I've read so much on the importance of playing full pay machines.
Where I play at Seneca Niagara the best we have is 8/5 JOB and 7/5 BP
with only 1 8/5 BP in $.25 denomination and a few 8/5 BPs in $.50 and
$1.00. You can sit on these quarter machines and lose $100 in 30
minutes and have at the most 2 Full houses and a couple of Flushes.
Since the only difference between the full pay and short machines is
the FH and FL how does getting an extra 20 credits in this time frame
make such a big deal? Losing $95 as compared to $100 is supposed to
be a big advantage?
It seems you have a better chance of playing 9/5 DB and going for the
quads.
I have had 3 RFs in the last 6 weeks on BP but most nights are just
horrible.
I've only been playing for about a year and only at Seneca Niagara
and Casino Niagara in Canada.
Is this normal or are these machines that bad?
I practice on Frugal VP with these pay scales and consistantly play
at 99.5% and higher accuracy so I know it isn't that i'm playing the
machines wrong
Short pay vs. Full pay
I've read so much on the importance of playing full pay machines.
Where I play at Seneca Niagara the best we have is 8/5 JOB and 7/5
BP
with only 1 8/5 BP in $.25 denomination and a few 8/5 BPs in $.50
and
$1.00. You can sit on these quarter machines and lose $100 in 30
minutes and have at the most 2 Full houses and a couple of
Flushes.
Since the only difference between the full pay and short machines
is
the FH and FL how does getting an extra 20 credits in this time
frame
make such a big deal? Losing $95 as compared to $100 is supposed
to
be a big advantage?
It seems you have a better chance of playing 9/5 DB and going for
the
quads.
I have had 3 RFs in the last 6 weeks on BP but most nights are
just
horrible.
I've only been playing for about a year and only at Seneca Niagara
and Casino Niagara in Canada.
Is this normal or are these machines that bad?
I practice on Frugal VP with these pay scales and consistantly
play
at 99.5% and higher accuracy so I know it isn't that i'm playing
the
machines wrong.
Hmmmm...another NY Indian casino. If you've seen my recent posts
about Turning Stone, there is reason to question whether or not
their video poker has the true ER that the paytable would indicate.
I dropped $50 in 35 minutes on a Ceasar's 9/6 JoB machine a few
weeks ago, but one dry spell doesn't mean a machine is hokey.
However, *if* Turning Stone's machines are questionable, then I bet
Seneca Niagara's are too
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "tghysel" <tghysel@y...> wrote:
However, *if* Turning Stone's machines are questionable, then I bet
Seneca Niagara's are too
I was at Turning Stone a year ago. I was told their slot machines were made by a company that is owned by Turning Stone Casino. I was brand new to video poker back then. I certainly didn't see any IGT machines. They had a young kid who was the casino manager. It seems you are trying to justify playing there. If you want to throw your money away, send it to me instead. I would rather drive four hours than play at that place. At least Niagara and Seneca offer some competition with each other. Hopefully, in time, there will be more different owners in the region. And better VP.
Joe
vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
···
kls9036 <ksunderland@htva.net> wrote:
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE/
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
vpFREE-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I've read so much on the importance of playing full pay machines.
...
You can sit on these quarter machines and lose $100 in 30
minutes and have at the most 2 Full houses and a couple of Flushes.
...
Losing $95 as compared to $100 is supposed to
be a big advantage?
Yes it is, and it's the exact definition of an advantage player. That
$5 in 30 minutes, plus other $5's elsewhere and the occasional $20
and some $2.50s and even some $0.0125s, add up over 100,000 hands on
quarter machines to around $1000 of advantage profit, give or take
some depending on the games available. It's a pretty slim edge, but
it is an edge and it lets a knowledgeable player gamble away to his
hearts content, ans still usually come away with a profit or
breakeven.
You can also use the same numbers to decide that you don't need or
want to go to all the trouble of playing advantage style, which seems
to be what you're saying. And it's true - for a relatively small
number of hands, even 97% VP can be pretty cheap entertainment
compared to movie, concerts, fine dining and so forth (not to mention
much better odds than your average slot machine).
