vpFREE2 Forums

World Series of Video Poker (WSOVP)?

#1

Stanford Wong VP (from 1991) had a tournament mode where two people could
play 100 hands on a split screen. The hands would be the same but in
reverse order. The scoring was done based on EVs of the selected draws. By
the way, even though (duplicate) bridge is played with the same cards for
everybody sitting a specific direction, there are definite luck factors.
One is how many errors are made against you. Two is that the distribution
of the cards can wreck any well bid contract or your opponents can catch a
lucky distribution in an overbid contract. That is similar to the luck of
the draw in VP. That may be one of the reasons that the three national
championships each year will draw about 10,000 players even though it is
not (usually) played for money.

···

[Original Message]
From: deuceswild1000 <deuceswild1000@yahoo.com>
To: <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Date: 12/12/2004 6:56:35 PM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: World Series of Video Poker (WSOVP)?

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rockofjello333" > >
> I don't think this would really work. If the DRAWS are still
> different from individual to individual, then the results would
> still diverge widely. As a test of skill, it stinks:

Ok, so what do you suggest as a measure of skill rather than luck?

vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm

Yahoo! Groups Links

#2

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Howard Stern" <howard.w.stern@e...>
wrote:

Stanford Wong VP (from 1991) had a tournament mode where two people

could

play 100 hands on a split screen. The hands would be the same but in
reverse order. The scoring was done based on EVs of the selected

draws. By

the way, even though (duplicate) bridge is played with the same

cards for

everybody sitting a specific direction, there are definite luck

factors.

One is how many errors are made against you. Two is that the

distribution

of the cards can wreck any well bid contract or your opponents can

catch a

lucky distribution in an overbid contract. That is similar to the

luck of

the draw in VP. That may be one of the reasons that the three

national

championships each year will draw about 10,000 players even though

it is

not (usually) played for money.

Thanks for the responses on a possible WSOVP. But no one commented
on whether the "format" would be interesting to watch on TV. Also,
no one mentioned the idea of ADDING $5 to each players credits for
each game they play. That's a pretty radical change! Also, what
about the big screen display of every players credits as the round
progresses? The screen is the only way viewers (and the players too)
know who is leading, by how much, how much time is left, and how many
errors each player has made. TV viewers will see 6-8 players banging
away as fast as they can, and the screen summary of whats happening.
There would also be a commentator saying things like "If Joe makes
one more error he's out of here, even though he's leading", or "If
Tom doesn't speed up his play he'll never catch Bob", or "I can't
believe Jim has played 10,000 hands and never made an error", or "Can
you believe how fast Helen is playing?". The commentator has to make
it exciting, and explain what's happening (much like the WSOP).

I'm disappointed Poker is getting so much publicity and exposure and
VP isn't getting any. I'm sure folks who have written VP books,
setup web sites, published strategy charts, VP software, etc. are
too. I'm not losing sleep over this, just a bit disappointed. It
would be nice if VP could hitch a ride on the Poker bandwagon.

There is a TV series coming soon with a poker playing genius
similar to the pool shark Paul Newman played years ago. You know,
where people are in awe over his poker abilities ... sort of an evil
genius. And of course the books ... so many books the shelves can
barely hold them all. There is even a book by the guy who moderates
the WSOP ... I guess he's a Poker expert too.

#3

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Howard Stern"

<howard.w.stern@e...>

wrote:

I'm disappointed Poker is getting so much publicity and exposure and

VP isn't getting any. I'm sure folks who have written VP books,

The reason people like to watch poker but probably won't want to
watch VP is the same reason that people like to watch two or more
people having sex (it's a multibillion industry after all), but they
aren't nearly as interested in watching ONE person have sex.

In other words, it's the human interaction that makes live poker
interesting to watch and video poker so dull.

Plus, what's happened to VP lately would be similar to, in live
poker, the house quadrupling the rake, the number of tables being
cut in half, and every game available being five-card stud, period.
No one wants to make a TV show about something that's dying.

···

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

#4

...

There is a TV series coming soon with a poker playing genius
similar to the pool shark Paul Newman played years ago. You know,
where people are in awe over his poker abilities ... sort of an

evil

genius. ...

There is an indie movie entitled High Roller: The Stu Ungar Story"
formerly called "Stuey", starring Michael Imperioli (Christopher of
the Sopranos) which was made in 2003 which will debut on STARZ! on
Jan. 30th and is coming on dvd. Stuie Unger was the self destructive
poker genius who was the only person to win the World Series of
Poker main event (no limit hold em) 3 times and was also reputedly
the world's best gin rummey player. I have been looking foward to
seeing this movie.

David

···

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