I look just fine, Arc. I have all my hair. My weight is under control. Not too many wrinkles.... LOL
Printable View
I look just fine, Arc. I have all my hair. My weight is under control. Not too many wrinkles.... LOL
There is 1 chance in 16,215 in drawing 3 tens from holding AT. There is also 1 chance of drawing 3 aces and one chance of drawing the 3 RF cards. This comes out to 1 in 5405.
If you hold just the ace you have 8 chances in 178,365 of hitting a non-ace quad (which is one chance in about 23K). However, you have 44 chances of hitting quad aces (1 in 4054). So, overall your chances are much better of hitting a quad.
Essentially, you trade off 4 sets of aces for one set of aces (w/o kicker) and one RF (not to mention low paying results).
If you hold just
This reminds me of a little ole' lady I saw standing by a circle of machines. Whenever I started playing, she waved me over and whispered,"Wait for the changing lights to turn green. A player just won a $1000 when the light was green."
Sorry. Forgot to hit quote button. I was doing fine until Arci said you're timing would have been off had you waited that split second to select the 10. And you guys think Rob's ideas are nuts? Let me say thanks for having me on the forum-it's given me more confidence that I'm on the right track. I know it's not healthy to base life's decisions on one person or idea, but I honestly feel that Rob has his act together and is on the right track. I think I'll base my play on his ideas-with my own personal preferences, of course-instead of the math. Thanks, again.
slingshot, Arcimede$ is correct about this: with a continuous shuffle machine each fraction of a second makes a difference in what card is chosen by the RNG.
If you have four to the royal, and you select to draw one card the RNG is continually shuffling the remaining 47 cards. At the precise moment you press the button the replacement card is chosen. This technology was introduced about 5-7 years ago.
Prior to that the deck was "shuffled" and the next card in sequence was chosen as your first replacement card.
Prior to that, five "shadow cards" were under the original five displayed on the machine.
Actually, continuous shuffle doesn't affect your odds for any draw. But it just goes to show you that there is another factor of chance in playing video poker which is out of the realm of "skill."
[QUOTE=arcimede$;2814]Why am I not surprised that a person who would believe the nonsense Singers states would not believe completely verifiable information. As they say ... there's one born every minute.[/QUOTE
And you can verify it how? By waiting until you get a pair and one time pushing the button as fast as you can and the next ever so sl-o-w-l-y and with the utmost gentleness pushing the button? LMA0.
It has been publicly stated that the new video poker machines all use a continuous shuffle. There may be older machines that use a single shuffle and either a sequential deal of replacement cards or the use of shadow cards.
slingshot, a question: why is this an issue?
the only time "continuous shuffle" or "sequential shuffle" or "shadow cards" becomes an issue is that when "shadow cards" are used it becomes impossible to draw a card that is "under" a hold card.
The "continuous shuffle" and "sequential shuffle" games both allow for all cards to have an equal chance of being available.
edited to add:
Take a look at this please: http://www.videopoker.com/learn/superstitions/
You're right. This shouldn't be an issue. I'm with you on the fact that win goals are probably the most important thing, anyway. No matter who's right, it always turns out being at the right place at the right time.
This is exactly right!! While you might be an expert on the correct holds, and theory about how to play games perfectly, we have no control over the RNG. Either the RNG gives us the cards we need -- or it doesn't.
Of course it helps if we play the games with the best pay tables, and it helps if we know when to quit (winning or losing), and it helps to know the game as best as we can.
But it all comes down to luck. Video Poker may require some skill, but it is still a game of luck and is gambling.
Luck is an interpretation of results. Nothing more, nothing less. What it really comes down to is the math. Your incorrect assertions are a source of your confusion.
The math provides for a range of results. Individual results bounce back and forth within that range. If you ignore the math you will probably tend towards the lower end of the range. Now, you are gambling.
Arc: Do we have different definitions of what gambling is or what "luck" is. Luck, to me, is anything that is out of your control. Are you suggesting, Arc, that since video poker is a game that uses math that you are always in control and it is not gambling?
I think math can help you win, but because you cannot control the RNG you are taking a chance with every push of the button. And that chance is your "luck," whether it be good or bad. And, that "chance" means you are gambling. Or do you see it differently?
We returned from Maui Wed. but stayed at the Cosmopolitan for a looksee and we got in this afternoon. As upscale as any place in town, and Alan, it puts any of those Harrahs properties to shame. You should check it out.
They still have that $100 loss/$100 in freeplay offer but I didn't need it. When I got up $240 I quit. The room was really nice and the restaurants were even better.
On luck, it's always fun to see how the math geeks diss it as just being some product of statistics. Kind of gives you a small look into what their lives might be like. So arci, please explain how this part of your life isn't unlucky, but instead, is simply the math catching up to you!
BTW, I've got your poi, and my wife was thoughtful enough to suggest having some pineapple jello along with it for that truly Hawaiian experience that you guys....well....will never experience.
If you only look at each hand individually you will think it's all luck. If you look at all your play then you will find the results are within a range of results. The gambling part fades away when you realize your results over time are quite predictable.
That fact holds for any system you use. It doesn't matter if someone thinks using the dufus system will make them a winner. Over time the math will determine how they do within a range of results.
Last time I checked life wasn't determined by math. I guess this is just another example of where the dufus gets confused. But, don't think for a minute I would trade my life for Singer's and live what must be a horrible existence. When a person feels they need to constantly lie you know they aren't happy. Life is how you live it, unhappy people like Singer take their misery with them wherever they might be.
As for Hawaii ... been there, done that, have no inclination to return (Took my parents there for their 50th anniversary). Lately, I've been suffering through 70° temperatures here in MN. Already played golf 3 times and will be playing again later today.
It is interesting that you point this out, slingshot. But the "advantage players" claim that they only play positive expectation games -- games with a positive pay table (Arcimede$ says his famed one-eyed Jacks game is such a game) or a game with a nearly positive payback that when coupled with cash back, comps, bonuses, free play, hotel, meals, show tickets, casino jackets, casino tee shirts, coffee mugs, pens and toilet paper and toiletries from the room, take home bags from room service and player's cards that can later be used as Christmas tree ornaments will combine to give them a positive return.
Okay, I'm being sarcastic.
But a bigger question -- and one which Rob raised -- is can you even be a winner at a positive expectation game because no one is at the machine long enough to experience that "positive return" unless they do have luck?