I have all the bones of the concept flushed out. I'll post on Friday, busy tomorrow and Thursday, exactly what I intend to create and get final thoughts from everyone.
~FK
What Would It Take???
Here's the working concept. Any final thoughts before I start coding it???
···
----------------------------------------------
Video Poker Hypothesis Tester and Confidence Quantifier
Basic Concept: The Utility will include three basic tests, each of which will be independent and optional. The user will be able to use some or all of them, if they so choose. In addition to the three basic tests there will be some optional tests and a place for advanced user-defined tests. The utility will include printable sheets for casino record keeping and tallying. Optionally, video of your play can be used to input at home, but the paper version will be included. The utility will be written in MS Excel and will be completely free, if the code translates then an OpenOffice version will also be made available for free for those that do not own MS Excel.
The Three Main Tests
1.A Test for Random Deal and Random Draw. All five dealt cards will be recorded, as will the cards drawn. The dealt and drawn cards will be analyzed for frequency of occurrence both separately and together. Since we are testing for the frequency of occurrence of single cards, each hand gives us 5 or more trials and minimizes the need for an impossibly large sample. This test is designed only for occasional or one time use. It's not something you are going to be doing for the rest of your VP career.
2.The Made Hand Test: This test will be ongoing and of indefinite duration. You may decide to track all your straights and higher for the rest of your life. It will allow you to track as much or as little as you want. If you only wanted to track Royals Flushes you could. Naturally the more things you track and the less rare they are the higher the confidence level will be. The problem with this test is it is based on your total number of hands and your strategy. It is therefore subject to error and is dependent on what your strategy is and how accurately you play. It might be amusing as a fun thing to do, but it is far too error prone to be good science.
3.Strategy Independent Frequency Test: This is similar to the made hand test in the sense that you are recording hands like Flushes, Full Houses, 4K, SF, RF. Where it differs is that rather than comparing your total hands to the number of paying hands, we are instead looking only at the frequency of the times you draw. The test will also include a dealt pat hand test as compared to total hands played, but again that is not subject to strategy difference. You'll be able to check for as little or as much as you like from the 3K on up to RF and it's designed for lifetime use or short term use. Obviously, as the sample size increases over time the confidence level will rise.
The utility will be designed non-partisan & side-neutral. That is to say, you can use it to test a hypothesis that machines are fair and your results are completely normal. Or, you could use it to test a hypothesis that machines are unfair and your results are abnormal. Most importantly, it will tell you your confidence level based on your sample size. ~FK
I like it.
It would be fun to use it on Paymar's or other's VP software, too.
···
--- On Fri, 3/23/12, Frank <frank@progressivevp.com> wrote:
From: Frank <frank@progressivevp.com>
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: What Would It Take???
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, March 23, 2012, 11:49 AM
Here's the working concept. Any final thoughts before I start coding it???
----------------------------------------------
Video Poker Hypothesis Tester and Confidence Quantifier
Basic Concept: The Utility will include three basic tests, each of which will be independent and optional. The user will be able to use some or all of them, if they so choose. In addition to the three basic tests there will be some optional tests and a place for advanced user-defined tests. The utility will include printable sheets for casino record keeping and tallying. Optionally, video of your play can be used to input at home, but the paper version will be included. The utility will be written in MS Excel and will be completely free, if the code translates then an OpenOffice version will also be made available for free for those that do not own MS Excel.
The Three Main Tests
1.A Test for Random Deal and Random Draw. All five dealt cards will be recorded, as will the cards drawn. The dealt and drawn cards will be analyzed for frequency of occurrence both separately and together. Since we are testing for the frequency of occurrence of single cards, each hand gives us 5 or more trials and minimizes the need for an impossibly large sample. This test is designed only for occasional or one time use. It's not something you are going to be doing for the rest of your VP career.
2.The Made Hand Test: This test will be ongoing and of indefinite duration. You may decide to track all your straights and higher for the rest of your life. It will allow you to track as much or as little as you want. If you only wanted to track Royals Flushes you could. Naturally the more things you track and the less rare they are the higher the confidence level will be. The problem with this test is it is based on your total number of hands and your strategy. It is therefore subject to error and is dependent on what your strategy is and how accurately you play. It might be amusing as a fun thing to do, but it is far too error prone to be good science.
3.Strategy Independent Frequency Test: This is similar to the made hand test in the sense that you are recording hands like Flushes, Full Houses, 4K, SF, RF. Where it differs is that rather than comparing your total hands to the number of paying hands, we are instead looking only at the frequency of the times you draw. The test will also include a dealt pat hand test as compared to total hands played, but again that is not subject to strategy difference. You'll be able to check for as little or as much as you like from the 3K on up to RF and it's designed for lifetime use or short term use. Obviously, as the sample size increases over time the confidence level will rise.
