RNG & DEAL/DRAW button timing

[Benford's Law]

Hi all,      I haven't heard much of anything on this topic but I was wondering if anybody would dispute that whether or not we receive lucky hands in video poker at any time has to do with TIMING.      It is my understanding that the RNG cycles through thousands (on upwards to billions) of numbers every second depending on the age of the machine and the computer processor inside.  This constant stream of numbers flows in the background regardless of whether anyone is playing at the time, right?      Is this true?  Whether or not we receive a royal, special quad, etc. strictly depends on the exact instant we hit the deal/draw button?      I ask this because I noticed "babybubba" (aka Fa La La La La.... La la la la) claiming somewhere on these boards that a losing machine going through a bad streak must be "played through" as if the next set of random cards can only be accessed when a previous hand has been played.     I was thinking this was only true on very old video poker machines from the late 1980's or so.     Please help me clarify this, thanks.

[knagl]

Fa La La La La.... La la la la's garbage aside, yes, on newer machines the "timing" of when you hit the deal/draw button does make a difference.
 
At least on IGT machines, it has been discussed by representatives of IGT that modern IGT machines (pretty much any of the Game King line or any of the touchscreen products) are constantly shuffling the deck (the RNG is cycling) until the "deal" button is pressed.  At that time, five cards are dealt, and then the RNG continues to cycle (the remaining 47 cards continue to be shuffled) until you press "draw."
 
So yes, if you're dealt four-to-the-royal, it's all in when you press that button as to whether or not you'll get the card you need.  Of course, there's no way to determine when you should press it as the RNG is constantly cycling, and doing so very, very quickly.  The bottom line, though, is that you're getting a fair shake.  There are 47 cards remaining, the machine (via your input by pressing "draw") is randomly going to select one of those 47 to complete your hand.
 
Some older IGT machines dealt all ten cards at once, five on the screen and the next five (as needed) already sitting at the "top of the deck".  On those machines, the timing of pressing "draw" had no effect as the replacement cards were determined with the initial deal.  No matter which method is used, both are fair ways to randomly assign cards, and neither method provides an advantage or disadvantage to the player or house.

[shadowman]

       It is my understanding that the RNG cycles through thousands (on upwards to billions) of numbers every second depending on the age of the machine and the computer processor inside. 
 
I did a computer simulation of running through an RNG cycle and was able to generate 1 million cards/second. Even assuming a slower processor in the VP machines probably means somewhere between 100-200 thousand cards/sec.

[oej719]

Boy this sure is much more civilized and happier place without you know who screaming and having fits.

[shadowman]

I also wanted to mention how this RNG cycle relates to the situation where someone sits down at a machine and hits a jackpot just after another player leaves.
 
With 100K different hands available at any moment the chances that two players would hit the same hand is infintesimal. Not only are they unlikely to be dealt anything remotely the same, they are highly unlikely to get the same draw.
 
The way I think about it is the new player was "lucky" I got off rather than me being unlucky since I never would have had the same hand. Often, we are both luckier if I happen to hit big on the machine I moved to.
 
This also dispells another myth about hot/cold machines. With 100K possible hands every second there are clearly some good and bad results available. There's no one to blame but ourselves if we do poorly. Many gamblers don't like to hear this, but it is true.

[Benford's Law]

Before I go any further, let me state up front that I am totally neutral on the ongoing battle of strategies between Fa La La La La.... La la la la & Shadowman.  I have no strong opinion one way or another here.  I am "on the fence", but good paytables are always nice.
That being said, I have wondered how Rob could consistently win playing negative games....and the only answer I could come up with was that (if what he says is true), then having multiple sessions broken up with frequent cashouts and extended periods of resting time away from the machines must somehow enable him to press the "DEAL/DRAW" button at a better time (whenever he does decide to play) than if someone is monotonously playing 100%+ games on a continuous basis with a great deal of frequency.  Perhaps short, abbreviated sessions are the key here to pressing the button at a good time?
 
Again, I am just neutral here....but the bottom line seems to be...TIMING.
~Benford's Law
 

[Webman]

The Fa La La La La.... La la la la and Shadowman "debate"  is over and done with because Mr. Fa La La La La.... La la la la is no longer a member of this forum.  Hopefully they meet up down the road and settle their differences. You are still welcome to discuss whatever theories you would like, of course.
On the subject, there are a lot of people that play short sessions. The machine doesn't know who you are or when you last played unless you are only talking about Slot Club players and believe that changes your potential outcome.  People that play short sessions don't appear to be any luckier than anyone else except that they give themselves less time to lose more money. Otherwise you would have all of the vacation gamblers going home with all of the money, right?

[Benford's Law]

Webman,
 
       Hmmm, well, okay.  Just thinking that the final frontier in video poker is beyond any mathematical or pre-set strategy.....it seems to border on the relationship between human biology and timing the good ol' RNG.
       Should we eat our Wheaties in the morning before we play?
       Should we talk to ourselves while we're playing (I noticed "oej" saying he once spied on Fa La La La La.... La la la la talking to himself while playing, does this help him press the all-important "deal" button at a better time?)
       
        I know most people here on the board will say this is a useless pursuit, but it intrigues me more than most people, I s'pose....
~Benford's Law

[shadowman]

I don't think you can take any of those past posts at face value. Also, keep in mind a progressive system, in and of itself, increases variance. This means there will be more big winners and more big losers. Hearing from a single winner would be of little value.
I think some studies have been done that seem to indicate a relationship between pyschological mood and success (I'm still waiting for one on VP ). I really don't know how to use this information. At times when I'm having a really bad streak I have tried to be "positive". Ususally, to no avail. Of course, it was probably a superficial effort to say the least. Personally, I don't know how "fake" a positive attitude if that's what it takes. Also, it can't have much of an effect or there would be lot's of successful people with only a smile on their face.
Naturally, the most logical conclusion is that it really is just all random. With the millions of gamblers there will be examples of positive winners if one looks for them. Most gamblers that start out negative would probably become more positive if they continued to win. Hence, successful gamblers with negative attitudes would be more difficult to find. Unfortunately, it takes millions of hands (if not more with a progression) before one could start making any statistical inferences.
Finally, if anyone does locate a smiley face that I can stick on my forehead and win every time I play ... please send it to me.  I'm game.

[Benford's Law]

Shadowman,
       When I read your post I was thinking that gamblers would only feel more positive psychologically after they hit a big hand.  Sometimes I'll hear my fellow players explain how their royal flushes seem to come in "bunches" grouped together.  Does the psychological boost from the first royal enable the player to be a more fortuitous "button timer" for the next royal without realizing it (due to a more positive psychological outlook)?
       I am asking questions such as these in a gentle manner because this is uncharted territory for me that I wouldn't mind exploring a bit.
       At this juncture, I cannot argue against the opinion that randomness is king of the hill and human biology plays no role at all.
       I simply do not know for sure, but it looks like an interesting angle to explore once you know all the "ins and outs" of conventional video poker strategy.
       Obscure factors could actually play a role in this, such as how much and what types of amino acids we regularly consume in our diet (just an example off the top of my head here)......
      ~Benford's Law