Video Poker: losing because you played correctly

I hate this: you memorize the best strategies, you play the hand perfectly and you lose. But had you played incorrectly, you would have won big.

My latest case in point, playing 8/5 Aces and Faces (a Bonus-type game):

Dealt 3c 3s Ah Jh 7d

Correct stategy is to hold the pair of threes which I did.

The draw cards would have given me a royal: 10h, Qh, Kh.

This is maybe the fourth time in my life that holding the "right cards" made me miss a royal. I guess after 10+ years of playing video poker, such things are to be expected.

But it still hurts.

On the postiive side, I had $375 of free play today and left with a $200 profit.

Good job with the free play.

Strange thing is -- I never notice those kinds of draws. I don't look for that, and I don't notice it, which is good, I suppose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I hate this: you memorize the best strategies, you play the hand perfectly and you lose. But had you played incorrectly, you would have won big.

My latest case in point, playing 8/5 Aces and Faces (a Bonus-type game):

Dealt 3c 3s Ah Jh 7d

Correct stategy is to hold the pair of threes which I did.

The draw cards would have given me a royal: 10h, Qh, Kh.

This is maybe the fourth time in my life that holding the "right cards" made me miss a royal. I guess after 10+ years of playing video poker, such things are to be expected.

But it still hurts.

On the postiive side, I had $375 of free play today and left with a $200 profit.

---

This type of thinking is always faulty human nature and it's one of the worst habits a VP player can have. The RNG says otherwise, so no matter how many times this happens, don't fall prey to letting it change how you play.

I don't look for them either, but when they happen they're memorable. That same thing has happened to me twice. I think more than actually looking for odd things that occur, it's a natural awareness.

Just think, if the machine you were playing had a progressive royal that screamed all kinds of theory about how the "correct play" by .02% was to hold the two royal cards instead--and you were on one of Frank's "teams"--you'd be the stand-up employee of the week and would have earned that minimum wage without benefits those hustlers get.

Just curious. Did the session win anything? Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

Just curious. Did the session win anything? Thanks.

---

yes, this was on my free play last night and I came away ahead $200.

The reason why I "notice" these things is that I am not a fast player. In the case of last night's hand, I always watch what happens when I discard an ace, because Ive discarded an ace before to hold a small pair and have seen one or more aces come up on the draw.

About a year ago I had a strange run of discarding a single deuce (held a high pair) and got three deuces on the draw. It happened three times in one night.

No, these things do not alter my play -- they are just oddities.

About five years ago at Caesars was the first time I noticed these "curve balls." I was playing a progressive which was in the mid 20's and missed the royal when I held a pair and the other royal cards came up. It happened again at Harrah's LV about three years ago playing a $1 progressive DDB game: was dealt Ad Td plus three blanks and held only the ace and the JQK of diamonds came on the draw.

In December of 2010 I missed a royal at Caesars when I was dealt Jc Jd 10d and two other blanks. I held the pair of Jacks, of course, and the QKA of diamonds came on the draw.

If I were a faster player I probably wouldn't even notice these.

"There is no such thing as good luck, bad luck, what-if's, coulda/shoulda/woulda's, hold errors, or any type of feelings when you play video poker. It is all nothing but math, statistical distribution, and pure unadulterated randomness where the player's unmatched & incredible skill level is all that is needed to succeed by a tremulous weeny percentage if one plays flawlessly into infinity--and IF the RNG decides to cooperate with you along the way."

What bozo am I?

Rob, I was surprised by your responses. I thought you might have commented that you would have held the single ace, or the AJ suited, as a variation of your special plays?

Hold an Ace over a pair of threes? Or a two-card royal? Not at all, ever. And all the special plays are set--there are no variations in the games included within my play strategies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Hold an Ace over a pair of threes? Or a two-card royal? Not at all, ever. And all the special plays are set--there are no variations in the games included within my play strategies.

---

The reason why I ask is your emphasis on the importance of "aces." I have experienced many hands where I hold a small pair, drop and ace, and then get an ace or more than one ace on the draw -- while my low pair does not improve. Of course I resist playing my "hunches" but I always am apprehensive of dropping that single ace when I hold a small pair.

I admire you keeping up with the cards-it keeps me alert. I had the A,10, 9 of clubs and a 5 &6 of other suits last week and did what I said I would always do-hold the suited A,10. Well, you know I wouldn't be writing this if I hadn't of hit the Royal on quarters. Wrong play? Well, I did what I said I would do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

The reason why I ask is your emphasis on the importance of "aces." I have experienced many hands where I hold a small pair, drop and ace, and then get an ace or more than one ace on the draw -- while my low pair does not improve. Of course I resist playing my "hunches" but I always am apprehensive of dropping that single ace when I hold a small pair.

---

I understand that because I've gone thru several instances where two and even 3 Aces were the first cards out on the draw. But small pairs present quad opportunities, and it's too much risk to keep just the lone Ace since asking for three more in four draw spots is highly unlikely compared to getting the low pair filled in.

This is a great example of what the game is really all about. You remember in the videos we did how I identified the mathematical values of the hands--either in making the optimal hold or the special hold, and how much the theoretical "give" was in each instance. The reason I did that--and by that I mean the ONLY reason--was to appease the math geeks who cannot live without their numbers and how they're associated with every hand and hold. But that's really a meaningless statistic to whomever is playing. What's really important is opportunity, because every player first & foremost wants either a great winner on the deal or a great opportunity to hit a big winner on the draw. Often, the math nerds put a theoretical .03% far ahead of opportunity, and that is the reason for many of their downfalls, as I've identified several times in past threads.

To a player such as myself, hand value in math terms has no real meaning outside of the risk analyses I performed to determine which special plays would be ultimately beneficial to my play strategy. The only true meaning in video poker is the actual deal and what opportunity it presents. To people like Dancer, arci, the Wizard and others of like-mindedness, they're incapable of noticing where the best opportunity is, simply because all that's important to them is to get numerous pushes or other small winners that'll keep their points accumulating and the so-called "freebies" flowing their way. They expect the big winners will occur according to the math so they claim, but as we've seen, if the RNG doesn't cooperate with that type thinking they're in for a long, long disappointing life. Case in point: Dancer is and will always continue to work a job or jobs until he is physically unable to, because he's poured his wages & retirement into the machines consistently in order to appear successful at vp. Our friend arci, while depressing to even discuss, was forced to dig a final resting place hole in beautiful Minnesota because of paying such fine attention to how the math was SUPPOSE to play out for him on the machines. But to people like myself--who sees the numbers but does not let them control his game as much as goals and common sense do--it was early retirement, a happy life with my wife the way WE wanted it to be from our plans of long ago, and a financially set future....all because I knew what I was doing when I chose to play as a professional and I have an intelligent wife who chose not to play knowing she didn't have the skills or desire to do so. In other words, while other players' wives were turned into the addicts they are, I respected my wife as I always do and never required her to do something she had no real interest in as the others have done - which is why we've been happily married with a great, close family for so long.

Frank has explained this to you before, Alan. When you look at any one hand there are 32 possible results. The chances of hitting one of the "other" 31 is much higher than hitting the "best" ER hold. So, if one wants evidence that holding the "best" cards doesn't always work, they can find it on a high percentage of hands.

Of course, if you picked out any of the other 31 holds it will also fail most of time also. It's kind of funny that Alan would bring up the RF example when he had such a long drought where he held for a possible RF thousands of times. You probably would have done better with one of the other 31 holds almost every time. Why did you not bring up any of those examples?

PS. I retired at age 52 and the dufus is bragging about retiring at age 63. Bwah hahahahahahahahahahaha .... Oh wait, he was unemployable ... it was his wife who retired taking them to that retirement mecca called Pahrump. ROTFLMAO.

Arc: I dont recall any conversation with Frank about this. I held the low pair instead of the AJ because I know holding the low pair was the correct play. It just irks me that the wrong play would have been the big winner. So many times I see players make the wrong plays and get the big winners... while making the right play gets nothing.

Alan, please cut arci some additional slack. He's trying to get over how I retired from working at age 60--a full ten years after I retired from a real job at age 50 :) Oh....and the fact that we're both healthy, happy, and able to eat with utensils instead of thru a straw doesn't help!

Rob, when I want to stop spam and junk mail I respond by saying "STOP."

I'm going to say the same to you about your spam and junk: "STOP."

I don't care who retired first or earlier or who has more money for retirement. What I do care about is having a free and open discussion about video poker so we can all learn something or at least get to know other positions.

That's the whole point Alan: I already KNOW everything! It's certainly helped me a lot, and whoever accepts, learns from, and understands how to use the education I've provided via how I play along with the machine testing I've generously shared, those are the ones who will profit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

That's the whole point Alan: I already KNOW everything! It's certainly helped me a lot, and whoever accepts, learns from, and understands how to use the education I've provided via how I play along with the machine testing I've generously shared, those are the ones who will profit.

---

I enjoy it when you share-it makes me sick to my stomach when you try to demean everyone else.

I don't think the ancient Greeks would have much respect for the fallacy that the more wealth and health one has, the more correct one is.