This is my first post on this board. It's a question I have. My son
and I were playing VP and he wondered if anyone has ever compiled
a "short run" playing strategy. In other words, a strategy where you
don't necessarily make a hold/discard decision based on the long run
highest EV, but the short run highest EV, if there is such a thing.
For example, instead of holding low pairs so often, perhaps it might
be better, in a short session, to hold high cards instead ... trying
to simply get a high pair.
Short Run Strategy?
This is my first post on this board. It's a question I have. My
son
and I were playing VP and he wondered if anyone has ever compiled
a "short run" playing strategy. In other words, a strategy where
you
don't necessarily make a hold/discard decision based on the long
run
highest EV, but the short run highest EV, if there is such a
thing.
Here is a little quiz.....
Complete the following sentence.
Beam me up Scotty, there is no ___ ___ ___ ___ ___.
QZ
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "brumar_lv" <brumar_lv@y...> wrote:
EV doesn't know the difference between short/long run.
It is possible to create alternate strategies which optimize things
other than EV, but these alternate strategies also make no distinction
between short run and long run. It may be that in a mathematical
sense, there is no meaningful distinction between the two, but I'm
sure there are many who disagree with me on this.
One example of an alternate strategy is a strategy that minimizes
risk. Suppose you start with a bankroll of N units and decide that
you want to play in such a way that you maximize the probability
of tripling that bankroll to 3N units -- you plan to play until you
either stop with 3N units or nothing. The max-EV strategy is NOT
optimal for this situation. Instead, a min-risk strategy gives the
best chance for reaching the target bankroll. In addition, min-risk
remains the best strategy for this kind of goal even if you are
shooting for only 2N units or 10N or 20N units for your final
bankroll. In other words, if you pick some fixed number as a
target bankroll and you plan to start with some smaller bankroll
and play until you reach the target or lose everything, then
a min-risk strategy will perform better than a max-EV strategy.
Unfortunately, min-risk strategies aren't what the popular VP
programs compute, so they aren't widely available.
···
On Friday 05 December 2003 12:22 am, brumar_lv wrote:
This is my first post on this board. It's a question I have. My son
and I were playing VP and he wondered if anyone has ever compiled
a "short run" playing strategy. In other words, a strategy where you
don't necessarily make a hold/discard decision based on the long run
highest EV, but the short run highest EV, if there is such a thing.
Here is a little quiz.....
Complete the following sentence.
Beam me up Scotty, there is no ___ ___ ___ ___ ___.
QZ
Can I buy a vowel?
might be better, in a short session, to hold high cards instead ...
trying to simply get a high pair.
IF you're talking about a basic game, like Jacks or better,
you'll be giving up too many 2 prs/3Ks/FHs/ and potential 4Ks when
you make that type of strategy change. You will probably make more
winning hands - but the TOTAL WINNING credits will probably be much
less. The extreme strategy would be to ALWAYS go for the Royal, but
then you'd be losing quite a bit in-between those royals, unless you
were playing a very lucrative progressive for the Royal.
It depends on how 'short' of a session you are talking about. An
hour will usually give most players (even beginners) 200-500 hands.
Experts/regular players probably can reach 600-900 hands per hour,
depending on how fast the machine 'deals cards/adds-subtracts
credits'.
What are your goals? Any specific game you're interested in?
The type of strategy you mention only works for a newer game called
Multi-strike; in that case, you need to maximize the number of
winning hands, initially, because there are bigger potential winning
payouts for moving 'up' to the 4th line (you have to have 3 wins in a
row, or combo. of wins and 'free rides', but that is a different type
of videopoker game).
Hope that helps,
Martin
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "brumar_lv" <brumar_lv@y...> wrote:
This is my first post on this board. It's a question I have. .....
For example, instead of holding low pairs so often, perhaps it
EV doesn't know the difference between short/long run.
I could have done a better job of explaining what I meant
by "short run strategy". I was referring to reducing the variance of
short run sessions. For example, we usually hold low pairs ...
shooting for quads ... but we usually fail, and that increases the
games variance. But what if we kept 2-3 high cards instead? With a
low pair there are only 2 cards we are shooting for, to get a big
win. With two high cards there are 6-9 cards that will give a much
smaller winning hand (high pair, two pair, straight), but more
often. It seems to me
this would reduce the variance of the game, giving a better chance of
breaking even in a short run session. As you said, there are many
possible strategies, but I've never seen one that minimizes the
variance.
brumar_lv wrote:
But what if we kept 2-3 high cards instead? ... It seems to me
this would reduce the variance of the game, giving a better chance of
breaking even in a short run session. As you said, there are many
possible strategies, but I've never seen one that minimizes the
variance.
