vpFREE2 Forums

switching machines when seemingly on a losing streak

#1

I must admit that I have only recently started playing video poker a
fair amount (and I don't have access to full pay machines). My
question to everyone is how do you approach it when losing on a given
machine? Do you stay on it since the odds should be the same as any
other machine with the same payout? Do you switch to try and change
the luck? If so, how much will you lose before you decide to switch?
I have played 3 times this year and a few hundred up so far. I
switch fairly often when I seem to be on a downward turn. I have no
idea if this helps, hurts, or doesn't really matter. I'd like to hear
what others feel about switching machines.

Thanks.

#2

I never stay on the same machine when on a bad losing streak.
Usually I just quit. (Same with any other game.) However, before
things get very bad I usually wait a substantial time between hands
in order to give the RNG more time to randomize or "shuffle up the
deck." Mathematical theory and probability rely on a completely
random deal. However, laws of physics state that nothing in this
universe is totally random. To what extent this affects a VP machine
is inconclusive and is a topic that needs to be researched. Even if
these machines (often a few years old) are using processors running
at 1 GHZ, the speed at which a VP player plays (< 1 sec/hand), means
that < 1 billion clock cycles (or possible random number changes) can
take place between deals. This sounds like a high number, but is not
nearly high enough to completely shuffle 10 cards needed for a draw
poker hand. Plus, you don't know enough about the hardware and
software programming that can link some of these numbers together.
I, conversely, maintain a fast rate of play when on a hot streak.
This method can help, or at least not matter, if the machines are
truly random enough.

If you notice throughout a casino, management seems to take great
pains in maintaining the most random play in all their games, even
often changing dealers < every 15 minutes at a table. However, this
did not stop a Las Vegas gaming engineer from discovering that the
Video Keno jackpot, several years ago, only had 100 possible outcomes
based on the previous result. He tabulated this, went to Atlantic
City, and won the jackpot on the first deal. Also, on an older post,
someone stated that the older IGT machines RNG operated only between
deals; but on the newer ones, the RNG also operated on the draw --
thereby increasing the shuffle. If this is true, this tells me that
the engineers felt this subject of randomness was an important enough
a factor to make change.

The other reason that I get off a bad losing streak is you don't
always know if there are any unknown factors at play. Factors that
may rest in the future of science that other people call "luck."

#3

HUH?

What "deck" is being referred to here? It is all "numbers in
memory", affected by a RNG. One is not "shuffling" a physical deck
of cards.

.....bl

However, before
things get very bad I usually wait a substantial time between

hands

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "steviemcc1" <steviemcc1@y...> wrote:

in order to give the RNG more time to randomize or "shuffle up the
deck."

#4

Following up a bit, most of the RNG's affecting us here are really
psudo random number generators, that is, they are mathematical
algoritms that attempt to simulate a sequence of random numbers.

Whether you take every consecutive number in the sequence, or every
5th, or every 1004th, it does not make the resulting sequence either
more or less random than the original one.

The machine is not sitting there shuffling a deck of cards between
hands of video poker.

.....bl

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "bornloser1537" <bornloser1537@y...>
wrote:

HUH?

What "deck" is being referred to here? It is all "numbers in
memory", affected by a RNG. One is not "shuffling" a physical

deck

of cards.

.....bl

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "steviemcc1" <steviemcc1@y...>

wrote:

>
>However, before
> things get very bad I usually wait a substantial time between
hands
> in order to give the RNG more time to randomize or "shuffle up

the

···

> deck."

#5

universe is totally random.

   Not quite true. For example, the time that a radioactive atom
decays is a random event. Half of the radioactive atoms in a
substance will decay during the time known as that substance's half-
life, but for any individual atom the chance is 50% that it will
decay within that period of time, and there's no way of successfully
predicting which atoms will decay and which won't. It's random.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "steviemcc1" <steviemcc1@y...> wrote:

However, laws of physics state that nothing in this

#6

In a light-hearted way and wanting to pick a nit.....<smile>....let me say that
each individual isotope in your sample will react a little bit differently than its
neighbor with respect to perfect randomness, due to whatever is happening
around it (i.e., temperature, pressure, what its neighbor isotopes are doing,
etc.). One can then argue that this just adds to the randomness, but then we
start arguing semantics about what "random" really implies.

.....bl

owever, laws of physics state that nothing in this

···

universe is totally random.

   Not quite true. For example, the time that a radioactive atom
decays is a random event. Half of the radioactive atoms in a
substance will decay during the time known as that substance's half-
life, but for any individual atom the chance is 50% that it will
dec

#7

I'd like to hear
what others feel about switching machines.

There seems to be an extraordinary degree of interest in this subject. If
you log on to the vpFREE home page and scroll down to where you see message
history, you will see a gray button labeled search archive. Type switch
machines or change machines into the open dialog box. You most likely will
get dozens and dozens of past postings for your reading pleasure. Here is
my take on the subject. If, in fact, you have complete trust in the
randomness of the vp machines in your particular venue, then there is only
one logical conclusion that you can make about the machine that you are
playing. If you let emotional factors into the mix, and one of the emotions
is distrust, there is also only one choice to be made. Don't play on any
machine in that casino.
                                                      Nudge

···

From: "videopoker333" <videopoker333@yahoo.com>
Subject: [vpFREE] switching machines when seemingly on a losing streak

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.0.0 - Release Date: 2/18/2005

#8

You might find this link fun,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Random_number_generator

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "bornloser1537" <bornloser1537@y...>
wrote:

Following up a bit, most of the RNG's affecting us here are really
psudo random number generators, that is, they are mathematical
algoritms that attempt to simulate a sequence of random numbers.

Whether you take every consecutive number in the sequence, or every
5th, or every 1004th, it does not make the resulting sequence

either

···

more or less random than the original one.

The machine is not sitting there shuffling a deck of cards between
hands of video poker.

.....bl

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "bornloser1537" <bornloser1537@y...>
wrote:
>
> HUH?
>
> What "deck" is being referred to here? It is all "numbers in
> memory", affected by a RNG. One is not "shuffling" a physical
deck
> of cards.
>
> .....bl
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "steviemcc1" <steviemcc1@y...>
wrote:
> >
> >However, before
> > things get very bad I usually wait a substantial time between
> hands
> > in order to give the RNG more time to randomize or "shuffle up
the
> > deck."

#9

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "bornloser1537" <bornloser1537@y...>
what "random" really implies

To me, "random" implies unpredictable even when one has complete
knowledge of the item under discussion. This doesn't prohibit the
prediction of *probabilities*, just certainty. To predict certainty
would require the presence of "hidden variables" which, for some
processes, have been proven not to exist.

For example, when drawing to a four card flush, nine cards will
complete the flush and thirty-eight will bust it. Therefore we say
that the chance of making the flush is nine divided by forty-seven.
This is not random. It depends on the suit of the next card to be
dealt, and that has been determined by a *pseudo* random process. If
we had complete knowledge of the system we would be able to predict,
with certainty, whether or not the next card to be dealt was of the
proper suit.

There are some systems that exist in nature, however, that are
unpredictable even with complete information regarding the system.
Such things can produce truly random events.

#10

From: "videopoker333" <videopoker333@y...>
Subject: [vpFREE] switching machines when seemingly on a losing

streak

> I'd like to hear
> what others feel about switching machines.

There seems to be an extraordinary degree of interest in this

subject. If

you log on to the vpFREE home page and scroll down to where you see

message

history, you will see a gray button labeled search archive. Type

switch

machines or change machines into the open dialog box. You most

likely will

get dozens and dozens of past postings for your reading pleasure.

Here is

my take on the subject. If, in fact, you have complete trust in the
randomness of the vp machines in your particular venue, then there

is only

one logical conclusion that you can make about the machine that you

are

playing. If you let emotional factors into the mix, and one of the

emotions

is distrust, there is also only one choice to be made. Don't play

on any

machine in that casino.
                                                      Nudge

I did do the search - thanks for the suggestion - still getting used
to this forum. I can see a number of people are conflicted as I am.
It should make no difference and yet some (such as myself) feels it
changes the luck a little. Maybe it hurts me in the long run or has
no effect. I at least feel like I'm not just sitting there and
letting it take me bit by bit. Perhaps just feeling like I'm taking
charge gets me to play more attentively. Thanks for everyone's input -
for either side of the equation. I'm off to the casino tomorrow. :slight_smile:

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nudge51" <nudge51@c...> wrote:

#11

Since changing or not changing will not produce a "physical or
mathematical" difference, if it makes you "feel" better to switch or
not switch, with respect to a macine with the same game and paytable
in Las Vegas, you are free to do as you wish, without generating any
financial consequences.

.....bl

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "videopoker333" <videopoker333@y...>
wrote:

I did do the search - thanks for the suggestion - still getting

used

to this forum. I can see a number of people are conflicted as I

am.

It should make no difference and yet some (such as myself) feels

it

changes the luck a little. Maybe it hurts me in the long run or

has

no effect. I at least feel like I'm not just sitting there and
letting it take me bit by bit. Perhaps just feeling like I'm

taking

charge gets me to play more attentively. Thanks for everyone's

input -

for either side of the equation. I'm off to the casino

tomorrow. :slight_smile:

#12

First, I think the following statement would be more valid.

Since changing or not changing will not produce a KNOWN "physical or
mathematical" difference ...

Unless you claim complete knowledge of the RNG algorithm used in all
machines then it is impossible to be absolutely sure whether moving
will or will not make a difference. As mentioned earlier, when it
comes to VP machines, random is not really random. All that is
required is that the machines pass certain randomness tests. Although
I haven't studied these tests personally, I suspect they are long
running tests that do not require short term randomness. If I am
wrong, then I'd love to see documentation to the contrary.

Second, having played machines by various manufacturers over many
years it seems to me that the RNG employed is different and has short
term effects, especially in older machines. This may be an
interesting topic for a poll.

Dick

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "bornloser1537" <bornloser1537@y...>
wrote:

Since changing or not changing will not produce a "physical or
mathematical" difference, if it makes you "feel" better to switch

or

not switch, with respect to a macine with the same game and

paytable

in Las Vegas, you are free to do as you wish, without generating

any

···

financial consequences.

.....bl

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "videopoker333" <videopoker333@y...>
wrote:
>
> I did do the search - thanks for the suggestion - still getting
used
> to this forum. I can see a number of people are conflicted as I
am.
> It should make no difference and yet some (such as myself) feels
it
> changes the luck a little. Maybe it hurts me in the long run or
has
> no effect. I at least feel like I'm not just sitting there and
> letting it take me bit by bit. Perhaps just feeling like I'm
taking
> charge gets me to play more attentively. Thanks for everyone's
input -
> for either side of the equation. I'm off to the casino
tomorrow. :slight_smile:

#13

Since changing or not changing will not produce a "physical
or mathematical" difference, if it makes you "feel" better to switch
or not switch, with respect to a macine with the same game and
paytable in Las Vegas, you are free to do as you wish, without
generating any financial consequences.

On 19 Feb 2005 at 15:29, rgmustain replied:

First, I think the following statement would be more valid.

Since changing or not changing will not produce a KNOWN "physical or
mathematical" difference ...

FAQ #14 states it as follows:

"14. When should I change machines? - Whenever you like. Changing
to another machine with the same pay table won't help or hurt you in any
predictable manner. See Bob Dancer's When should you quit for the day?
<http://www.strictlyslots.com/archive/0404ss/begin.html>"

Second, having played machines by various manufacturers over many
years it seems to me that the RNG employed is different and has short
term effects, especially in older machines. This may be an interesting
topic for a poll.

The vpFREE Yahoo Poll Directory has an open poll on randomness:
<http://tinyurl.com/54kas>.

vpFREE Administrator

#14

To me, the argument is simple, although my viewpoint hinges on a
controversial assumption not held by the majority:

In ANY casino environment, while playing ANY casino game, the
likelihood of being cheated is FAR greater than the average gambler
is led to believe. In the case of table games, this can happen with
or without the casino's knowledge or blessing. Likewise, non-random
VP machines--whether "benevolent" non-randomness, such as a faulty
RNG generator, or "gaffing", or outright manipulation of the
results, are also often encountered.

If I am playing what is an inherently positive game, yet I lose, and
continue to do so, as my results continue to deviate farther and
farther from the norm, IMHO the likelihood of my being cheated also
rises. The extent to which you feel such cheating exists is a direct
correllation to how much of a loss you are willing to absorb before
abandoning the game (ignoring bankroll considerations).

If I play a DB machine for, say, three hours, and don't get a single
four of a kind, this is certainly within the realm of statistical
probability. HOWEVER, in my point of view, there is now a
significant chance that the machine, for whatever reason, is
returning non-random results. Therefore I consider it a valid
defensive measure to switch machines. As other posters have said,
even if there is no actual anomaly so far except that arising from
normal fluctuation, it won't HURT to switch.

#15

To pick the nits along with the rest along this thread, and in the
spirit of what is said below, it won't HURT unless you switch to a
machine that is even more egregious in its chreating.

.....bl

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

< As other posters have said,

···

even if there is no actual anomaly so far except that arising from
normal fluctuation, it won't HURT to switch.

#16

In the words of a famous philosopher, "Doh!" :slight_smile:

···

-----Original Message-----
From: bornloser1537 [mailto:bornloser1…@…com]
Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2005 12:02 PM
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: switching machines when seemingly on a losing
streak

To pick the nits along with the rest along this thread, and in the
spirit of what is said below, it won't HURT unless you switch to a
machine that is even more egregious in its chreating.

.....bl

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

< As other posters have said,

even if there is no actual anomaly so far except that arising from
normal fluctuation, it won't HURT to switch.

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

Yahoo! Groups Links

#17

Each machine is different, so a general rule as to when to leave a
machine is impossible to formulate. I know exactly when I want to
change machines, and that is when I switch machines, that is, when
the machine I'm at is just, for one reason or another, acting in a
totally disgusting way. This can be after spending a twenty on it, or
after spending two hundred, but sometimes it can be after just
playing it once. Now, a machine that has not been paying for the time
I have been playing it could, all of a sudden, start paying like a
maniac, so sometimes one is indecisive on whether to leave a non-
paying machine or not. This would be the situation of a machine that
is not behaving in a totally disgusting way, but it is not paying but
rather collecting. When I find myself in a situation like that, I
consult the mathematics. You see, the Greeks can be considered as
having been the biggest contributors to mathematics in the history of
humanity; they got the ball rolling, as it were. The Greeks also
believed in omens and the prophetic flight of birds. A bird on the
right was good, on the left was bad. So when I don't know if I should
leave a machine where I have been losing, I order a drink. If when
the drink comes the cocktail waitress serves it on the right, I stay
at the machine, if she serves it on the left I move to another
machine. I know there are no birds inside a casino, but cocktail
waitresses sometimes seem to fly.

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "videopoker333" <videopoker333@y...>
wrote:

I must admit that I have only recently started playing video poker

a

fair amount (and I don't have access to full pay machines). My
question to everyone is how do you approach it when losing on a

given

machine? Do you stay on it since the odds should be the same as any
other machine with the same payout? Do you switch to try and change
the luck? If so, how much will you lose before you decide to

switch?

I have played 3 times this year and a few hundred up so far. I
switch fairly often when I seem to be on a downward turn. I have no
idea if this helps, hurts, or doesn't really matter. I'd like to

hear

···

what others feel about switching machines.

Thanks.

#18

I am catching up on some posts so forgive me for the delay. I found
your answer interesting because I have read on more than "one
expert" site and articles that the machines are always "shuffling"
even when idle. In between hands, etc...
Am I wrong?

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "bornloser1537" <bornloser1537@y...>
wrote:

Following up a bit, most of the RNG's affecting us here are really
psudo random number generators, that is, they are mathematical
algoritms that attempt to simulate a sequence of random numbers.

Whether you take every consecutive number in the sequence, or

every

5th, or every 1004th, it does not make the resulting sequence

either

more or less random than the original one.

The machine is not sitting there shuffling a deck of cards between
hands of video poker.

.....bl

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "bornloser1537"

<bornloser1537@y...>

···

wrote:
>
> HUH?
>
> What "deck" is being referred to here? It is all "numbers in
> memory", affected by a RNG. One is not "shuffling" a physical
deck
> of cards.
>
> .....bl
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "steviemcc1" <steviemcc1@y...>
wrote:
> >
> >However, before
> > things get very bad I usually wait a substantial time between
> hands
> > in order to give the RNG more time to randomize or "shuffle up
the
> > deck."

#19

There is a random number generator running constantily, creating a
stream of numbers between 0 and 1. They are not shuffling cards in
the sense that you are thinking about.

.....bl

I am catching up on some posts so forgive me for the delay. I

found

your answer interesting because I have read on more than "one
expert" site and articles that the machines are always "shuffling"
even when idle. In between hands, etc...
Am I wrong?

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "bornloser1537"

<bornloser1537@y...>

wrote:
>
> Following up a bit, most of the RNG's affecting us here are

really

> psudo random number generators, that is, they are mathematical
> algoritms that attempt to simulate a sequence of random numbers.
>
> Whether you take every consecutive number in the sequence, or
every
> 5th, or every 1004th, it does not make the resulting sequence
either
> more or less random than the original one.
>
> The machine is not sitting there shuffling a deck of cards

between

> hands of video poker.
>
> .....bl
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "bornloser1537"
<bornloser1537@y...>
> wrote:
> >
> > HUH?
> >
> > What "deck" is being referred to here? It is all "numbers in
> > memory", affected by a RNG. One is not "shuffling" a physical
> deck
> > of cards.
> >
> > .....bl
> >
> > --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "steviemcc1" <steviemcc1@y...>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >However, before
> > > things get very bad I usually wait a substantial time

between

> > hands
> > > in order to give the RNG more time to randomize or "shuffle

up

···

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

> the
> > > deck."

#20

Sorry. I was stating something I read in an article. I understand
what is happening but I am not sure new people would. The
word "shuffling" was used in the articles

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "bornloser1537" <bornloser1537@y...>
wrote:

There is a random number generator running constantily, creating a
stream of numbers between 0 and 1. They are not shuffling cards

in

the sense that you are thinking about.

.....bl

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "missdeuces" <missdeuces@y...>

wrote:

>
> I am catching up on some posts so forgive me for the delay. I
found
> your answer interesting because I have read on more than "one
> expert" site and articles that the machines are

always "shuffling"

> even when idle. In between hands, etc...
> Am I wrong?
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "bornloser1537"
<bornloser1537@y...>
> wrote:
> >
> > Following up a bit, most of the RNG's affecting us here are
really
> > psudo random number generators, that is, they are mathematical
> > algoritms that attempt to simulate a sequence of random

numbers.

> >
> > Whether you take every consecutive number in the sequence, or
> every
> > 5th, or every 1004th, it does not make the resulting sequence
> either
> > more or less random than the original one.
> >
> > The machine is not sitting there shuffling a deck of cards
between
> > hands of video poker.
> >
> > .....bl
> >
> > --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "bornloser1537"
> <bornloser1537@y...>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > HUH?
> > >
> > > What "deck" is being referred to here? It is all "numbers

in

> > > memory", affected by a RNG. One is not "shuffling" a

physical

> > deck
> > > of cards.
> > >
> > > .....bl
> > >
> > > --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "steviemcc1"

<steviemcc1@y...>

> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >However, before
> > > > things get very bad I usually wait a substantial time
between
> > > hands
> > > > in order to give the RNG more time to randomize

or "shuffle

···

up
> > the
> > > > deck."