out2222lunch wrote:
How about in the 98% range ...
The vpfree world will little note, nor long remember
video poker in the 98% range, unless it has a lot
of extras going for it.
Where is the best 5-play MS in Vegas for $.05/.10?
This is so true, even a game with an EV of 99.1% is pretty much
unthinkable. If you run a long term simulation of 1 or more million
hands a game that returns 99.8% still loses and you have to have a
good cash back or promotion situation to make it work, something that
returns 98.5% just doesnt even show on the radar.
Happy Royals
Jim
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Roland Langley <roland0684@y...> wrote:
out2222lunch wrote:
> How about in the 98% range ...The vpfree world will little note, nor long remember
video poker in the 98% range, unless it has a lot
of extras going for it.
What you say is true for 1 million hands. But for those of us who are
there for a couple of days and don't mind throwing $100 into these
machines with a 99% paytable for the chance at getting 1 lucky hand,
it's not "unthinkable". In the short term, anything can happen.
Obviously the better the paytable the better the expected return, no
matter how long you play (hence the question of where are the best
paytables). But in the short term you are MUCH more likely to fall
well outside the expected return, so losing a half a perecnt or a
percent on the expected doesn't really matter that much. When I am
budgeting my money for the trip (or especially if I'm ahead) I have
no trouble pulling some cash away from something with a lower margin
(like boring 9/6 Jacks) for a shot at a big payout or just the pure
fun of something like Multistrike.
Every time somebody asks a question about paytables lower than about
99.5%, there are some people on the list that have to respond just to
say how dumb it is to play those. I'm not trying to pick on these
particular responses which were at least polite, but saying that
doesn't contribute anything, and it ignores the fact that you can't
completely measure "value" by $ expected value. To me, playing hours
and hours at 100.3% is a waste of life and would bore me to death -
but I respect the opinion of those that enjoy making money at what is
for most people just a form of entertainment. Just as I also respect
the opinion of those that occasionally buy lottery tickets (as long
as they can afford it) which are about as bad as you get as far as
expected return but can be exciting to do once in a while or for a
few bucks a week.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Roland Langley <roland0684@y...>
wrote:
>
> out2222lunch wrote:
> > How about in the 98% range ...
>
> The vpfree world will little note, nor long remember
> video poker in the 98% range, unless it has a lot
> of extras going for it.This is so true, even a game with an EV of 99.1% is pretty much
unthinkable. If you run a long term simulation of 1 or more million
hands a game that returns 99.8% still loses and you have to have a
good cash back or promotion situation to make it work, something
that
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "jimnkelli" <jbecker11@c...> wrote:
returns 98.5% just doesnt even show on the radar.
Happy Royals
Jim
I believe that it all boils down to just one thing. Do whatever you want, but make an informed decision.
One of the key benefits of vpFREE is dispensing of knowledge. Once you know what you are doing,
then it is up to you. It doesn't bother me a bit to see someone giving it a shot on a low paying machine,
or playing nothing but 9/6 jb in order to get a bunch of comps.
I even play penny slots once in a while . It always bothers me when I see the clueless
sit down at a machine and make a donation.
The number one priority of the majority of players is to have a good time, we members of vpFREE just try and combine
that with either making a profit, or at least losing the least.
Regards
A.P.
···
----- Original Message -----
From: larsonsm
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 9:56 AM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Where is the best 5-play MS in Vegas for $.05/.10?
What you say is true for 1 million hands. But for those of us who are
there for a couple of days and don't mind throwing $100 into these
machines with a 99% paytable for the chance at getting 1 lucky hand,
it's not "unthinkable". In the short term, anything can happen.
Obviously the better the paytable the better the expected return, no
matter how long you play (hence the question of where are the best
paytables). But in the short term you are MUCH more likely to fall
well outside the expected return, so losing a half a perecnt or a
percent on the expected doesn't really matter that much. When I am
budgeting my money for the trip (or especially if I'm ahead) I have
no trouble pulling some cash away from something with a lower margin
(like boring 9/6 Jacks) for a shot at a big payout or just the pure
fun of something like Multistrike.
