New VP game idea: Monster Jackpot Bonus Poker

Dealt Royal 10,000
Royal 800
Straight flush 50
4 Aces 80
4 2-4 40
4 5-K 25
Full House 6
Flush 5
Straight 4
Trips 3
2 Pair 2
Jacks or Better 1

It's identical to 6-5 Bonus, except you get 10,000 coins per credit bet for a dealt royal. This adds 1.54% to the return, which makes it a 98.41% game -- still good for the casino, and lower than the dreaded (by the casino) "full pay".

So someone playing 5 credits at $1 will win $50,000 for a dealt royal, which you would think would be very enticing. Even quarter players would win $12,500 for a dealt royal.

At the same time, there's still the excitement of hitting quad aces or quad 2-4, which retains all of the interesting elements of bonus poker.

The same game could be built upon 8/5 DDB, with a 98.32% return.

Or if they really want to water down the paytable, they could do this with 7/5 DDB at a 97.25% return.

I think this game would be a hit because of the allure of big money without having to play high limits.

Does something similar exist?

Yes, there are several games that pay bonuses for dealt royals and these are usually multi hand games that also have premiums for dealt quads and dealt straight flushes. Don't ask me the names because I don't remember.

I think Rob Singer once talked about a bank of dollar machines offering $250,000 for a dealt royal. I personally never saw one, but I don't travel to Vegas that often.

Dealt royal jackpots (650,000-1) are much more attainable than the sequential royal (30+ million-1).

I believe it's a good idea to advance the proliferation of dealt royal jackpots more widely, yes.

To some extent, multi-play machines (3-play, 5-play, 10-play, etc.) give inherent bonuses to dealt royals via the nature of the games themselves.

When Aria first opened they paid $1-million for a dealt royal on their 50 - play 25-cent games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Count Room

Dealt royal jackpots (650,000-1) are much more attainable than the sequential royal (30+ million-1).

---

I'm not certain that a sequential is that tough. I've gotten four of those and only one dealt royal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Count Room

I think Rob Singer once talked about a bank of dollar machines offering $250,000 for a dealt royal. I personally never saw one, but I don't travel to Vegas that often.

Dealt royal jackpots (650,000-1) are much more attainable than the sequential royal (30+ million-1).

I believe it's a good idea to advance the proliferation of dealt royal jackpots more widely, yes.

To some extent, multi-play machines (3-play, 5-play, 10-play, etc.) give inherent bonuses to dealt royals via the nature of the games themselves.

---

That was a $2 DDBP game at Sam's Town.

I believe dealt royals should ALWAYS be paid a 50,000 credit bonus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

That was a $2 DDBP game at Sam's Town.

---

Rob: I'd like to compliment myself for at least remembering you mentioned that game, if not the denomination or specific game, because the $250K jackpot you mentioned and your walking away from the temptation with a small win after a quad was written AT LEAST five years ago.

I'd like to think I don't have Alzheimers' yet....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Yes, there are several games that pay bonuses for dealt royals and these are usually multi hand games that also have premiums for dealt quads and dealt straight flushes. Don't ask me the names because I don't remember.

---

Deal/Draw poker comes to mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

I'm not certain that a sequential is that tough. I've gotten four of those and only one dealt royal.

---

Much tougher to get a sequential than a dealt royal. The odds of a dealt royal is 1:649,740. But the first question is the sequential reversible or not. You can make a sequential two ways, either A-K-Q-J-T or T-J-Q-K-A. On most machines that have a sequential it's reversible.

Without a strategy shift the odds of a reversible sequential is 1 in 60 royals.

Just hypothetical here but if a 9/6 Jacks had a reversible on it, and without a strategy shift, then the frequency would be 40,391 X 60 = 2,423,460

When you make a royal it can appear 120 different ways. The first card can be any one of the 5, the second card can be any one of the remaining 4, the third card can be any one of the remaining 3, the fourth card can be any one of the remaining 2, and the fifth card is whatever is left.

5X4X3X2X1 = 120

So the chances of a reversible sequential is 1 in 60 when you make a royal.

120 x 40,000 = 4.8 million, Not 30 million. I think the 30 million figure is the odds of getting it holding just one card to a royal. One of mine was that holding an ace in the last position. I wasn't doubting it's tougher overall, just that it wasn't the 1 in 30 million figure.

Some of the stuff I played in the old days was a five coin quarter FPDW (100.76%) with a $10,000 reversible sequential at the Fiesta.

And the Carson Nugget in Carson City had 20 coin nickel 17/10 Loose Deuces (101.6%) plus a $10,000 reversible sequential. This game had auto-hold that played flawless except for the sequential strategy. It made it very easy to play two machines.

Unfortunately, the sequentials I've hit were all on the wrong machines.

I had a friend that hit a $50,000 sequential at the Riverside in Laughlin about 2006.

Unfortunately, games with poor pay tables (mainly 6/5 BP) are so bad on the lower-paying hands, it doesn't take long before you're in the "I pretty much can't ever come out ahead" situation. After a few sessions, where people are losing every session, they're gonna stop playing. People don't like that and casinos don't like that. Casinos and players prefer games where they sometimes lose and sometimes win, giving the illusion they at least have a chance to win.

Would probably be a more successful game (players enjoy it and continue to play it) if the 4oaks paid higher [no idea what they'd have to pay], while dropping a dealt RF to something like 5K credits (25K on a 5-credit wager).

Or keep the 10K credit dealt RF, increase 4oaks, but change it to queens or better (or perhaps only kings or better) to keep the HE in the 1.5% range.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

120 x 40,000 = 4.8 million, Not 30 million. I think the 30 million figure is the odds of getting it holding just one card to a royal. One of mine was that holding an ace in the last position. I wasn't doubting it's tougher overall, just that it wasn't the 1 in 30 million figure.

---

I was looking at a website that explains the sequential RF being dealt is just under 39 million to one. Obviously I was thinking of this number and didn't account for the other situations that dramatically improve those odds (ie. holding one or more sequential cards). I don't know what the actual odds are at this time.

One other interesting option is to have bonuses for dealt full houses (693-1) and quads (4,165-1)...maybe even dealt straight flushes (~72,000-1). Setting these up on progressive jackpot meters sound viable with the dealt royal as well (~650,000-1).

Maybe it's my selective memory, but I think most of the straight flushes I've gotten were dealt.

For those of you who like sequential royal flush bonuses -- Red Rock casino in Summerlin has progressives for sequentials (both ways) on the $1 and $2 games (I remember seeing those) and I think also on the 25-cent games. You can choose among six different video poker games on these progressives.

Bally's has a 25 cent progressive that pays in every suit. If you hit one in spades the other 3 suits keep progressing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

Unfortunately, games with poor pay tables (mainly 6/5 BP) are so bad on the lower-paying hands, it doesn't take long before you're in the "I pretty much can't ever come out ahead" situation. After a few sessions, where people are losing every session, they're gonna stop playing. People don't like that and casinos don't like that. Casinos and players prefer games where they sometimes lose and sometimes win, giving the illusion they at least have a chance to win.

Would probably be a more successful game (players enjoy it and continue to play it) if the 4oaks paid higher [no idea what they'd have to pay], while dropping a dealt RF to something like 5K credits (25K on a 5-credit wager).

Or keep the 10K credit dealt RF, increase 4oaks, but change it to queens or better (or perhaps only kings or better) to keep the HE in the 1.5% range.

---

I disagree.

Plenty of casinos have degraded their paytables to these levels -- and that's without the enticement of this exciting 10,000-per-credit dealt royal.

Double double bonus is the most popular variant of VP because gamblers have shown that they are wiling to lose most of the time in order to have a shot at a few big hits.

8-5 DDB is a horrible game, yet it's very popular just because people like hitting their precious AAAA2/AAAA3/AAAA4 and getting paid half of what they do on a royal.

I will say that 8-5 DDB is probably a better game to build this dealt royal payout, as 8-5 DDB is more popular in general than 6-5 bonus (and it has some more exciting quads payouts).

Nobody will like a game where it's queens or better or kings or better. That's too foreign to what people are used to. Even DDB is built upon the foundation of JoB.

Sadly, casinos are realizing more and more that the average gambler simply doesn't care about paytables, and simply wants to play for the big score. That's why the 99% machines are quickly disappearing, and some of these casinos decided they would actually prefer to lose the business of 99%-paytable-or-nothing players than keep them around and beat them for a small profit. It's just not worth the trouble and variance to some of these places, especially when you factor the rewards programs into it.