The utility will be designed non-partisan & side-neutral. That is to say, you can use it to test a hypothesis that machines are fair and your results are completely normal. Or, you could use it to test a hypothesis that machines are unfair and your results are abnormal. Most importantly, it will tell you your confidence level based on your sample size. ~FK
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Oh one more thing: The utility will be completely open source and the method as well as the utility will be published and should always be consider a work in progress. As people make suggestions of how to do things better, it will be reviewed updated and new versions will be made available.
The new versions will be designed to work with your old data, so nothing will be lost and it will be totally backwards compatible.
~FK
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Cohen <brucedcohen2002@...> wrote: I like it.
It would be fun to use it on Paymar's or other's VP software, too.
You reminded me, when you used the word, "fun", what inspired me to work on this little project. I met two nice retired couples from Canada a few weeks ago that were keeping hyper accurate tallies of all their made hands, SF on up to RF, and of all the 1 cards draws they made. My first thought was that they were wasting their time. I asked one them if he was doing it because he doubted the honesty of machines and he told me "no", it was just fun. It added a level of competitiveness (albeit random) to their play. They'd play next to each other and bet (a quarter) on who could get the most of a particular hand that day, and they got all excited when one of them would pull into the lead on let's say, "dirty royals" for the night.
It really seemed to add a level of fun and entertainment for them and I would imagine they aren't alone.
I asked him if he used the data to check for anything and he admitted that no he hadn't bothered. I guess he had originally intended to use it for checking, but had run so good on Royals, he never got around to it.
Anyway, I have it on the best of authority that recorded keeping like this can add fun and excitement to VP play for some people and anything that can make the same activity more fun seems like it's worth spending the time on.
To increase people's fun is therefore my ulterior motive for working on this utility. I hope it does exactly that. ~FK
I'm glad Frank brought this topic up as it has really taken off and threads like this are far more interesting than most (at least in my opinion!). I've gambled for about ten years, have kept stats, but never, really good ones. Or, ones that I really looked at later or studied. Since my move to Reno, that part (the studying) has become almost as fun at the actual playing. Maybe I am different in that regard, but I guess I have always been like that. To be honest, I would rather listen to sports talk radio than watch the various games. The analysis and the breaking down the of plays, the momentum swings and the analysis always seemed more interesting to me than the actual playing of the game. Am I unique in this aspect of things?
For most, they could care less with this, but these are my numbers so far this year (I would much rather see information like this that is factual in nature)! So, no need to read further if you are not interested. . .
I've played 16,591 hands in a little over 34 hours for an average of about 484 hands an hour. I have had 11 winning sessions and 8 losing sessions and am up a little over $500 for the year. I have hit one royal (ave 40,782), so I am definitely running ahead on that one. Straight flushes have come up roses four times already this year (ave hit 9,124) so I should have a little under two. I have been playing DDB (10/6), so with the flush only worth 500 (same as a quad), it really isn't that big of a deal. Four aces with the kicker has really saved me so far this year. I have hit four of those (ave hit 16,236), so I have hit three more than could be expected. The last one was dealt (so I can't comment on hitting from three of a kind!). The four 2's, 3's and 4's with a kicker I have only hit twice (ave hit 6,983), so I am a little under in this category. Four aces without the kicker I have hit twice so far (ave hit 5,761), so I am about one hit short on quad aces. The 2's, 3's and 4's without the kicker is where I have really been light. I have only hit three of these and the average hit is every 2,601 hits. So, I am way short in this category. As for regular quads (5-K's), I am at 30 for the year. With the average hit being at every 613, I am about three over the average. With that information in mind, I think the machine (all on one machine) that I have been playing is fairly standard. Some categories above, others below.
The thing that is interesting is that I have also started to document how I reach the quads (I only save or document quads or above hands) as it seemed to me that I hardly ever reached them from having three of a kind. I think, what happens, for the most part is that we have pairs so many more times that we are bound to reach quads to a greater degree than off of threes (math, anyone?). Of my last 22 quads, one was from a lone high card, 14 were from a pair, six were from a three of a kind and one was dealt.
And, I am going this Sunday and all this information will need to be changed. . .
Have a good weekend everyone. And, thank you to Bob Dancer for the software to analyze this game!
Until next time,
Peter Boyd.
···
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
From: frank@progressivevp.com
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 21:55:15 +0000
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: What Would It Take???
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Cohen <brucedcohen2002@...> wrote: I like it.
It would be fun to use it on Paymar's or other's VP software, too.
You reminded me, when you used the word, "fun", what inspired me to work on this little project. I met two nice retired couples from Canada a few weeks ago that were keeping hyper accurate tallies of all their made hands, SF on up to RF, and of all the 1 cards draws they made. My first thought was that they were wasting their time. I asked one them if he was doing it because he doubted the honesty of machines and he told me "no", it was just fun. It added a level of competitiveness (albeit random) to their play. They'd play next to each other and bet (a quarter) on who could get the most of a particular hand that day, and they got all excited when one of them would pull into the lead on let's say, "dirty royals" for the night.
It really seemed to add a level of fun and entertainment for them and I would imagine they aren't alone.
