Negative VP Game Analysis

[Eduardo]

I hate to keep beating a dead horse, but this is the kind of information our VP experts should be providing.





























Most video poker software that experts would point you to will provide that information and more for these pay tables. The only concept that you need to understand is "returns less than 100%." Beyond that, what more could the experts possibly need to say? The rest is beyond obvious. Bet less, lose less? You act like this is some gambling secret that the masses are unaware of. I agree that it's helpful to know the rate of losses on different pay tables... I like your chart. But there is no reason to keep harping on how the experts are somehow failing us by not getting into how to best play negative games.Experts generally aren't interested in teaching you how to lose money more efficiently. They are more interested in teaching people how to actually win.That's kind of like telling a boxing instructor they should be teaching people how to just survive an encounter with a real boxer since 99% of people won' t be able to win, instead of training people how to win a fight.

[FAA]

Even barely negative games will bust you nine of ten trips. Quarters should be the only play. Minimally, unless you discern some hot streak. Indulging in the $4K fantasy has left me numb. I grin and bear it, hoping for a -$100 outcome.
Olds, I have DW strategy pretty much down. But I haven't even had a DW hit in my phone yet. Were it real money, I would be -$1,900. But maybe 9/6 JOB really is that bad along the East Coast and I'm throwing good money after bad!

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=Eduardo]Beyond that, what more could the experts possibly need to say?[/quote]Have you ever heard any VP expert state the fact that playing 96% VP games with single coin costs less than playing them with max coins?  Maybe a sentence here or there, but nothing in depth.  Have you ever seen a chart like this in any VP strategy book?  I haven't.  That's because most VP experts are playing both sides of the fence.   Dreams sell.  Players "want" to believe these games are beatable and will buy books and software promising to teach them how.   No one will buy a book telling them how to lose less.  On the other hand, casinos do not want customers tying up their machines playing one coin at a time.   They want you to play 5 times that much so you can lose 5 times more.The truth is outside of Nevada and the high limit room, positive VP games are the exception not the norm.   With this chart  a recreational VP player can walk into a casino and identify the real cost of playing negative games before they play.  If they choose to pay more to play max coins, that's their business.    If they walk out and choose not to play, that works too.  All I want is for players to know the costs before they decide if and how they play.  I have nothing against VP experts.  If it wasn't for them we would not know what positive games are or what perfect play is.  We wouldn't know that comps have value and we sure wouldn't know how to earn more of them.  That said, I would like to see experts address the questions and issues of the millions of small time VP players who must play negative games or not play at all. 

[FAA]

Max coin correlates quite clearly to max loss. Max players may have a lucky trip, even a lucky year with an over royal. Don't bet on it. I'm sick of losing and must strictly abide min coin. The cost is boredom. It's a long ride to boredom. DW has worse odds but offers a thousand coin payout. We're picking coal flavors either way.

[Eduardo]

Have you ever heard any VP expert state the fact that playing 96% VP games with single coin costs less than playing them with max coins?
















Or costs more over a longer period of time, depending on how you manage your bankroll.PLAYING SINGLE COIN:If you are going to play X hours per day, then the cost per hour is less (with lower coin-in)If you are going to play a total of X hands, the cost is less (with lower coin-in)If you are going to play a total of X coin-in, the cost is more (with longer play to reach X coin-in)So that "fact" is only factual under certain conditions and it depends on your objectives.Bottom line summary: If you are going to bet a total of $10,000 you are better off doing it at max bet. The casino will get more of your money (on average) at single coin, it will just take longer.But if you are fine with losing a higher percentage of your bankroll, then playing through it more slowly will obviously lose it more slowly.

[asteroid]

In that case Olds I would like to suggest the game Royal Aces  Bonus (RAB). If you get quad Aces you get paid 800 coins (799 won plus your original wager). With RAB, you are not shorted on quad aces (no kicker required) if you only put in one coin. I've seen 100 line RAB, but I don't remember seeing it on spin poker games.FAA....in the long run, you will hit quad deuces 8 times for every job royal. Yet the job royal when hit, pays 800 for one and in the same long term time frame, the quad deuces will pay 1600. That's why I like to chase the quad deuces instead of the Royal. If you have the time, practice on this site for fun playing airport deuces. Bet only the amount you need to be even once the quad deuces hit. I think you will be amazed at the long term outcome. Now if only I could stick to that method. i think I would be just about even for the year instead of another substantial losing one. Just as an aside, when the royal does come in deuces wild every 50k hands or so while you are chasing the deuces, it will be gravy. Nice and hot with no lumps of coal in it either.

[FloridaPhil]

Life is about experiences and video poker is no different.  If you are new to the game, you should play whatever number of coins it takes to earn the royal bonus.  I can't think of anything more depressing than hitting a $62.50 royal on your first one.   Cashing a ticket for $1,000 is a great thrill for someone who has never won more than a couple hundred dollars in a casino.   I gave up counting royals years ago.  I got very lucky early on and thought VP was a cash machine.  I followed the expert's advice and it worked wonderfully at first.   To gain better odds, I raised my bets as instructed and spent my time grinding it out waiting for math to make me a winner.   I started getting free rooms, then suites.  Fancy meals and shows whenever I wanted.  Casinos were flying me around for free.  We had a great time.  I don't need to tell you what happened because you know. After you play VP for a while, you discover the cost of hitting a max coin royal far exceeds the payout.  The truth is there are very few positive VP games left in today's casinos and you probably won't find one near you.  Playing computer perfect is nearly impossible for mortal human beings.  You need a lot more money, guts and luck than you think to keep from going broke in this game.Once these facts sink in, you can continue to pay up or figure out how to enjoy the "experience" of playing VP without falling for the hype.   Use this chart.  These are computer calculated hourly loss benchmarks based on Bob Dancer's own figures.   Most of today's VP games are negative.  The odds say you are going to pay to play.  Look at the cost.  Calculate the comps.  Decide for yourself what the "experience" of playing VP is worth.  Make your decision based on facts, not dreams. This is the Recreational Forum.  We are supposed to be talking about having fun playing VP.   I enjoy VP the way I play it now.  I didn't back when I followed the experts.

[Waiting4RF]

Your chart should include penny, two cents, nickel, and dime denominations to show how to really reduce the cost of VP and still have the experience.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=Waiting4RF]Your chart should include penny, two cents, nickel, and dime
denominations to show how to really reduce the cost of VP and still have
the experience.
[/quote]Good idea.  We don't have less than quarter video poker in Florida.   I have seen them out of State, but I never play because the odds are so much worse.  If someone wants to provide me with common nickel or less pay schedules I will be happy to add them to the chart.[quote=Eduardo]Bottom line summary: If you are going to bet a total of $10,000 you are
better off doing it at max bet. The casino will get more of your money
(on average) at single coin, it will just take longer.[/quote]Making your money last over more hands is beneficial to a Recreational player.  I go to the casino to be entertained.  The more hands I can play with my money, the more entertainment I receive.  Running out of money means I am tempted to hit the ATM or I have to go home.   It may also cause me to run into the high limit room in an attempt to recover my losses.  Playing cheaper prevents me from getting into this position.  Personally, I enjoy VP much more when I don't constantly have to worry about how much money I am losing.  None of these things means anything to the experts because they assume VP is being played by human computers.  I am not a computer.  I am sad when I lose and sadder when I lose too much.  Experts may be able to turn off their emotions and human frailties, I can't.   To me video poker is a game to be enjoyed not endured.When I go to a casino I don't expect to make money, although sometimes I do.  I expect to have an enjoyable relaxing day away from the cares of the world.   I don't need to add any more stress to my life by walking out with a big loss.  No one is standing at the casino exit handing me a grade sheet for the number of correct plays I made that day or the game odds I chose.  I am the one who decides how I play and I am the only one who decides if I received good value for my money.

[DAAnMAAn]

Let’s see...96% return video poker game, single line quarters, 800 hands an hour...
Max bet=$1.25 a spin
$1,000 coin thru an hour
4% house edge=theoretical loss of $40.00

Min bet=.25c a spin
$200 coin thru an hour
4% house edge=theoretical loss of $8 dollars an hour.

Experts keep saying I lose less max betting. Strange math.
Even with a 1% comp edge on max betting and taking away 1% for lack of Royal bonus in min bet, we are still looking with same hand total and bets per hour a loss of $30 for max bet (97% ER) and $10 dollars for
Min bet (95% ER)...What are we missing here?