Every time somebody asks a question about paytables lower than about
99.5%, there are some people on the list that have to respond just to
say how dumb it is to play those. I'm not trying to pick on these
particular responses which were at least polite, but saying that
doesn't contribute anything, and it ignores the fact that you can't
completely measure "value" by $ expected value. To me, playing hours
and hours at 100.3% is a waste of life and would bore me to death -
but I respect the opinion of those that enjoy making money at what is
for most people just a form of entertainment. Just as I also respect
the opinion of those that occasionally buy lottery tickets (as long
as they can afford it) which are about as bad as you get as far as
expected return but can be exciting to do once in a while or for a
few bucks a week.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
It always bothers me when I see the clueless
sit down at a machine and make a donation.
Regards
A.P.
I agree totally. I once was playing Video Poker -I won't say if the
machine was positive or not, it does not matter for this anecdote-
and someone sat next to me and seemed to be mystified and clueless.
Very soon I got the inevitable question, "How do you play these
machines?" I just tried to remember what I read about Lee Strasberg
and the Actors Studio and all of that, and put on an even more
mystified and puzzled face as I mumbled in what I tried to make a
thick Ukrainian accent, "No, English, no, no, English".
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Albert Pearson" <a-p@s...> wrote:
I'll come to the defense of those who say it's dumb.
I'm against being rude to people but let's face it, "What should I
play, 99.5% JOB which bores me or Double Bonus that only has a 96%
payout?" is kind of a dumb question to begin with, isn't it? How are
people in the forum supposed to answer that?
If the questionee knows enough about VP to understand payouts, they
already know which game will pays more (or loses the least) in the
long run. If they don't care about the long run, then why are they
asking if it's ok to play a game for fun?
carlos
PS I'm tempted to respond, "Obviously, people go to Las Vegas to be
bored, so play the JOB. When you get sick of that, return to your
hotel room. But don't turn the TV on or call anyone or read a book
or even look out the window, because that might be interesting."
[etc]...Every time somebody asks a question about paytables lower
than about
99.5%, there are some people on the list that have to respond just
to
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "larsonsm" <larsonsm@y...> wrote:
say how dumb it is to play those. I'm not trying to pick on these
particular responses which were at least polite, but saying that
doesn't contribute anything, and it ignores the fact that you can't
completely measure "value" by $ expected value....[etc]
You're completely missing my point. I'm not asking whether it's OK
to play a game for fun, that's for me to decide. I can also decide
whether I think playing something very different such as 5-play
multisrike is worth a few dollars and worth giving up a few pennies
in expected value for the excitement. Comparing my question asking
the forum for the best paytables offered for nickel 5-play MS and
asking for help choosing between JOB & 96% DB is ridiculous.
I enjoy the excitement of 5-play MS (playing for free on the website)
and I want to try it while I am in LV. I have mostly-mastered
several game strategies and I am informed enough to know to look for
the best paytables offered. (I also will play plenty of 9/6 JOB and
better games while I am in LV.) So since I have already decided that
the few pennies of expected value is a small price to pay for a few
minutes of entertainment, I would just like to know where I can find
the best return, whether it be 95%, 98% or 99.5%. If you can't help
with the question, just stay silent and enjoy that whopping subsidy
that I'm providing.
It's like one person said, there is a difference between being
completely uninformed and making an informed decision that not
everyone else would make the same way. Another example is playing a
game with a lower expected return because you happen to be staying at
or spending time at a particular casino. There are times I'd rather
play 9/6 JoB and be with or near my friends than go off by myself to
find 10/7 DB. That's a lot different than the person who plays 7/5
BP on a machines adjacent to one offering 8/5 BP or someone who plays
and holds 66K in JoB (I witnessed those kinds of plays several times
on my last trip!). Also, my goal is usually a combination of "making
it last" and having a chance to "hit it big". I'd love to see the
analysis of 98.5% nickel 5-play MS versus $1 9/6 JoB - each hand is
$5, right? If I started with $100 and played both games until either
the money was gone or I reached $500, how would they compare? And
how long could I expect to play each?
