vpFREE2 Forums

What's the record on 'back-to-back-to-back...' Royal Flush?

#21

>
> Good point Don! Sure it does not change anything to that

particular

> machine. Somehow, it just happened yet or maybe it has and we

just

> haven't heard of it. But, since no one has replied that they

have back-

> to-back Royals 3, 5, or 10 times... what's the point of staying

on the

> same machine where you just hit 2 Royals back-to-back?
>
> If you have hit it more than 2 in the past, then I would changed

my

> assumption to whatever the highest number that "Jackpot" has been

hit

> on the same machine back-to-back-to-back.
>
> Of course it would be an unwise decision, if someone is trying to

prove

> that s/he can hit that Royal Flush 3 or more times on the same

machine

> back-to-back-to-back on the same session. (Note: we're talking

about

> Single-Play machines here, by the way, with an honest RNG)

Since we are dealing with a RF that typically hits about every

42,000

hands and the most hands a person can play on a single line game in

a

10 hour period is about 7 to 10 thousand hands, it really doesnt
matter if you played 10 hands per machine and moved or stayed on one
machine the whole time. the odds are against hitting even one RF,
much less 2 or 3 or more, it has nothing to do with the machine. I
personally have hit 2 RFs in 20 minutes and have gone months without
hitting one, that is called randomness, which is the way the

machines

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "jimnkelli" <jbecker11@c...> wrote:

are supposed to work.

Happy Royals
Jim

-----------------------

Exactly the point -- randomness and the way the machines are supposed
to work versus the "reality" or the "fact" that so far, nobody seems
to have hit back-to-back-to-back (or more) Royals on the same machine
(Single Play), same game, same (short 24hr) session yet (it does not
mean it's impossible) so, why stay on that same machine after you
just hit back-to-back (2) Royals? Again similar to a Pick-6 Lotto
where if the winning numbers are 2-4-6-8-10-12, what are the odds of
seeing the same winning numbers within the same year or even the next
10 or more years?

I would go back to that same machine that gave me the 2 Royals but,
maybe after a few days or weeks but not on the same 24hr session
until I hear from someone that they have done it before.

Come to think of it...if a Single Play machine happens to hit 3 or
more Royals frequently in a short 24hr period, I would think that the
casinos will do their best to make some magic and have this machine
disappear. (must be part of the business plan)

#22

gilbert_616 wrote:

-----------------
At least twice already. (1) This guy playing next to me just hit the Royal playing Deuces on a Multi-Game machine, switch to DB and hit the Royal again, moved to the next machine and hit the Royal again. (2) A few months later on the same bank of $1 MultiGame machines, an old lady hit the Royal on DW, switch to the next machine to the right and hit the Royal again, switch again to the next machine to her right and hit the Royal again. (at Pechanga Indian casino)

  Gilbert; In case I get the chance to make a trip to Pechanga, how much do you charge per hour to play next to someone?

···

--
Thanks!
Skip
http://www.vpinsider.com

#23

Exactly the same as any other particular combination of numbers,
whether they have been winners before or not.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "gilbert_616" <gilbert_616@y...> wrote:

--- Again similar to a Pick-6 Lotto
where if the winning numbers are 2-4-6-8-10-12, what are the odds of
seeing the same winning numbers within the same year or even the next
10 or more years?

#24

From: "gilbert_616" <gilbert_616@yahoo.com>
Come to think of it...if a Single Play machine happens to hit 3 or
more Royals frequently in a short 24hr period, I would think that the
casinos will do their best to make some magic and have this machine
disappear. (must be part of the business plan)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Deja Moo: The feeling that you've heard this
bullshit before.

"We are born naked, wet and hungry....Then things get worse."

"No sense being pessimistic. It wouldn't work anyway."

"It IS as BAD as you think, and they ARE out to get you."

#25

gilbert_616 wrote:
> -----------------
> At least twice already. (1) This guy playing next to me just hit
> the Royal playing Deuces on a Multi-Game machine, switch to DB and
> hit the Royal again, moved to the next machine and hit the Royal
> again. (2) A few months later on the same bank of $1 MultiGame
> machines, an old lady hit the Royal on DW, switch to the next
> machine to the right and hit the Royal again, switch again to the
> next machine to her right and hit the Royal again. (at Pechanga
> Indian casino)

  Gilbert; In case I get the chance to make a trip to Pechanga, how

much do you

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Skip Hughes <skiphughes@e...> wrote:

charge per hour to play next to someone?
--
Thanks!
Skip
http://www.vpinsider.com

------------------------------------
Thanks! But, no thanks Skip!
I think I better stay as an AMATEUR (Player next to someone) in case
Video Poker makes it to the OLYMPICS in the future!!! :> :> :>

So for now, sitting next to someone will be available, believe it or
not, for (vp)FREE!

#26

Skip Hughes <skiphughes@e...> wrote

Gilbert; In case I get the chance to make a trip to Pechanga, how
much do you charge per hour to play next to someone?

···

--------------------------------------
gilbert_616 wrote:

Thanks! But, no thanks Skip! I think I better stay as an AMATEUR
(Player next to someone) in case Video Poker makes it to the
OLYMPICS in the future!!! :> :> :>
So for now, sitting next to someone will be available, believe it
or not, for (vp)FREE!
---------------------------------------------

Skip,

You are SOOOOO fickle! When I wrote about all my neighbors getting
RF's, you wanted to sit next to ME! I don't charge anything either!

)-: Babe

#27

Hi Gilbert,

Do you have any idea just how much havoc we can wreak on any
casino, if we JOIN FORCES?? With you on one side of a player,
and me on the other, we can create the VP winner of the century.
I wouldn't bet against a sequential royal with our potent powers!
I do believe that we should re-think the no charge bit, however.
Somehow has to subsidize our RF drought!

It's OUR turn now. (-:

Babe

···

-----------------------------------
gilbert_616 wrote:
......... (1) This guy playing next to me just hit the Royal playing
Deuces on a Multi-Game machine, switch to DB and hit the Royal
again, moved to the next machine and hit the Royal again. (2) A few
months later on the same bank of $1 MultiGame machines, an old lady
hit the Royal on DW, switch to the next machine to the right and
hit the Royal again, switch again to the next machine to her right
and hit the Royal again.........

#28

>And since most of the replies is showing that the most back-to-

back-to-

>back Royals people have hit before is "2", it seems to be a very

wise

>decision to move to another machine once you have accomplished

that

>number "2".

That's silly, the machine has exactly the same chance after

hitting #2 as it

did after hitting no royals for 3 days. Each dealt hand is

independent.

Otherwise we wouldn't hear any stories of back-to-back hands at

all.

This is one thing that has never been answered satisfactorily for
me. I recall from a statistical class that I took in college about
coin flipping: Yes, each individual flip of the coin has 50% chance
of coming up heads, 50% chance coming up tails. It doesn't matter if
heads has come up the last 20 times in a row. The next flip still
has a 50/50 chance of coming heads again.

HOWEVER, the statistical probability for each individual flip of the
coin is different than the probability for a particular series of
outcomes, is it not?

For example, while each flip of the coin has a 50/50 chance for the
outcome, isn't it a different probability to predict that the next 3-
in-a-row will all be heads or tails? Statistically, isn't there a
different percentage chance that all 3 flips will be either heads or
tails?

It's been 15 years since that class so I can't remember the
specifics, but it seems like, when taken together as a series of
events, the odds of that same event occuring go down.

Wouldn't this apply to royals as well? Again, I understand that each
outcome is independent of the previous outcome, but surely the
chances have to be lower that a machine will hit 4 royals in a row
than one in a row?

I'm NOT trying to start a math argument, but this scenario has
always puzzled me.

Thanks,
Karen

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today -

it's FREE!

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Part Timer" <PartTimeVP@h...> wrote:

http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

#29

the chances of heads coming up 3 times in a row are .5 x .5 x .5
= .125...whereas the chances of heads coming up 3 times in a row
after already coming up twice is .5...

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Part Timer" <PartTimeVP@h...>

wrote:

> >And since most of the replies is showing that the most back-to-
back-to-
> >back Royals people have hit before is "2", it seems to be a

very

wise
> >decision to move to another machine once you have accomplished
that
> >number "2".
>
> That's silly, the machine has exactly the same chance after
hitting #2 as it
> did after hitting no royals for 3 days. Each dealt hand is
independent.
> Otherwise we wouldn't hear any stories of back-to-back hands at
all.
>

This is one thing that has never been answered satisfactorily for
me. I recall from a statistical class that I took in college about
coin flipping: Yes, each individual flip of the coin has 50%

chance

of coming up heads, 50% chance coming up tails. It doesn't matter

if

heads has come up the last 20 times in a row. The next flip still
has a 50/50 chance of coming heads again.

HOWEVER, the statistical probability for each individual flip of

the

coin is different than the probability for a particular series of
outcomes, is it not?

For example, while each flip of the coin has a 50/50 chance for

the

outcome, isn't it a different probability to predict that the next

3-

in-a-row will all be heads or tails? Statistically, isn't there a
different percentage chance that all 3 flips will be either heads

or

tails?

It's been 15 years since that class so I can't remember the
specifics, but it seems like, when taken together as a series of
events, the odds of that same event occuring go down.

Wouldn't this apply to royals as well? Again, I understand that

each

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "kls9036" <ksunderland@h...> wrote:

outcome is independent of the previous outcome, but surely the
chances have to be lower that a machine will hit 4 royals in a row
than one in a row?

I'm NOT trying to start a math argument, but this scenario has
always puzzled me.

Thanks,
Karen
> _________________________________________________________________
> Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today -
it's FREE!
> http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/

#30

The odds of a unusual event happening 3 times in a row, or even in a
short period of time will become extremely rare depending on the odds
of the particular event. With a 'dealt RF' the odds are 1/650,000
aprox. but if you just had 2 dealt RFs in a row (never reported), the
odds of the next deal being a dealt RF is exactly the same on this
particular machine as any other machine (1 in 650,000), the
probability would be extreme, but after the first 2 events the odds
are no different on this machine than any machine.

Jim

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "kls9036" <ksunderland@h...> wrote:

This is one thing that has never been answered satisfactorily for
me. I recall from a statistical class that I took in college about
coin flipping: Yes, each individual flip of the coin has 50% chance
of coming up heads, 50% chance coming up tails. It doesn't matter if
heads has come up the last 20 times in a row. The next flip still
has a 50/50 chance of coming heads again.

HOWEVER, the statistical probability for each individual flip of the
coin is different than the probability for a particular series of
outcomes, is it not?

For example, while each flip of the coin has a 50/50 chance for the
outcome, isn't it a different probability to predict that the next 3-
in-a-row will all be heads or tails? Statistically, isn't there a
different percentage chance that all 3 flips will be either heads or
tails?

It's been 15 years since that class so I can't remember the
specifics, but it seems like, when taken together as a series of
events, the odds of that same event occuring go down.

Wouldn't this apply to royals as well? Again, I understand that each
outcome is independent of the previous outcome, but surely the
chances have to be lower that a machine will hit 4 royals in a row
than one in a row?

I'm NOT trying to start a math argument, but this scenario has
always puzzled me.

Thanks,
Karen