See FAQ #50:
http://members.cox.net/vpfree/FAQ.htm#50
<a href="http://members.cox.net/vpfree/FAQ.htm#50">
http://members.cox.net/vpfree/FAQ.htm#50</a>
On 17 Jun 2008 at 10:55, wpgtrinity wrote:
Next week I am in my first VP "contest" in Las Vegas. Thier are three
10 minute play periods, with 400 credits. Jacks or better. I can play
at 100% error free and the speed is not a problem. I am looking for
suggestions on tips to play "differently" than normal, if I should?
wpgtrinity wrote:
> Next week I am in my first VP "contest" in Las Vegas. Thier are
> three 10 minute play periods, with 400 credits. Jacks or better. I
> can play at 100% error free and the speed is not a problem. I am
> looking for suggestions on tips to play "differently" than normal,
> if I should?
vpFae wrote:
See FAQ #50:
http://members.cox.net/vpfree/FAQ.htm#50
I'll offer up a general preface to the material referenced in the FAQ:
In a tournament you seek to maximize your opportunity to place. A
strong score isn't sufficient alone.
That probability will depend on the number of entrants and the
structure of the tournament. Where it comes to structure, variables
include such things as the paytable played and whether multiple
scoring sessions are included (and, if so, how they're scored to
determine the winners).
VP software can be used to help determine the score levels that are
likely necessary to place, and the key hand hits that can be deemed
necessary to hit those scores (RF's, quads, etc.). Strategies can be
refined to maximize the probability of those hits.
------
A note re my comments that are included in the FAQ "VPfree Discussion"
link:
The cited comments are from 2-1/2 years ago. It's to be expected that
further experience would amend them. (For that matter, they reflect
an update on a 2j-year prior post on the former Skip Hughes Group board.)
One such change has to deal with the Harrah's Millionaire Maker
Tournament qualifier. In my suggested strategy I now find that I
significantly underestimated both the number of entrants as well as
the number who aggressively pursue a winning position (I suspect Bob
Dancer had much to do with the latter ;).
At the time I recommended largely sticking to a standard DDB strategy
(the game on the tournament machines). It's now clear that all of the
placing qualifiers hit one or more royals ... consequently "RF or
bust" is a stronger strategy.
This illustrates the role tournament assumptions play. Had
participation in that qualifier been in the 1000 range and the players
adhered more closely to their casino strategy, then a more general DDB
strategy would likely have been optimal.
- Harry
There is a chapter in my book "Frugal Video Poker" about VP tournaments and gives many hints on playing them. There is also a "Tournament Mode" where you can practice on the "Frugal VP" software.
________________
Jean $�ott, Frugal Gambler
http://queenofcomps.com/
You can read my blog at
http://lasvegasadvisor.com/blogs/jscott/
Well, you probably wouldn't throw away dealt aces with a kicker (half
a royal). There's a few other hands you probably wouldn't throw away
also. Unless it was your last hand and you needed a royal to get into
the money.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@...> wrote:
At the time I recommended largely sticking to a standard DDB strategy
(the game on the tournament machines). It's now clear that all of the
placing qualifiers hit one or more royals ... consequently "RF or
bust" is a stronger strategy.