I'll come to the defense of those who say it's dumb.
I'm against being rude to people but let's face it, "What should I
play, 99.5% JOB which bores me or Double Bonus that only has a 96%
payout?" is kind of a dumb question to begin with, isn't it? How
are
people in the forum supposed to answer that?
If the questionee knows enough about VP to understand payouts, they
already know which game will pays more (or loses the least) in the
long run. If they don't care about the long run, then why are they
asking if it's ok to play a game for fun?carlos
PS I'm tempted to respond, "Obviously, people go to Las Vegas to be
bored, so play the JOB. When you get sick of that, return to your
hotel room. But don't turn the TV on or call anyone or read a book
or even look out the window, because that might be interesting."[etc]...Every time somebody asks a question about paytables lower
than about
> 99.5%, there are some people on the list that have to respond
just
to
> say how dumb it is to play those. I'm not trying to pick on
these
> particular responses which were at least polite, but saying that
> doesn't contribute anything, and it ignores the fact that you
can't
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "calebr0n" <calebr0n@y...> wrote:
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "larsonsm" <larsonsm@y...> wrote:
> completely measure "value" by $ expected value....[etc]
This will be my last response to this issue, as there is no point
beating a dead horse...
Let me try one more analogy to try to show where I'm coming from on
this. Let's say there is an informed group of movie buffs who like
to share information about films. A sizable segment of this
population thinks it is stupid to ever pay $14 or $18 a couple to see
a film in the theater when you can wait just a few months to rent it
on DVD with all the extras for $2. Many others naturally see some
value in experiencing the movie on the big screen, with the surround
sound, when it is first released, etc. So I post a message to the
group, asking what do people know about theaters A, B, & C: how much
do they charge, what is the atmosphere, how is the popcorn, etc.
Most people offer helpful advice, but somebody always replies to tell
me I'm stupid for paying so much to see it in the theater, whether
it's $14 at A or $18 at B. Is that helping???
Anyway, thanks to those who have provided some information on this
subject. And thanks to everyone who helps maintain the database and
shares other information. Even those who think I'm stupid for
sometimes playing negative expecation games!
I'll come to the defense of those who say it's dumb.
I'm against being rude to people but let's face it, "What should I
play, 99.5% JOB which bores me or Double Bonus that only has a 96%
payout?" is kind of a dumb question to begin with, isn't it? How
are
people in the forum supposed to answer that?
If the questionee knows enough about VP to understand payouts, they
already know which game will pays more (or loses the least) in the
long run. If they don't care about the long run, then why are they
asking if it's ok to play a game for fun?carlos
PS I'm tempted to respond, "Obviously, people go to Las Vegas to be
bored, so play the JOB. When you get sick of that, return to your
hotel room. But don't turn the TV on or call anyone or read a book
or even look out the window, because that might be interesting."[etc]...Every time somebody asks a question about paytables lower
than about
> 99.5%, there are some people on the list that have to respond
just
to
> say how dumb it is to play those. I'm not trying to pick on
these
> particular responses which were at least polite, but saying that
> doesn't contribute anything, and it ignores the fact that you
can't
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "calebr0n" <calebr0n@y...> wrote:
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "larsonsm" <larsonsm@y...> wrote:
> completely measure "value" by $ expected value....[etc]
I'd love to see the
analysis of 98.5% nickel 5-play MS versus $1 9/6 JoB - each hand is
$5, right? If I started with $100 and played both games until
either
the money was gone or I reached $500, how would they compare? And
how long could I expect to play each?
I must admit I would like to see that analysis too, but I'm too lazy
to make it, it would feel like punishment, like homework in VP-102. I
can tell you that I have been in both situations -on the Five Play
Multi-Strike even with worse paytables than 98.5%. In JB I have gone
beyond 500 starting with 100 many, many times, never in the nickel
game; but then I have yet to have a Multi-Strike Royal or fat Quad in
the lofty levels. In spite of that, it is my experience that in most
sessions you will play longer in the nickel machine than in the
dollar one.
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "larsonsm" <larsonsm@y...> wrote: