vpFREE2 Forums

The key is gaming regulations

#1

I have two comments on this thread:

If you suspect that (for whatever reason) vp machines with 100%+
theoretical yield paytables are gaffed, then there is every reason to
suspect that all vp machines may be gaffed. Why wouldn't a casino
elect to alter some of their 99%+ machines as well?

Second, I won't argue that it's irrational to suspect that a casino
might gaffe machines. What I will say is that it's irrational to play
at a casino that you suspect of doing this.

- Harry

(Corrolary, so long as I choose to play somewhere I'll accept on faith
that the machines are "fair". And when I no longer accept that, I'll
stop playing there altogether.)

#2

I too dont want to think along these lines , because then I would have to quit playing
Jack

···

----- Original Message -----
  From: Harry Porter
  To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 6:05 PM
  Subject: [vpFREE] Re: The key is gaming regulations

  I have two comments on this thread:

  If you suspect that (for whatever reason) vp machines with 100%+
  theoretical yield paytables are gaffed, then there is every reason to
  suspect that all vp machines may be gaffed. Why wouldn't a casino
  elect to alter some of their 99%+ machines as well?

  Second, I won't argue that it's irrational to suspect that a casino
  might gaffe machines. What I will say is that it's irrational to play
  at a casino that you suspect of doing this.

  - Harry

  (Corrolary, so long as I choose to play somewhere I'll accept on faith
  that the machines are "fair". And when I no longer accept that, I'll
  stop playing there altogether.)

        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
  vpFREE Home Page:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE

  vpFREE Links:
  http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

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

#3

What I will say is that it's irrational to play at a casino that you suspect of doing this.

But what would lead anyone to suspect that machines are being toyed with? Who is at any given vp machine long enough to notice anything other than the kinds of deviations you expect to see over time? And what if there seems to be a normal distribution of all hands but one?

Remember the Vegas case of a few years back, where a guy from a company that supplied machines to bars tweeked the chip so that RFs appeared much less often than statistically expected?

The point is, the only thing that brought it to the attention of authorities were bar patrons complaining that there were never any RFs. But if those machines had been distributed throughout a huge casino, and not in a relatively small bar with maybe a dozen machines, the scam might have lasted much longer. It's a scary thought, but you've got to assume that it's possible some machines are gaffed even if the vast majority are not.

This has been a very instructive string. Funny, a few days ago there was a string on whether the "double-up" feature could be tweeked, and now it's about the whole machine. Yikes.

lb

···

----- Original Message -----
  From: jack
  To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 6:12 PM
  Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: The key is gaming regulations

  I too dont want to think along these lines , because then I would have to quit playing
  Jack
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Harry Porter
    To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
    Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 6:05 PM
    Subject: [vpFREE] Re: The key is gaming regulations

    I have two comments on this thread:

    If you suspect that (for whatever reason) vp machines with 100%+
    theoretical yield paytables are gaffed, then there is every reason to
    suspect that all vp machines may be gaffed. Why wouldn't a casino
    elect to alter some of their 99%+ machines as well?

    Second, I won't argue that it's irrational to suspect that a casino
    might gaffe machines. What I will say is that it's irrational to play
    at a casino that you suspect of doing this.

    - Harry

    (Corrolary, so long as I choose to play somewhere I'll accept on faith
    that the machines are "fair". And when I no longer accept that, I'll
    stop playing there altogether.)

          Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                ADVERTISEMENT
               
    vpFREE Home Page:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE

    vpFREE Links:
    http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html

    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

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

        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
  vpFREE Home Page:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE

  vpFREE Links:
  http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

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

#4

I think you are confusing slot machines that have a RNG that can be set for
a given payback, to VP machines that can not (at least legally). To
determine the payback of a VP machine, there are two possibilities:

some other stategy, or

B: Set a paytable and after the machine is played a while, look at the
actual payback.

My guess is that "B" is the proper choice. It is almost certain that a
casino with a group of double bonus machines would experience a payback of
less than 100%.

Otherwise, how can the payback be calculated without knowing the strategy
the player is using? Have you ever seen a machine that "suggests" the cards
you should hold? It is many times the wrong hold.

···

A: Assume a give startegy and calucalte the payback given perfect play or

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Velek" <billvelek@alliancecable.net>
To: <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 12:32 PM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: The key is gaming regulations

Remember what the logic of my post was:

1. If it is, in fact, illegal within a certain state to have a machine
that pays in excess of 100%; and

2. If games, such as "Double Bonus" have an ER which does, in fact,
exceed 100%; and

3. There are "Double Bonus" machines in a casino within that same state

...then at least one of the following conclusions must logically follow:

A. There really are no such laws in that state, or they are not
interpreted and applied as we suspect [Bob Dancer's last post might
contain the answer to this] ... but for purposes of this discussion, we
have already accepted, as a 'given', that there _are_ such limits); or

B. The machines are NOT gaffed, AND the state gambling commission is
either ... ignorant of the true ER of those machine ... OR is unaware
that those machines are in the casino ... OR they are ignoring the
violation; or

C. The machines ARE gaffed, with the commissions blessing, in order to
offer a machine that comes within the limits of the law (I think if
they were to do this, they could only lower it to precisely 100% return,
and no lower).

However, even if 'C' were the actual case, it does not logically follow
that they would be able to legally gaffe a machine that already has an
ER of less than 100%, nor does it logically follow that they are going
to try to do anything stupid and illegal, like gaffing a machine without
the approval of the state gaming commission as in 'C', above.

#5

Correct me if I'm misinterpreting, there seems to be some confusion between the legal randomness of a machine and paybacks. Has this entire string been about paybacks? If so, then I'm the one who was confused, as I thought there were questions raised about illegally affecting actual distribution.
lb

···

----- Original Message -----
  From: Dick Kalagher
  To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 12:27 PM
  Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: The key is gaming regulations

  I think you are confusing slot machines that have a RNG that can be set for
  a given payback, to VP machines that can not (at least legally). To
  determine the payback of a VP machine, there are two possibilities:

  A: Assume a give startegy and calucalte the payback given perfect play or
  some other stategy, or

  B: Set a paytable and after the machine is played a while, look at the
  actual payback.

  My guess is that "B" is the proper choice. It is almost certain that a
  casino with a group of double bonus machines would experience a payback of
  less than 100%.

  Otherwise, how can the payback be calculated without knowing the strategy
  the player is using? Have you ever seen a machine that "suggests" the cards
  you should hold? It is many times the wrong hold.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Bill Velek" <billvelek@alliancecable.net>
  To: <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
  Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 12:32 PM
  Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: The key is gaming regulations

  >
  > Remember what the logic of my post was:
  >
  > 1. If it is, in fact, illegal within a certain state to have a machine
  > that pays in excess of 100%; and
  >
  > 2. If games, such as "Double Bonus" have an ER which does, in fact,
  > exceed 100%; and
  >
  > 3. There are "Double Bonus" machines in a casino within that same state
  >
  > ...then at least one of the following conclusions must logically follow:
  >
  > A. There really are no such laws in that state, or they are not
  > interpreted and applied as we suspect [Bob Dancer's last post might
  > contain the answer to this] ... but for purposes of this discussion, we
  > have already accepted, as a 'given', that there _are_ such limits); or
  >
  > B. The machines are NOT gaffed, AND the state gambling commission is
  > either ... ignorant of the true ER of those machine ... OR is unaware
  > that those machines are in the casino ... OR they are ignoring the
  > violation; or
  >
  > C. The machines ARE gaffed, with the commissions blessing, in order to
  > offer a machine that comes within the limits of the law (I think if
  > they were to do this, they could only lower it to precisely 100% return,
  > and no lower).
  >
  > However, even if 'C' were the actual case, it does not logically follow
  > that they would be able to legally gaffe a machine that already has an
  > ER of less than 100%, nor does it logically follow that they are going
  > to try to do anything stupid and illegal, like gaffing a machine without
  > the approval of the state gaming commission as in 'C', above.
  >

        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
  vpFREE Home Page:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE

  vpFREE Links:
  http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

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

#6

Larry,

Confused? I didn't know they let you out of the "home" again. <G> Just put in five coins and see the results. If you have more coin than you started with, you played the hand right. If you have less, then you played it wrong. Forget all about RNG's and EV's...

I heard a good term on CNBC today that really applies to this thread. Even though it was about investing, the phrase was saying that too many people were, "Paralysis from Analysis". People afraid to invest, or in this case play VP, from over analysis. Don't you agree?

Allen

···

At 12:58 PM 10/14/02, you wrote:

Has this entire string been about paybacks? If so, then I'm the one who was confused, as I thought there were questions raised about illegally affecting actual distribution.

#7

Picking a small nit, perhaps, but it is not likely
that the RNG would be modified to change ER for a
slot machine. The results of the RNG are used to
select what symbols come up in each reel. To change
the ER, the operator would merely choose a different
set of symbols for the reels (most likely from a
predefined set of choices).

For example, suppose the reels for the machine have
100 virtual "stops".
In the base game there are 10 cherries (or whatever)
on the virtual reel. Changing the number of cherries
to 9 would affect the ER of the game appropriately
without any need to gaff the RNG. In fact, modifying
the RNG would be very likely to invalidate the
randomness test of the machine.

--jazbo
http://www.jazbo.com
Poker & Video Poker Information

···

--- Dick Kalagher <dick@kalagher.com> wrote:

I think you are confusing slot machines that have a
RNG that can be set for
a given payback,

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com

#8

Yes, of course you are correct. I did not mean to imply that the RNG was
actually gaffed. Sorry for the confusion.

Dick Kalagher
dick@kalagher.com

···

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jazbo Burns" <jazbo55@yahoo.com>
To: <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: The key is gaming regulations

--- Dick Kalagher <dick@kalagher.com> wrote:
> I think you are confusing slot machines that have a
> RNG that can be set for
> a given payback,

Picking a small nit, perhaps, but it is not likely
that the RNG would be modified to change ER for a
slot machine. The results of the RNG are used to
select what symbols come up in each reel. To change
the ER, the operator would merely choose a different
set of symbols for the reels (most likely from a
predefined set of choices).

For example, suppose the reels for the machine have
100 virtual "stops".
In the base game there are 10 cherries (or whatever)
on the virtual reel. Changing the number of cherries
to 9 would affect the ER of the game appropriately
without any need to gaff the RNG. In fact, modifying
the RNG would be very likely to invalidate the
randomness test of the machine.

--jazbo
http://www.jazbo.com
Poker & Video Poker Information

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More
http://faith.yahoo.com

vpFREE Home Page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE

vpFREE Links:
http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

#9

I heard a good term on CNBC today that really applies to this thread. Even

though it was about investing, the phrase was saying that too many people
were, "Paralysis from Analysis". People afraid to invest, or in this case
play VP, from over analysis. Don't you agree?

Allen<<

Maybe at least partly true, but amazing to hear it from the guy who recommended winpoker to me!!!! But like we used to say in our heavy craps days, the next best thing to playing it is talking about it, and often the talking is better! <g>

Anyway, I've got no problem with all the analysis. The only problem I have is when I think the talk is about one thing and it turns out to be about something else!

Now relax, Allen. No Angel games until Saturday : ( BTW, I haven't seen any kind of early line. Do they legally have to wait until the NL winner is determined?
Seems so obvious...Angels over Yankees in 4...Angels over Twins in 5...so Angels over either SF or StL in six. Isn't that how it's programmed into the chip?

lb

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

#10

Bill Velek wrote:

> ... Have you ever seen a machine that "suggests" the cards
> you should hold? It is many times the wrong hold.

No, I've never seen one, and it wouldn't surprise me if it did suggest
the wrong hold. I don't think the casinos are under any legal or moral
obligation to help you win a bet.

The first time I played video poker it was on a nickel machine, and I
was playing Deuces Wild at an Indian casino. That machine made
suggestions. I got 4 deuces twice following the suggestions. Never got
4Ds on that machine after that, but beginner's luck is a strange and
wonderful thing.

···

--
Pat O'Connell
Take nothing but pictures, Leave nothing but footprints,
Kill nothing but vandals...

#11

If that's really the approach they take, then the 100% limit is no reason, in and

of itself, to suspect that a casino is tampering with randomness.<<

Bill, thank you for the clarification, and I agree with you. But again you use the term "tampering with randomness" in relation to possible tampering with paybacks, real or theoretical, where randomness actually applies to the probable distribution of hands. That's where the confusion stemmed from, and why I cited the case of the tweaked vp chips that caused the absense of RFs...and incidentially led to the murder of the guy who did it. But thanks again for the clarification.

lb

···

----- Original Message -----
  From: Bill Velek
  To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 3:26 PM
  Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: The key is gaming regulations

  Lawrence Boxer wrote:
  > Correct me if I'm misinterpreting, there seems to be some confusion
  > between the legal randomness of a machine and paybacks. Has this
  > entire string been about paybacks? If so, then I'm the one who was
  > confused, as I thought there were questions raised about illegally
  > affecting actual distribution.

  The portion of the string has been about how the casinos can have
  machines that have an ER of over 100% with perfect play and still pass
  muster with a state law that prohibts machines paying more than 100%.

  I had speculated upon whether and how a casino might be able to ...
  legally ... gaffe the machine in order to meet the legal requirements.
  But Bob Dancer and Dick Kalagher -- unless I misunderstood them -- are
  suggesting that it is the actual payback, rather than the theoretical
  one, that matters; i.e., there will be inexperienced folks as well as
  errors by experts which should be sufficient to pull the actual payback
  to below 100% to satisfy the state gambling commission. If that's
  really the approach they take, then the 100% limit is no reason, in and
  of itself, to suspect that a casino is tampering with randomness.

  Cheers.

  Bill Velek, Attorney at Law
  Please don't 'drink & drive' ... but if you do, remember us.
  DUI- & DWI-Lawyer Referral Service: http://www.velek.com/dwi

        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
  vpFREE Home Page:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE

  vpFREE Links:
  http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

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

#12

... Have you ever seen a machine that "suggests" the cards

> you should hold? It is many times the wrong hold.

By the way, that feature can be turned off on most machines that have it by hitting the "help" button, or other similar button.

···

----- Original Message -----
  From: Pat O'Connell
  To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 6:25 PM
  Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: The key is gaming regulations

  Bill Velek wrote:
  >

  > > ... Have you ever seen a machine that "suggests" the cards
  > > you should hold? It is many times the wrong hold.
  >
  > No, I've never seen one, and it wouldn't surprise me if it did suggest
  > the wrong hold. I don't think the casinos are under any legal or moral
  > obligation to help you win a bet.

  The first time I played video poker it was on a nickel machine, and I
  was playing Deuces Wild at an Indian casino. That machine made
  suggestions. I got 4 deuces twice following the suggestions. Never got
  4Ds on that machine after that, but beginner's luck is a strange and
  wonderful thing.

  --
  Pat O'Connell
  Take nothing but pictures, Leave nothing but footprints,
  Kill nothing but vandals...

        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
  vpFREE Home Page:
  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vpFREE

  vpFREE Links:
  http://www.lvcm.com/tomesims/VP/Links.html

  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

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