I expect you're right about this change over a very short time period.
However, I expect even over a modest trip that the strategy cost
would unreasonably increase the loss risk. There could be little
justification of such a strategy for any player.
However, there are indeed some strategy variations that do provide a
largely justifiable reduction in variance.
I advocate that in 10/7 DB a player MAY wish to hold an "Aces" Full
House rather than hold the trip and go for quad Aces. This change
involves a negligible reduction to ER but a relatively sizable
reduction in variance (at least compared to the reduction in ER).
I suspect that the "min-loss" play strategy that Steve Jacobs has
noted here earlier also serves to reduce short-term variance (but I'm
too lazy to think that through and say that with confidence).
- Harry
btw, I don't actually break "Aces Full's" in my play. DB play
involves risking such sizable losses in any case that I don't value
the modest decrease in session loss risk as much as I do the
excitement of going for quad Aces :).
Of course, I got my ass burned sufficiently bad over a recent 12-mo
period on the game that under the right circumstances someone could
talk me into breaking any FH for the "trip". (You know, like after
I've suffered a double 4-digit loss and have indulged in my 5th Rusty
Nail ...)
- Harry
IMO if you are concerned about short term variance, you should be
playing jacks not BD. I saw something that indicated there was a
higher risk of ruin in the short term in Pick'em which has an even
lower variance game than jacks. Consider playing at lower stakes
rather than making incorrect plays. One variance in strategy may be
to draw to 4 to a flush rather than 3 to a royal w a 10 & A,
although this is technically correct only when there is a penalty
card. Look at the following site to ascertain the cost her hour w/o
drawing certain high hands: http://videopoker.fws1.com/CPH-JB-
comp.htm
David
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@v...>
wrote:
brumar_lv wrote:
> But what if we kept 2-3 high cards instead? ... It seems to me
> this would reduce the variance of the game, giving a better
chance of
> breaking even in a short run session. As you said, there are
many
> possible strategies, but I've never seen one that minimizes the
> variance.I expect you're right about this change over a very short time
period.
However, I expect even over a modest trip that the strategy cost
would unreasonably increase the loss risk. There could be little
justification of such a strategy for any player.However, there are indeed some strategy variations that do provide
a
largely justifiable reduction in variance.
I advocate that in 10/7 DB a player MAY wish to hold an "Aces" Full
House rather than hold the trip and go for quad Aces. This change
involves a negligible reduction to ER but a relatively sizable
reduction in variance (at least compared to the reduction in ER).I suspect that the "min-loss" play strategy that Steve Jacobs has
noted here earlier also serves to reduce short-term variance (but
I'm
too lazy to think that through and say that with confidence).
- Harry
btw, I don't actually break "Aces Full's" in my play. DB play
involves risking such sizable losses in any case that I don't value
the modest decrease in session loss risk as much as I do the
excitement of going for quad Aces :).Of course, I got my ass burned sufficiently bad over a recent 12-mo
period on the game that under the right circumstances someone could
talk me into breaking any FH for the "trip". (You know, like after
I've suffered a double 4-digit loss and have indulged in my 5th
Rusty
···
Nail ...)
- Harry
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "d_richheimer" <d_richheimer@y...>
wrote:
Look at the following site to ascertain the cost her hour w/o
drawing certain high hands: http://videopoker.fws1.com/CPH-JB-
comp.htm
I clicked on that link and got an error message. It must have(been)
moved, removed, or something, cuz it's not there(or is there a typo
in the url?).
Cutting and the pasting was necessary. Try this:
http://videopoker.fws1.com/CPH-JB-comp.htm
···
On 6 Dec 2003 at 14:16, Jeff wrote:
"d_richheimer" <d_richheimer@y... wrote:
> Look at the following site to ascertain the cost her hour w/o
> drawing certain high hands: http://videopoker.fws1.com/CPH-JB-
> comp.htm
On 6 Dec 2003 at 14:16, Jeff wrote:
I clicked on that link and got an error message. It must have(been)
moved, removed, or something, cuz it's not there(or is there a typo in
the url?).
....intelligent life on this planet.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "quadzilla_666" <quadzilla666@e...>
wrote:
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "brumar_lv" <brumar_lv@y...> wrote:
> This is my first post on this board. It's a question I have. My
son
> and I were playing VP and he wondered if anyone has ever compiled
> a "short run" playing strategy. In other words, a strategy where
you
> don't necessarily make a hold/discard decision based on the long
run
> highest EV, but the short run highest EV, if there is such a
thing.Here is a little quiz.....
Complete the following sentence.
Beam me up Scotty, there is no ___ ___ ___ ___ ___.
QZ