This is part of the reason they were happy to no-offer Alan from Rincon. The main reason was that they were insulted regarding some critical articles/posts he wrote on this site, but they also didn't mind losing him because he was mainly playing a 99.26% game, so he really wasn't the type of player they wanted anyway.

There used to be some sequential royal games which paid 10,000 (just as I listed for my "dealt royal" game), and it was analyzed that these happen around once every 4,000,000 hands, assuming that "sequential" is defined only as T-A, and not A-T.

However, this figure includes sequential royals that you can draw to.

A dealt sequential royal (T-A only) will only occur once out of 78 million hands.

So they could add an exciting "dealt sequential royal" bonus on a $1/credit game of $1,000,000 (for 5 credits played only), and only be adding 0.25% value to the paytable.

I think this sort of thing should be added more often to VP games, as it will entice a lot more "dreamer" type players who play a lot more (and longer) with the hope of becoming an instant millionaire due to this stroke of luck.

BTW, some of you might remember that near the end of my March Rincon trip, I almost hit a $200,000 dealt-royal-with-multiplier bonus on Double Super Times Pay, but I was dealt the wrong suit's queen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

8-5 DDB is a horrible game, yet it's very popular just because people like hitting their precious AAAA2/AAAA3/AAAA4 and getting paid half of what they do on a royal.

---

I've only seen 8/5 DDB when there is a royal progressive and sometimes with progressives on Aces and 2s. 3s, 4s.

When there aren't progressives, then I've seen only 9/5 DDB at Caesars in Vegas.

At Rincon they still had a couple 9/5 and even a 9/6 DDB on non progressive machines when I was there months ago. I have no idea what they have now.

At Bellagio 9/5 DDB is pretty standard.

It's more common on lower denomination machines in many places. Even 25¢ 7/5 DDB is popping up in places.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Count Room

Rob: I'd like to compliment myself for at least remembering you mentioned that game, if not the denomination or specific game, because the $250K jackpot you mentioned and your walking away from the temptation with a small win after a quad was written AT LEAST five years ago.

I'd like to think I don't have Alzheimers' yet....

---

Yes I recognized that, and it was a long time ago. You also have the scenario correct!

mickey, during the Riverside's 25th anniversary year I hit a dollar royal by it being dealt sequentially. As they counted out my $4000 I noticed a substantially larger wad. Turns out they had a year-long 25,000 credits bonus for any dealt sequential RF for the whole year, up thru the $5 machine. However, when I read the rules afterwards they stated that it had to be AKQJT only and not in reverse. Every 50,000 credit bonus for dealt royals in any order I've seen have allowed reversible.

In most Jacks or Better games the high pairs play over the 3-card royals. But that changes if a sequential is involved and the royal cards are in sequential position.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slobdinger

In most Jacks or Better games the high pairs play over the 3-card royals. But that changes if a sequential is involved and the royal cards are in sequential position.

---

What you say is true, but If i have three high cards to a royal (so that pairing any high card will give me my money back) I would drop the pair to draw to the royal.

Example:

As Ks Js Jh 3c I would gladly hold the three spades in this example. I'm not playing this hand to get a pair. I'm playing this hand to get a royal or even a straight or a flush is better than a pair of jacks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

What you say is true, but If i have three high cards to a royal (so that pairing any high card will give me my money back) I would drop the pair to draw to the royal.

Example:

As Ks Js Jh 3c I would gladly hold the three spades in this example. I'm not playing this hand to get a pair. I'm playing this hand to get a royal or even a straight or a flush is better than a pair of jacks.

---

To each his own, but this is definitely not optimum strategy. At 8/5 Bonus Poker the expected return on the pair of jacks is about 1.53 bets where the expected return on the 3-card royal is about 1.41 bets. If you routinely hold these 3-card royals over the high pairs you are doing two things, knocking your royal odds down from about 40,000 down to under 34,000....but you are giving up EV in return. You are not getting the full value of the 99.166% return with optimal strategy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slobdinger

At 8/5 Bonus Poker the expected return on the pair of jacks is about 1.53 bets where the expected return on the 3-card royal is about 1.41 bets. If you routinely hold these 3-card royals over the high pairs you are doing two things, knocking your royal odds down from about 40,000 down to under 34,000....but you are giving up EV in return. You are not getting the full value of the 99.166% return with optimal strategy.

---

How often do I get a 3-card royal draw? You make it sound like it happens consistently. I might play video poker for four hours and get one or two 3-card draws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

How often do I get a 3-card royal draw? You make it sound like it happens consistently. I might play video poker for four hours and get one or two 3-card draws.

---

Frugal and Wolf Video Poker have a function called "tweak the strategy chart." All i had to do was place the 3-card royals over the high pairs in the strategy chart and then hit the analyze tab. It showed 99.0656%. So you are giving up a tenth of a percent by playing it the way you do.

By the way, you can download Frugal Video Poker for free at wolfvideopoker.com

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slobdinger

So you are giving up a tenth of a percent by playing it the way you do.

---

Yeah, not a big deal. I'll keep the pair and forego the huge variance though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slobdinger

Frugal and Wolf Video Poker have a function called "tweak the strategy chart." All i had to do was place the 3-card royals over the high pairs in the strategy chart and then hit the analyze tab. It showed 99.0656%. So you are giving up a tenth of a percent by playing it the way you do.

By the way, you can download Frugal Video Poker for free at wolfvideopoker.com

---

You'd think someone who cares so much about 0.06% would use proper strategy, so as to not give up this 0.1% in return.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

You'd think someone who cares so much about 0.06% would use proper strategy, so as to not give up this 0.1% in return.

---

I'm not sure what your point is here?

If I was so concerned with return I'd be playing 9/6 Jacks instead of 8/5 Bonus at Caesars. Clearly I am playing 8/5 Bonus because I want a crack at bigger payoffs. It's very frustrating to play JOB and get quad aces -- and it's happened to me too many times.

Before you ask me why I'm not playing DDB or TDB for the bigger payoffs, the answer is I have but I have also lost too much on the volatility of those games.

Getting back to the 3-card royal draws -- I am not in the casinos every day. So on the rare occasions when a 3 card royal presents itself I am going to go for it. However, I am not going to dump trip-queens to go for a 3-card royal the way Rob Singer would.

For every one quad aces you get, I'll get more money off the full houses and flushes in between. BTW, I hit four aces on 7/5 BP today and only play it at this location because the JoB is 8/5 which actually makes the BP a better choice. Overall of these bonus games though, I prefer 8/5 SDDB.

It's all about preference and nobody is wrong on how they play or spend their money. Beats wasting it watching over paid celebrities and sports players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

BTW, I hit four aces on 7/5 BP today and only play it at this location because the JoB is 8/5 which actually makes the BP a better choice.

---

Why would you even bother playing that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Why would you even bother playing that?

---

Idk why he plays 7/5 BP....but I've played 6/5 BP in some locations because it's the best (least awful) game. Sometimes it doesn't matter what the return is on the game....it matters what kind of return you can get out of it (i.e.: good promos).


Alan, in another thread you make a huge deal about the 0.06% return difference. And now you're (essentially) saying you don't care that much about the return?

Time waster. For quarters, I'll play it for short 15-20 minute bursts. I don't sit and "gamble" for long periods of time. It's not costing me much and it's their best paying 25¢ low variance game.

P.S. there's nothing worse, I think, than getting AAAA3 holding AAA then half hour later throwing everything away and redrawing 6AAAA on Deuces Wild! Did this last Saturday on NSUD.

At least you won't ever catch me playing those sucker 7%+ STA or 20%+ Fire bets

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

Alan, in another thread you make a huge deal about the 0.06% return difference. And now you're (essentially) saying you don't care that much about the return?

---

I don't recall making a "huge deal" about the 0.06% return difference. Please post a link.

I do know that since I am not in a casino as much as you guys are, I want to hit the bigger winners and want to give myself a better chance to do that. 8/5 Bonus gives me that chance.

You can argue that I am giving up coins that I would have had with 9/6 Jacks, but when I hit AAAA on a $25 Bonus game, I really don't care about the missed coins for flushes and full houses.

Alan's 100% correct on several counts. People who don't spend countless hours in casinos every week don't care about how many full houses or flushes they get. What they do care about is giving themselves the best opportunity to see the big winners that will send them home with more money than they came with. And all this theorizing about the FH's & Flushes adding up to more than what the Aces paid is irrelevant and wrong. No one who has any brains is ever going to play millions of hands, and that's exactly where that assertion comes from.

The same thing goes for a tenth of a percent in "give". Why would anyone who plays to win TODAY care one bit about something as foolish as that? And of course, as we all know, that's really how everyone plays, only the AP's spin it to make believe that tiny tenth of a % has some mysterious value by the time they step into their graves. Makes no sense at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Alan's 100% correct on several counts. People who don't spend countless hours in casinos every week don't care about how many full houses or flushes they get. What they do care about is giving themselves the best opportunity to see the big winners that will send them home with more money than they came with. And all this theorizing about the FH's & Flushes adding up to more than what the Aces paid is irrelevant and wrong. No one who has any brains is ever going to play millions of hands, and that's exactly where that assertion comes from.

The same thing goes for a tenth of a percent in "give". Why would anyone who plays to win TODAY care one bit about something as foolish as that? And of course, as we all know, that's really how everyone plays, only the AP's spin it to make believe that tiny tenth of a % has some mysterious value by the time they step into their graves. Makes no sense at all.

---

Be careful with whom you attack and whom you support there -- as Alan has been preaching how important 0.06% is to him. I was trying to convince him 0.06% is such a tiny amount, you shouldn't even worry about it. (It's less than ONE four of a kind on $5 BP, over the course of $1M coin in.)

I used to play a game similar to the one mentioned by Dan. It was at Circus Circus. The base game was 8/5 Aces and Eights. It had a progressive on both the RF and the sequential royal.

I think it's still there.

Damn, I remember that Aces and eights machine at Circus-Circus. I have no idea if it's still there as I haven't been in CC in quite a long while.

One problem with Rob's whole mantra is that sports bettors could say, "What the hell? I'm playing today, not in the long run, so the difference between laying -120 and -110 won't matter TODAY." Good way to go broke fast.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

I used to play a game similar to the one mentioned by Dan. It was at Circus Circus. The base game was 8/5 Aces and Eights. It had a progressive on both the RF and the sequential royal.

---

I remember that game. It was in Circus Circus Reno too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

Idk why he plays 7/5 BP....but I've played 6/5 BP in some locations because it's the best (least awful) game.

---

I used to play quite a bit of dollar 6/5 Bonus Poker at Harvey's in Lake Tahoe. But it was a little bit different set up. The quads all had 1% meters on them. The game was in the bartops at the Mountain Bar. This was in the late nineties and the machines didn't have bill acceptors. We had to buy racks of tokes from the bartender and hand feed. But the machines did hold credits so we only had to hand feed just enough to get some credits on the machines.

Several of us would jump into action when the meters hit certain points.

Generic Quads = $220
Small Quads = $320
4 Aces = $650

It was a quad race amongst the hustlers. When the key meter was hit you would hear Clang! Clang! Clang! as all the hustlers cashed out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

Be careful with whom you attack and whom you support there -- as Alan has been preaching how important 0.06% is to him. I was trying to convince him 0.06% is such a tiny amount, you shouldn't even worry about it. (It's less than ONE four of a kind on $5 BP, over the course of $1M coin in.)

---

I asked you before to post the link to where I was preaching how important 0.06% is. Please do it. I am not familiar with this. If I were, then yes, I would be playing 9/6 Jacks instead of 8/5 Bonus.

Second time you made this comment.

For the record I wasn't criticizing Alan's play. I was just showing the math of the situation. Lenny Frome published a strategy he called the "royal buster" strategy for those who didn't care about long term payback.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I asked you before to post the link to where I was preaching how important 0.06% is. Please do it. I am not familiar with this. If I were, then yes, I would be playing 9/6 Jacks instead of 8/5 Bonus.

Second time you made this comment.

---

http://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/showth...emain-for-2016

That entire thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

http://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/showth...emain-for-2016

That entire thread.

---

You are a very confused young man. That thread was about getting tier points and reward credits for playing video poker games that gave points for $10 vs $25 per point.

You introduced some silly discussion involving return on games which had nothing to do with what Dan and I were discussing.

Frankly, I never even discussed what you were talking about. And through the thread I questioned why you were even raising it?

Your big grief about $10 vs $25 per point is a difference in 0.06% return.

I hope this doesn't take 55 pages and 4 threads for you to realize that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

Your big grief about $10 vs $25 per point is a difference in 0.06% return.

I hope this doesn't take 55 pages and 4 threads for you to realize that.

---

No. And Dan made it very clear what we are talking about, and it is not a difference in a 0.06% return.

It's playing $10 per point, or $25 per point -- and that is not a difference of 0.06%.

Stop trolling.

This will be interesting. The "rebate" that comes in the form of tier points represents a very small percentage of coin in. If one acknowledges that it is all one system, then the difference in tier rewards can legitimately be held up to and compared with differing video poker return schedules. This puts a mathematical figure to the costs of earning tier points and highlights the rather frightening ratio of loss to benefits.

To me, this seems an unflinching reality. But I have interacted with people who refuse to put all of the measuring cups in one measuring table because then their commitment to CET becomes tarnished by the required acknowledgement that video poker at CET properties sucks and one should play elsewhere.

Now what I just said seems to me reasonable and obvious. But the responses should be verrrryyy interesting.

I am familiar with an analogous situation. A particular offshore offers cashback ranging from .4 percent to .8 percent plus other benefits that vary by kind and volume of action. I am amazed at the obsessive commitment and debate regarding how to accrue these benefits.

Apparently there's a 25¢ 50/10/6 DDB at one of the bars at Paris.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

This will be interesting. The "rebate" that comes in the form of tier points represents a very small percentage of coin in.

---

We weren't talking about "rebates" or the value of rebates or anything else. We were talking about the coin-in required for 7 Stars.

And it is true -- the cash back and free play that is very much ballyhooed here is usually only about 1% of your coin-in... if you're lucky.

Why anyone makes a big deal out of it amazes me. On a typical Vegas trip I have a budget of about $5,000. These days I'm lucky to get $300 of free play. The "reward credits" I earn might be worth a hundred bucks or so. If I had to rely on free play and casino bonuses it wouldn't be worth my while to go to Vegas.

Which is why I go for the fun of it, and if I get lucky, I get lucky.

It's nice to get lucky.

At that amount, it was a 99.2051% return. Not to shabby.

Nope--that one's over a 1000% return. Calculating return before playing is for armchair players only.

Why? Because IT DOESN'T MATTER.

And I suppose he's up 1000% lifetime? Oh wait, he's not. He's admitted he's a lifetime loser at VP. Try again. That 1000% return dealt royal is factored into the full 99.20%

That's because he doesn't plan ahead. I'm up over 500%. I do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

Apparently there's a 25¢ 50/10/6 DDB at one of the bars at Paris.

---

A positive return VP machine at Paris?

That's hard to believe.

Of course, at 25c, you're not going to earn many tier credits anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

A positive return VP machine at Paris?

That's hard to believe.

Of course, at 25c, you're not going to earn many tier credits anyway.

---

Someone posted a picture of it on WoV. And not everyone, including me, cares about tier credits. We only care about making money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

Someone posted a picture of it on WoV. And not everyone, including me, cares about tier credits. We only care about making money.

---

So you really think it's worth your while to sit and play a 25c VP machine at barely over 100% return -- at a bar, no less?

That sounds like a foolish AP play. I guess it's fine if you like bar video poker, but I think I'd rather work at McDonald's than spend hours playing that machine at 25c, and McDonald's would probably be more lucrative.

Has nothing to do with any AP play. But if I'm going to play DDB, I'd rather play that one than some other lower paying game.

Personally, I wouldn't waste my full day on any AP VP when table games are light years ahead in profitability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I'd rather work at McDonald's than spend hours playing that machine at 25c, and McDonald's would probably be more lucrative.

---

Wow! That's so funny you say that Todd. Since your self entitled silver spoon fed ass does not even work. Add to that how you belittle the working class people of the world. They wouldn't even hire your autistic ass at McDonald's. So no need to speculate like you always do in your fantasy world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boygenius

Wow! That's so funny you say that Todd. Since your self entitled silver spoon fed ass does not even work. Add to that how you belittle the working class people of the world. They wouldn't even hire your autistic ass at McDonald's. So no need to speculate like you always do in your fantasy world.

---

10/6 DDB is essentially a breakeven game that carries huge variance. There would have to be a good promotion going on to get me to play it. And Paris is not the type of place that has decent promotions. I'm not saying "don't play it." To each his own. But from my perspective, an AP, the game would be a waste of time and I would be putting my money through all kinds of gyrations for nothing. Meanwhile there is something better going on somewhere else.