from my experience. You really need to play over 1 million hands of VP to have stats as your new religion. I once lost 15 straight session of $200 at $ 9/6 Jacks or better in Atlantic City. Its not that uncommon - big loses at low EV games. Thats with a modest goal of quitting when I get to $500, or hit a royal. Playing full pay deuces , My worst session was 4 straight $100 loses with a modest goal of doubling my money. There is no way playing the super volitile $1 5/6 super bonus poker with a limited bankroll is safer than playing 25 cent deuces wild with the same limited bankroll. just my 2 cents...Tom

Frank and M management say....

···

"In other words, much better and much safer than FPDW."

#7

Agreed. Between myself and my partners we average over 15,000,000 hands a year. We passed the "new religion" mark a long time ago and I believe we are well into "hard science" territory. A million hands for us is a little over three weeks.

I do applaud your skepticism. For a long time now I have said that if more people questioned more things the world would be a better place.

Cheers,

~FK

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "tomflush" <tomflush@...> wrote: Hi Frank...love the show and your book but....I'm not sure I can believe these stats from my experience. You really need to play over 1 million hands of VP to have stats as your new religion.

#8

I wonder what Frank gets from these machines. The mind reels from this discussion. Some 99+ machines would be nice. I prefer JoB myself.

Saw a lady hit a RF last night holding A/10 : ). Casinos IMHO can put some +99% out. I really do wonder what the casinos hold is on these machines.

I live 2 minutes of santa fe and did not play there til they put in some 9/6 JoB.

#9

Losing a $120k bank playing $FPDW is a 1 in 10 million shot, no?

···

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

My acquaintance that used to play $FPDW full time, said he would not have considered it with less than $200,000. And apparently he took a $120,000 down swing once during his career. He also said overall he made very close to expectancy during a 5 year period.

~FK

#10

He may be discussing the "drop". This is a term often used on table games as
a percentage remaining of the player's investment in a table game that
he/she cashes out. I have actually seen the accounting screen three times on
vp machines (Twice on IGT products and once on a Sigma product.) and the
actual differences were between 3% and 3.75%. I suspect that the players in
the markets I have seen this (Colorado and Illinois) are less savvy than
Vegas locals.

···

From: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vpF…@…com] On Behalf Of
Sai Sai
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 7:20 PM
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Seats added at M

That brings up another subject. Actual hold is never near what is advertised
or mathematically figured especially when the most of the players are
playing less than perfect. I have a friend that was an accountant at a
casino I will not name. He did regular audits on all machines and he said
most were in the 60-80% range over the long term. These were all game king
VP machines that he audited. He also noted that almost all of the end
machines were in the 80% range while the others were much lower. I have
played with this guy for many years and trust his comments. It makes me
wonder sometimes how the casinos claim they dont make any money on VP.

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vpFREE%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"radek2166" <radek2166@...> wrote:

I wonder what Frank gets from these machines. The mind reels from this

discussion. Some 99+ machines would be nice. I prefer JoB myself.

Saw a lady hit a RF last night holding A/10 : ). Casinos IMHO can put some

+99% out. I really do wonder what the casinos hold is on these machines.

I live 2 minutes of santa fe and did not play there til they put in some

9/6 JoB.

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

#11

Wouldn't it take about a $4000 royal on these quarter games to hit 102.5%?
In other word, they would be unplayayable, by your definition, over 99% of the time?

···

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

This assumes you are playing with about a 2.5% edge on quarters and at least a 1.5% edge on dollars.

#12

Doesn't M have a TON of 8-5 BP machines?
Does this not qualify as "Some 99+ machines" or am I missing something?

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "radek2166" <radek2166@...> wrote:

I wonder what Frank gets from these machines. The mind reels from this discussion. Some 99+ machines would be nice. I prefer JoB myself.

Saw a lady hit a RF last night holding A/10 : ). Casinos IMHO can put some +99% out. I really do wonder what the casinos hold is on these machines.

I live 2 minutes of santa fe and did not play there til they put in some 9/6 JoB.

#13

Don't know about that. My good friend dropped like 90K trying to be a "pro" at the dollar FPDW at the Frontier.
He hasn't played a hand of VP since.

···

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

Losing a $120k bank playing $FPDW is a 1 in 10 million shot, no?

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

>
> My acquaintance that used to play $FPDW full time, said he would not have considered it with less than $200,000. And apparently he took a $120,000 down swing once during his career. He also said overall he made very close to expectancy during a 5 year period.
>
> ~FK

#14

I've seen you mention that before. I was just wondering, back in that time, whenever it was, did they have a cashback rate with that? Or any bounceback mailers? I had only been to the Frontier a couple times, and that was when I was pretty young.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "mike" <melbedewy1226@...> wrote:

Don't know about that. My good friend dropped like 90K trying to be a "pro" at the dollar FPDW at the Frontier.
He hasn't played a hand of VP since.

#15

It's quite interesting to see how these eight specific games stack up against each other when the royal is high. They all start in the 96% range at reset, but there is a lot of difference when they get high. If I recall, at least one of them which is lower than another at reset actually becomes higher when at 12000 coins or so. They intersect at some point.

Check it out for yourself on your software. It's very interesting. Off the top of my head I think the 6-5 Bonus Poker is about 102-1/4% at 13000 coins, and I remember the 15-7 Jokers Wild is MUCH lower. Yet they both are 96-3/4% or so at reset.

I know Frank addressed that before. Or at least he spoke about how the Joker game changed as the royal increased. It's all pretty interesting.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "mike" <melbedewy1226@...> wrote:

Wouldn't it take about a $4000 royal on these quarter games to hit 102.5%?

#16

I think they had "something". All I know is like a fool he convinced me to try it out one time and I lost like $600 within a couple of hours.
That's all I needed to see of those machines!
Not coincidentally those machines were almost always empty during my very frequent forays to the Frontier.

···

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

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "mike" <melbedewy1226@> wrote:
>
> Don't know about that. My good friend dropped like 90K trying to be a "pro" at the dollar FPDW at the Frontier.
> He hasn't played a hand of VP since.
>

I've seen you mention that before. I was just wondering, back in that time, whenever it was, did they have a cashback rate with that? Or any bounceback mailers? I had only been to the Frontier a couple times, and that was when I was pretty young.

#17

Well that's more or less correct. It's closer to 70% of the time and my criteria for "a play" is higher than almost anyone I know. These days I won't sit down for less than $60 and hour, unless I have an ulterior motive.

Most consider $20 an hour decent wages. Look at the folks pounding away on FPDW at the Palms. I did my time, back in the day, on similar games, but I didn't get a teeshirt.

Note: Many of the games reach 102.5% in the low $3,000 range if you count cash-back, meter-rise, and mailer. Why is it that everyone seems to forget that all the perks apply to these games that apply to non-progressives and the meter goes up while you play???

~FK

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "mike" <melbedewy1226@...> wrote:

Wouldn't it take about a $4000 royal on these quarter games to hit 102.5%?
In other word, they would be unplayayable, by your definition, over 99% of the time?

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

>
> This assumes you are playing with about a 2.5% edge on quarters and at least a 1.5% edge on dollars.
>
>

#18

"Why is it that everyone seems to forget that all the perks apply to these games that apply to non-progressives and the meter goes up while you play???"

It may be that its hard to forget the beatings of the past. For example, I once lost $5000 over a 5 week period of time, chasing a 103% 8/5 jacks progressive. An old lady walked up to the machine with $40 and hit it, right next to me ! Hey, you gonna play progressives you have to have this montra : no royal = no money !
I perfer lower volatility games that are more bulletproff, where mini jackpots can keep you alive rather than a royal or nothing framework.
best ....Tom

···

----- Original Message ----- From: "Frank" <frank@progressivevp.com>
To: <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2011 2:45 AM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Seats added at M

#19

<<<......Note: Many of the games reach 102.5% in the low $3,000 range if you count cash-back, meter-rise, and mailer. Why is it that everyone seems to forget that all the perks apply to these games that apply to non-progressives and the meter goes up while you play???

~FK

···

From: Frank <frank@progressivevp.com>
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Seats added at M
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, June 30, 2011, 11:45 PM

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps it's because as "everyone" watches the meter rise, they are also watching their bankroll shrink at an alarming rate.

BTW, assuming play on one of the less volatile games, BP (96.87%) what would you suggest as a sensible bankroll to carry, to avoid risk of ruin? That is, if the player is determined to sit at the prog. bank until he, or someone else, hits the royal, on that game.

~Babe

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

#20

First of all, one royal on these machines is not going to set one up on easy street for the remainder of one's life. On the contrary, as soon as you hit one you could easily watch it go right back down the drain, all $3000 of it.

This is really quite an easy thing to prepare oneself for, and assuming that most people on this board already have WinPoker they could easily prepare themselves mentally by doing several high speed simulations. Go ahead and set up WinPoker, and then run a million hands, and watch what happens. And then do it again, and again, and again. You will see that going DOWN 40,000 coins is not that difficult to do. But guess what, at the end of 3 or 4 million hands, you're probably going to be sitting pretty with a very healthy profit. And that's the way it works. There is no way to get around it.

Variance is YOUR FRIEND!

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, patricia swenson <jackessiebabe@...> wrote:

Perhaps it's because as "everyone" watches the meter rise, they are also watching their bankroll shrink at an alarming rate.

BTW, assuming play on one of the less volatile games, BP (96.87%) what would you suggest as a sensible bankroll to carry, to avoid risk of ruin? That is, if the player is determined to sit at the prog. bank until he, or someone else, hits the royal, on that game.