I asked him if he used the data to check for anything and he admitted that no he hadn't bothered. I guess he had originally intended to use it for checking, but had run so good on Royals, he never got around to it.
Anyway, I have it on the best of authority that recorded keeping like this can add fun and excitement to VP play for some people and anything that can make the same activity more fun seems like it's worth spending the time on.
To increase people's fun is therefore my ulterior motive for working on this utility. I hope it does exactly that. ~FK
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I like the idea of adding a, "how you got it" function to the utility.
Then, after the fact you could record if you hit a 4K on a 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 card draw.
I believe I will try to incorporate this, if I figure out what to do with the data once it's collected, thanks for the idea.
~FK
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, peter boyd <boyd_peter@...> wrote:
I'm glad Frank brought this topic up as it has really taken off and threads like this are far more interesting than most (at least in my opinion!). I've gambled for about ten years, have kept stats, but never, really good ones. Or, ones that I really looked at later or studied. Since my move to Reno, that part (the studying) has become almost as fun at the actual playing. Maybe I am different in that regard, but I guess I have always been like that. To be honest, I would rather listen to sports talk radio than watch the various games. The analysis and the breaking down the of plays, the momentum swings and the analysis always seemed more interesting to me than the actual playing of the game. Am I unique in this aspect of things?
For most, they could care less with this, but these are my numbers so far this year (I would much rather see information like this that is factual in nature)! So, no need to read further if you are not interested. . .
I've played 16,591 hands in a little over 34 hours for an average of about 484 hands an hour. I have had 11 winning sessions and 8 losing sessions and am up a little over $500 for the year. I have hit one royal (ave 40,782), so I am definitely running ahead on that one. Straight flushes have come up roses four times already this year (ave hit 9,124) so I should have a little under two. I have been playing DDB (10/6), so with the flush only worth 500 (same as a quad), it really isn't that big of a deal. Four aces with the kicker has really saved me so far this year. I have hit four of those (ave hit 16,236), so I have hit three more than could be expected. The last one was dealt (so I can't comment on hitting from three of a kind!). The four 2's, 3's and 4's with a kicker I have only hit twice (ave hit 6,983), so I am a little under in this category. Four aces without the kicker I have hit twice so far (ave hit 5,761), so I am about one hit short on quad aces. The 2's, 3's and 4's without the kicker is where I have really been light. I have only hit three of these and the average hit is every 2,601 hits. So, I am way short in this category. As for regular quads (5-K's), I am at 30 for the year. With the average hit being at every 613, I am about three over the average. With that information in mind, I think the machine (all on one machine) that I have been playing is fairly standard. Some categories above, others below.
The thing that is interesting is that I have also started to document how I reach the quads (I only save or document quads or above hands) as it seemed to me that I hardly ever reached them from having three of a kind. I think, what happens, for the most part is that we have pairs so many more times that we are bound to reach quads to a greater degree than off of threes (math, anyone?). Of my last 22 quads, one was from a lone high card, 14 were from a pair, six were from a three of a kind and one was dealt.
And, I am going this Sunday and all this information will need to be changed. . .
Have a good weekend everyone. And, thank you to Bob Dancer for the software to analyze this game!
Until next time,
Peter Boyd.To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
From: frank@...
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 21:55:15 +0000
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: What Would It Take???--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Cohen <brucedcohen2002@> wrote: I like it.
It would be fun to use it on Paymar's or other's VP software, too.
You reminded me, when you used the word, "fun", what inspired me to work on this little project. I met two nice retired couples from Canada a few weeks ago that were keeping hyper accurate tallies of all their made hands, SF on up to RF, and of all the 1 cards draws they made. My first thought was that they were wasting their time. I asked one them if he was doing it because he doubted the honesty of machines and he told me "no", it was just fun. It added a level of competitiveness (albeit random) to their play. They'd play next to each other and bet (a quarter) on who could get the most of a particular hand that day, and they got all excited when one of them would pull into the lead on let's say, "dirty royals" for the night.
It really seemed to add a level of fun and entertainment for them and I would imagine they aren't alone.
I asked him if he used the data to check for anything and he admitted that no he hadn't bothered. I guess he had originally intended to use it for checking, but had run so good on Royals, he never got around to it.
Anyway, I have it on the best of authority that recorded keeping like this can add fun and excitement to VP play for some people and anything that can make the same activity more fun seems like it's worth spending the time on.
To increase people's fun is therefore my ulterior motive for working on this utility. I hope it does exactly that. ~FK
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
After posting the beta version of the utility I'd like to extend an open invitation to anyone that would like to improve it and post their versions on my site if they would like me to. Appropriate credit will be given to the creators and any improvements they make.
~FK
Sounds like a lot of paperwork.
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Cohen <brucedcohen2002@...> wrote:
I like it.
Â
It would be fun to use it on Paymar's or other's VP software, too.--- On Fri, 3/23/12, Frank <frank@...> wrote: