Single coin vs. max coin play

[FAA]

I like hitting full houses too FAA especially like the other night when I
hit 3 at 9 bucks each in 5 hands. That was just like hitting a quad for
me.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Easy for you to say! I hit a bunch of one coin full houses on Sat. At $2.25 each not nearly as likable.

[olds442jetaway]

Results of session ( I will call it 3A ). A bust. Not because my single coin play didn't work on job, but because I foolishly tried it on Deuces Wild and the deuces were few and far between. No wild royals, deuces quads, or even 5 of a kind. Kissed 200 bucks goodbye. Back to the original plan which I never should have left anyway. Getting those 2 pair and 3 of a kinds to keep you going on job does just that, but not on deuces wild. Session 4 may be sometime this weekend. It will definitely be on job. Edited to add this footnote...My punishment for the above was to leave the casino in the morning with just coffee and bagel instead of a nice breakfast. The bagel was stale too. Good thing dunking still works...not so well though when the bagel is loaded up with cream cheese... I did give myself a mini pick me up this morning at my favorite local diner. For $ 3.95 I get eggs, toast or biscuit, great home fries with onions, juice, and coffee with refills. Great conversation and pretty waitress too. Not many of these places left at that price. Clean as a whistle to boot.

[onemoretry]

What was the pay table on the deuces wild game?

[olds442jetaway]

It was a good game at 98.91%...25/15/9/4/4/3/2/1 but when the deuces are few and far between, you know what happens. I really like that game and find it less boring than job, but this is what happens sometimes.....Edited to add this...Looking ahead a little to 2016, I know ahead of time if health and other things remain OK, I will be playing another million hands next year as well. If I can get the machines to attain their long term average at 99.54% on job and play a quarter game with 5 in, I should lose only 5 or 6k for the year. If I don't hit Royals like this year, make that negative 20 or 25k. That would not be good. The value of free rooms, gas, gifts, free play, and meals I received this year exceed the 5k number by a bit and I would be happy coming in around that figure for 2016. The 20k or more would definitely not be acceptable. Before I do decide what to do for 2016, I will run a separate test with 5 quarters in instead of single coin dollar play. It will be kind of a short term test, but we'll see what happens anyway. Either way, I hope the Royals can play catch up or I might as well play pennies, nickels, or not at all.

[DAAnMAAn]

In Vegas, I knew someone who had a betting strategy for blackjack. The trick was discipline. It was simple enough, build a 3.5k bankroll, start with 500, if lose, go to 1k, if lose, 2k. Stop at any win point and leave the table. Could do it multiple times in a day, but that was the strategy. Idea was losing three in a row is rare (happens to me in bj all the time) and when u finally lose 3 in a row, you can absorb it with a built up bankroll. Well....in the beginning, he thought he had the answer...bought a new car, paid off his debt, etc...well, gamblers fallacy notwithstanding, the end result was after selling his car and losing his savings, came to the conclusion that math and odds are present in each bet regardless of strategy, regardless of money wagered. If this wasn't true, there would be no casinos for they would not be profitable...
Fast forward to video poker...a 98% game is a 98% game regardless of how we play it...whether one coin, max coin, short session,
Long session. I think you have found a system with a fat bell curve of small wins. On one side, is losses, and in the other side is a thin portion of significant wins. Your cutting out some of the variance in terms of significant wins and losses, leaving with a small win/loss strategy. This is not a winning strategy; HOWEVER, imo, a strategy that once again with a player on a limited budget and tight pay tables, can last statistically longer than one playing max bet. Your results seem to be correlate to this imo.
But interesting experiment and I like to see people trying different things. Give it many sessions before any conclusions can be drawn. The more session,'more accurate the conclusions. Should do at least 30 sessions imo.
Cheers

[olds442jetaway]

Yes, the classic Martingale systems always fail over time. I am actually hoping my single coin dollar play does not show a major difference in playing with 5 quarters other than the roughly 2% Royal penalty. I plan to give this test at least 100 sessions before beginning to draw any conclusions. The biggest disappointment of course will be if the single coin dollar play beats 5 quarter bet on the same 99.54 game. That will mean that the games may be manipulated by the casino. I hope that is not the case. If for some reason it is, and the single coin dollar play still works over time, well, I will just have to go with the flow. The reason I am suspicious of course is my lack of hitting Royals with 5 or more bet over the last several years and just a very few in several million hands. Going from 6-10 W-2Gs per year over a lifetime of playing keeping the play relatively constant to none issued this year, just adds to my suspicions about vp games at least in one casino. It is no fun playing 99% or better games with nearly perfect play and having the end results be in the 94-96% range for the last several years. That turns a game of fun and recreation into something else. Granted, the comps of all types when valued at retail may just about offset that 5% loss, but you can't take those to the bank or bankroll whatever the case may be. Time will tell. In the interim, good luck and wishes for good health for all...Olds....

[onemoretry]

I plan to give this test at least 100 sessions before beginning to draw any conclusions. The biggest disappointment of course will be if the single coin dollar play beats 5 quarter bet on the same 99.54 game. That will mean that the games may be manipulated by the casino.
I think it is virtually impossible for a single player to generate statistically significant results.

If your sessions are, say, four hours, and you play 700 hands per hour, your total number of hands will be 280000. While that may seem to be a lot of hands, I doubt that it really is, from a statistical point of view.

There are 2,598,960 dealt hands possible. How can less than 10% of that number be that significant?

If your single coin results happen to be better than expected - great, and so be it. But, it will not mean that "the games may be manipulated" any more than if you get poor single coin results, you have proved the games are legit.

[olds442jetaway]

I agree that is a small sample. The rest of the trials over the last 5 years or so are undocumented. However, if I do get that trend after a few months of play, I would be foolish to ignore it until that fails as well. Probably a bigger sample is the over 1 million hands played this year most of which would have generated a W-2G on a Royal or a few other premium hand hits. To me, the no W-2G factor is very big and possibly significant. Still in the big scheme of things, meaning infinity, it may be a small sample as well. All I can do is go with the flow until that is showing a significant pattern change. At any rate, for 2016, I will be losing much less money than the last few years. No more 2 buck to 25 buck a hand play for me. You just can't count on that putting you in positive territory or even close session by session.

[FloridaPhil]

Post unable to migrate

[DAAnMAAn]

Interesting theories. Thanks for sharing