You would still want to learn perfect strategy to keep the house edge
as low as possible, and possibly do some other things depending on
what you situation is. For example, if you play the negative games
only because you can't get positive ones, and you'd like to learn how
to play right on the occasional Atlantic City or Tunica trip, then I
always advise people to play full pay strategy and pay themselves the
shortfall. Keep notes or a separate pocket full of quarters bought
with non-gambling money, and when you hit a FH transfer some quarters
from your general recreation expense to the gambling fund.
On the other hand, if you're going to play 7/5 forever and it's fine
by you to lose (spend) a little money, get a strategy that designed
for your exact pay tables - not the full pay strategy - and above
all, cut back to one coin. Don't worry about missing a royal - the
3750 coins you lose on short coin royals are MORE than made up for by
all the 4 coins you save on losing hands. In fact, that's pretty
close to the definition of a negative game.
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "tghysel" <tghysel@y...> wrote:
I DOUBT these are VLTs at Seneca Niagara.
I have played VLTs in Washington state, where a Match card makes up
for incorrect holds. That's a dead giveaway that they are VLTs.
I have played the VP at Seneca Niagara - no match card - and have hit
Royals on them.
ksunderland: i know you have done a good job so far of investigating
Turning Stone VP. I doubt if writing to the Gaming Commission or the
Governor will make you feel any better. Tribal Compacts are supposed
to be public documents, it just takes a little digging to find them.
If you have read the NYState compact with the tribe in question, then
you will have probably enough facts to decide to play or not.
ON the other hand, these NEW IGT's that are non-random VP should
scare the heck out of anyone who plays outside of Nev/NJ. On the VLT
VP in Wash. State, at least the presence of the Match Card is a sure
tip-off that the VP is not random. But what of the new IGT's?? WE
NEED MORE INFO!! It sounds like a genuine attempt to DUPE VP players
into thinking they are playing an RNG-based random game with a
paytable that would be a high % return if it was in the Nevada Class
of games ("Class III" I think it's called). And they don't have any
warning about being NON-Random on them? No stickers? Crazy.
Are these the machines Mr. Singer has been warning us about? (perhaps
not- he has claimed that non-RNG machines have been deployed in
Nevada!)
Once the public realizes it is being duped by a false chip (an "RNG-
poser"), the backlash should cripple the entire VP industry, and I
welcome the efforts of so many people to OUT this scam. That's what
it is- a scam. State legislators need to be educated on these non-RNG
based games, so that language in the tribal compacts can preclude
their use. (Class 2 1/2?)
And a letter-writing barrage to IGT wouldn't hurt either.
I think I'll stop my rant short. I started out wanting to reassure
that the Seneca Niagara VP was truly random but short-pay Paytables,
but now I'm not as sure. They were Random when I played them shortly
after opening in Jan 2003.
~MARK
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "kls9036" <ksunderland@h...> wrote:
Hmmmm...another NY Indian casino. If you've seen my recent posts
about Turning Stone, there is reason to question whether or not
their video poker has the true ER that the paytable would indicate.I dropped $50 in 35 minutes on a Ceasar's 9/6 JoB machine a few
weeks ago, but one dry spell doesn't mean a machine is hokey.
However, *if* Turning Stone's machines are questionable, then I bet
Seneca Niagara's are too
according to this document dated 20 June 2003:
http://tinyurl.com/2z5eg
Mohawk and Oneida tribes have a 1993 compact with the state of NY to
provide Class III (Nevada style) gaming
However, as of 20 June 2003 the New York Court of Appeals has
declared this compact invalid
Indian tribes must have a compact with the state to provide Class III
gaming, to provide Class I and II they only need an agreement with
the federal NIGC
that's why IGT is making Class II machines that look like Nevada
style (Class III) machines
just to make things even funnier, the NIGC is still in the process of
defining exactly what a Class II machine is
if you dig here you might find more info:
www.nigc.gov
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Joseph F Jarabek <george1451@a...>
wrote:
kls9036 <ksunderland@h...> wrote:
However, *if* Turning Stone's machines are questionable, then I
bet
Seneca Niagara's are too
I was at Turning Stone a year ago. I was told their slot machines
were made by a company that is owned by Turning Stone Casino. I was
brand new to video poker back then. I certainly didn't see any IGT
machines.
They do have their own style of machines, but there are about 65
new Game King machines (all 25 cent) that must have been installed
in the last few weeks.
It seems you are trying to justify playing there.
I am. It's convenient for a day trip (or just a few hours of
evening play).
If you want to throw your money away, send it to me instead.
My chances are still better with "hokey" JoB than giving it
directly to you. ;-D
I would rather drive four hours than play at that place. At least
Niagara and Seneca offer some competition with each other.
Hopefully, in time, there will be more different owners in the
region. And better VP.
Seneca is a New York Indian casino just like Turning Stone. How do
you know their VP is any more legit? Another poster says he can
easily drop $100 in 30 minutes on the Seneca 8/5 JoB. I'm going to
Turning Stone with my husband this weekend so he can play Hold'em
and am going to take a really close look at the new Game Kings to
see if they provide an clues one way or the other.
I just wish someone could provide a definitive answer. None of the
statements about the Indian casinos being a rip-off have been backed
up with any proof. (If you've seen otherwise, I'd love to be
corrected). Even if they don't operate exactly like a truly random
game, how do we know they aren't programmed to *pay* like a random
machine (in accordance with the paytable). Wishful thinking perhaps,
but it seems a bit rash to abandon my local casino because a couple
of people have "heard" that the machines are hokey.
Karen
The perception problem of Indian Casinos.
I am from California, can not tell you about Indian
Casinos in other states.
Here there is no regulation. Complaints sent to the
state attorney general's office on gaming get no real
response when it comes to Indian casinos.
Some people when they run into a bad streak tend to
start thinking the place must be cheating them and can
start rumors. In places like Vegas and AC, the
likelyhood of the casino cheating you is almost 0,
though you could run into a cheating dealer trying to
make up what he took by taking from you. But
basically because of their regulation, emotional
outbursts that the casino cheats just do not gain
popularity in a place like vegas. Indian Casinos,
because they are not regulated will run into a
completely different perception. If for no other
reason than the fact that if they wanted to, they
could cheat, the Indians would be smart to let
themselves be regulated by the individual states (if
the states care). I think, human nature being what it
is, if you can cheat, someone somewhere will.
What I see in California is that in locations where
there are several casinos close to each other, the
games are much better. The machines pay better, the
rules for blackjack are better and the pit and other
management types are more customer friendly. Go to a
California Indian Casino in a location where there is
no other casino for a 3-4 hour drive and you will find
machines that just about never pay, table game rules
that are just plain horrid and a management crew that
settles each and every dispute in the favor of the
house. Competition creates self regulation, but
regulation is necessary.
Victoria
ksunderland wrote:
I just wish someone could provide a definitive answer. None of the
statements about the Indian casinos being a rip-off have been backed
up with any proof. (If you've seen otherwise, I'd love to be
corrected). Even if they don't operate exactly like a truly random
game, how do we know they aren't programmed to *pay* like a random
machine (in accordance with the paytable). Wishful thinking perhaps,
but it seems a bit rash to abandon my local casino because a couple
of people have "heard" that the machines are hokey.
Karen,
I don't have a definitive response to offer up. But let me summarize
what I think are the most salient facts of which someone who chooses
to play in a tribal casino should be aware.
Electronic tribal gaming comes in two flavors, referred to as "Class
II" and "Class III". (Class I gaming refers to those games that have
historically been permitted on tribal lands, e.g. standard Bingo).
The National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) authorized tribes to
offer electronic casino gaming so long as those games were essentially
proxies for participation in the equivalent of a standard bingo game.
These games are defined as Class II. (There's some conflict in
what's defined as an acceptable electronic bingo game and the NIGC is
in the process of scaling back that definition.)
Tribal casinos are restricted to offering only Class II games unless
they have entered into compacts with the state to expand into Class
III gaming.
Video poker in class II form involves a game in which the game result
is centrally determined (loss or win/amount) and the machine will
produce a hand consistent with that determined win. Because the
player can "interfere" with that result as a consequence of their hold
decision, the machines I've seen have a second bonus mechanism that's
used to ensure that the predetermined win is awarded. Class II vp
doesn't adhere to standard card probabilities and typically all
players in the casino, slot and vp, are playing under identical odds
-- driven by the central determining processor.
Any table or electronic gaming that falls outside of Class I/II
definitions is deemed Class III. It's a catch-all category and makes
no assurances about the "fairness" of that gaming.
Class III gaming can be conducted by tribal casinos authorized to do
so under compacts entered with the appropriate state tribal gaming
commissions. Whereas the NIGC maintains a semblence of oversight over
Type II gaming to ensure tribal compliance, I've seen no evidence of
any significant state oversight of Type III gaming equipment to ensure
fairness. So, in my opinion, a gambler in a tribal casino places
their trust in self oversight.
Clearly, unrecognized machines makes are to be avoided in these
casinos. But there's been some comfort provided by playing mainstream
makes (IGT, Bally, etc.) since these games were manufactured as
standard Nevada compliant equipment. Of course, there is the risk
(perhaps modest) that the tribal casino would alter the machines after
delivery since there's no later evaluation of the equipment. Whether
the level of expertise required to modify the machines is sufficient
to make it unlikely is questionable. However, I'd have no problem
casually playing these.
But a new variable has been introduced into the picture. As noted
elsewhere, IGT and Bally are now making the foray into manufacture and
marketing of Class II gaming equipment. IGT Double Diamond machines
have been reported on the floor of WA casinos which are restricted to
Class II gaming.
I haven't seen any answer to the question of whether IGT will clone
it's standard vp machines into Class II versions. Because they
recently acquired a traditional Class II gaming manufacturer, I had
hoped that they would introduce any new Class II vp under that name
plate rather than IGT. I would expect that IGT is sensitive to image
integrity (an issue raised in other posts) and wouldn't introduce
equipment that could impair their consumer standing. Time will tell.
The bottom line here is simply to be cautious and keep your eyes open.
- Harry
Mark wrote: If you have read the NYState compact with the tribe in
question, then
you will have probably enough facts to decide to play or not.
Even if any member of the public is allowed to see the compacts, it is still
doubtful that without independent outside reports on supervision and
accounting that a gambler would be able to make an informed judgment about
playing.
State legislators need to be educated on these non-RNG
based games, so that language in the tribal compacts can preclude
their use.
There is no reason to expect that this could or might occur.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
kls9036: None of the statements about the Indian casinos being a rip-off
have been backed
up with any proof.
It is usually up to the business that wants our money to verify its
integrity. And that has most certainly not been the case with Indian
gambling.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Here's a link discussing the importance of playing FPVP.
http://videopoker.fws1.com/custom.html
I've read so much on the importance of playing full pay machines.
Where I play at Seneca Niagara the best we have is 8/5 JOB and 7/5
BP
with only 1 8/5 BP in $.25 denomination and a few 8/5 BPs in $.50
and
$1.00. You can sit on these quarter machines and lose $100 in 30
minutes and have at the most 2 Full houses and a couple of Flushes.
Since the only difference between the full pay and short machines
is
the FH and FL how does getting an extra 20 credits in this time
frame
make such a big deal? Losing $95 as compared to $100 is supposed to
be a big advantage?
It seems you have a better chance of playing 9/5 DB and going for
the
quads.
I have had 3 RFs in the last 6 weeks on BP but most nights are
just
horrible.
I've only been playing for about a year and only at Seneca Niagara
and Casino Niagara in Canada.
Is this normal or are these machines that bad?
I practice on Frugal VP with these pay scales and consistantly play
at 99.5% and higher accuracy so I know it isn't that i'm playing
the
I think your advice about cutting back to 1 coin is way off base.
Whether it is a positive or negative game, losing out on the bonus
for a max-coin Royal is going to hurt your expected value.
> I've read so much on the importance of playing full pay machines.
...
> You can sit on these quarter machines and lose $100 in 30
> minutes and have at the most 2 Full houses and a couple of
Flushes.
...
> Losing $95 as compared to $100 is supposed to
> be a big advantage?Yes it is, and it's the exact definition of an advantage player.
That
$5 in 30 minutes, plus other $5's elsewhere and the occasional $20
and some $2.50s and even some $0.0125s, add up over 100,000 hands
on
quarter machines to around $1000 of advantage profit, give or take
some depending on the games available. It's a pretty slim edge, but
it is an edge and it lets a knowledgeable player gamble away to his
hearts content, ans still usually come away with a profit or
breakeven.You can also use the same numbers to decide that you don't need or
want to go to all the trouble of playing advantage style, which
seems
to be what you're saying. And it's true - for a relatively small
number of hands, even 97% VP can be pretty cheap entertainment
compared to movie, concerts, fine dining and so forth (not to
mention
much better odds than your average slot machine).
You would still want to learn perfect strategy to keep the house
edge
as low as possible, and possibly do some other things depending on
what you situation is. For example, if you play the negative games
only because you can't get positive ones, and you'd like to learn
how
to play right on the occasional Atlantic City or Tunica trip, then
I
always advise people to play full pay strategy and pay themselves
the
shortfall. Keep notes or a separate pocket full of quarters bought
with non-gambling money, and when you hit a FH transfer some
quarters
from your general recreation expense to the gambling fund.
On the other hand, if you're going to play 7/5 forever and it's
fine
by you to lose (spend) a little money, get a strategy that designed
for your exact pay tables - not the full pay strategy - and above
all, cut back to one coin. Don't worry about missing a royal - the
3750 coins you lose on short coin royals are MORE than made up for
by
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "blaw57" <blaw57@y...> wrote:
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "tghysel" <tghysel@y...> wrote:
all the 4 coins you save on losing hands. In fact, that's pretty
close to the definition of a negative game.
larsonsm wrote:
I think your advice about cutting back to 1 coin is way off base. Whether it is a positive or negative game, losing out on the bonus
for a max-coin Royal is going to hurt your expected value.
If you're playing a negative expectation game that isn't made positive by cash-back, then you will usually reduce your losses by playing short coin, despite the reduced Royal payout. Of course, comps and bounce back also need to be considered, but for day-trips (not needing to have rooms comped), short coin is usually the cheapest. I did a math comparison some months ago, which I'm sure is still in the archives.
Cheers.
Bill Velek
Isn't it true that you would reduce your losses only because you're
betting less money each hand? To me, that's like saying you will
lose less if you don't play at all. Assuming a person wants to put
$100 through a negative expectation game one time, he should be
better off playing 5 coins than 1, right?
If you can find the same paytable (and I know that sometimes you
can't), you should drop down and play 5-coin (say nickels) rather
than 1-coin (say quarters) which would have all the same payouts
except the bonus Royal.
I agree that there are situations where fewer than 5 coins may be the
right choice depending on choice of paytables, bankroll and the
desire to make the bankroll last. However I think it is misleading
to imply that with a negative expectation game one should
automatically play fewer coins.
larsonsm wrote:
> I think your advice about cutting back to 1 coin is way off base.
> Whether it is a positive or negative game, losing out on the bonus
> for a max-coin Royal is going to hurt your expected value.If you're playing a negative expectation game that isn't made
positive
by cash-back, then you will usually reduce your losses by playing
short
coin, despite the reduced Royal payout. Of course, comps and
bounce
back also need to be considered, but for day-trips (not needing to
have
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bill Velek <billvelek@a...> wrote:
rooms comped), short coin is usually the cheapest. I did a math
comparison some months ago, which I'm sure is still in the archives.Cheers.
Bill Velek
Here's the basic calculation in favor of playing one coin. It assumes
that you are playing for fun and that you will experience average
luck - we'll come back to the average luck assumption in a minute.
With average luck, and rounding things a bit, every 40,000 hands you
play, you will get one royal. If the game yields 97.3% full coin, it
will yield about 95.93% short coin (assuming royal is worth 2.00%
return at full coin and 0.63% at short coin).
Playing full coin, 40,000 hands will take $50,000 coin in, of which
you will lose $2350 (4.7%) if you're average on everything else but
don't hit the royal, as is very possible. If you do hit the royal,
your net loss will be $1350 for each 40,000 hands.
Playing one coin, 40,000 hands will take $10,000 coin in, of which
you will lose $470 (4.7%) without the royal. With the royal, your net
loss will be $407 for each 40,000 hands, or less than one.
Yes, actually not playing does have a higher ER (zero) compared to
playing a negative game. However, playing short coin still puts you
in the casino, on the same bank of machines your friends are on, with
the same chance to make it with that cute cocktail waitress, and with
the added, priceless chance to piss them all off by hitting a royal
on your short coin and thereby "ruining their luck" (note: they WILL
accuse you of this, thinking in zero-sum terms that there was one
royal to get and you took it away from them).
The only difference is that where some of your friends may stop
coming after the 2nd or 3rd trip (being down $1000+ and worried about
the rent), you can be pretty sure of still being part of the playing
group on the 3rd, 4th and subsequent trips. In fact, you can be so
sure of returning that you can take advantage of that discounted
health club offer the casino is making, and you can make plans to
spend the whole day down there every time you go.
Now, about that luck assumption.... Remember, also, we assumed that
you were playing for fun - well what if playing for quarters isn't
fun for you?
Okay, so let's say what you're after is to WIN, and to WIN BIG, and
you believe that whatever the odds your luck will overcome them.
Okay, I'll accept that, I know several people like that and I've even
seen some succeed. In this case, then, yes, you do want to bet max
coins, regardless of paytable. But let's do another calculation for
your benefit. We saw above the full 40,000 hand cycle costs $2350
without a royal. You want to win big - let's define that as $500 or
more. So how soon do you need to hit the royal? Well, obviously,
before you are down $500, and we can put that into number of hands by
doing this: 500/2350*40000 = 8510. So, you need to do it in the first
8500 hands. And we can calculate the odds of that as 4.2 to 1
against. In other words, of every 5.2 people who have that objective,
one will succeed. Those are not insurmountable odds at all, so if you
feel lucky, go for it. After all, some people actually make money
playing 92% slots.
But it means that if I'm the first guy, playing quarters, and I have
5.2 friends like the second guy who come with me, then pretty soon
our little group is going to be down to two.
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "larsonsm" <larsonsm@y...> wrote:
I think your advice about cutting back to 1 coin is way off base.
Whether it is a positive or negative game, losing out on the bonus
for a max-coin Royal is going to hurt your expected value.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <mark_my_words_again@y...>
wrote:
Once the public realizes it is being duped by a false chip (an "RNG-
poser"), the backlash should cripple the entire VP industry,
I doubt that, the general public is very ignorant of basic facts
these days. Three Vegas Review-Journal articles:
http://tinyurl.com/ysnvs
http://tinyurl.com/2jbew
http://tinyurl.com/2e69g
nightoftheiguana2000 wrote:
I doubt that, the general public is very ignorant of basic facts
these days. Three Vegas Review-Journal articles:
http://tinyurl.com/ysnvs
http://tinyurl.com/2jbew
http://tinyurl.com/2e69g
The continued booming popularity of video poker machines in jurisdictions
without independent testing, supervision and auditing clearly contradict
that. In fact, the two Venetian articles are about a promotional contest,
not video poker.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]