VP Royal Flushes

[JamieV]

Hey Guys,

Started to play VP. I bought Wiz's VP app and been visiting some other VP sites to practice my game. I think I am going to settle on DDB...a lot more action for me, if that makes sense? Anyways, do you guys notice a trend when a royal is about to hit? For example, do you start receiving more quads or more near dealt royals? Mind you, I have only played about 1,000 hands thus far so I am still new to VP culture; every casino game has its own culture and it's tough for newbies like myself to join a convo without feeling dumb. Take care guys.

[Rob.Singer]

Here's some clear advice for a starter in video poker. Study and play as perfectly as possible at least 500,000 hands on your home computer. That'll get one of your feet into the long-term door. Then, if your results running close to or are significantly better than what the game ER that you're playing is, do not go to a real casino. If however you are running significantly BEHIND that ER, run out to as many casinos as you can find and play as high a limit as you possibly can, for surely, the math will begin to catch up for you. Because the AP's all claim the more hands you play the closer to expercted return you will get because that's what math theory states, then use this info to your advantage and DO NOT play in a casino unless and until you begin to run sour at home. What's the difference if you play all those long-term-worthy hands in a casino, on your computer, or out in space? Become a REAL advantage player.

[arcimede$]

The machines are random. There are no patterns that occur before a royal. That doesn't mean you won't see patterns. The mind is a pattern matching machine. We see faces in clouds and Jesus in pieces of toast. You will see patterns, they will come and they will go and they will change over time. Ignore them, they are meaningless.

There is also no regression to the mean as robki was claiming. That is just more nonsense from people who don't understand the math. If you're on a bad streak it just might continue, same with win streaks. Your expectation never changes in the future. It is always to approach the expected return over time. There is no memory in the machines so it doesn't know what hands you gotten. It's just a dumb program.

I would also suggest you check out the games at the casino you will be playing at. It may turn out there are better games than DDB. You can check vpfree2 to get a good idea. A small difference in ER can make a big difference over time.

[Rob.Singer]

That doesn't make sense for you to say arci, because it goes against what you've been perpetuating in the past.

You spend hours claiming how, as an AP, you can absolutely count on the math working out its kinks, and that's the reason you just don't stop playing when you get behind by five or so royal cycles. In other words--and whether or not this has really happened is anyone's guess--those multiple times you've said on all the forums thru the years that you WERE in a bad losing streak, but thanks to the magic of the math, you are now back from doomsday. Of course, just as Jean Scott has always done, you've always identified your losing ways only AFTER you either really caught up or decided to make the story up in order not to shock other AP's. Now you throw out something different.

You can't have it both ways. Time to come clean.

[Alan Mendelson]

JamieV: yes you should get practice software and you should practice so you get the strategy down pat.

DDB is a tough game to play. I hit my big progressive royals on DDB but I also am a net loser playing the game. In fact, over my entire life playing all video poker I am a net loser. But I play for the fun and thrill of it and entertainment. And if fun and thrills and entertainment is your goal then it doesn't matter what game you play -- but play it well to give yourself a fighting chance.

Please ignore Rob's comments about playing at home so that you have a run of losses that will set you up to be a winner in the casinos. Please.

All machines are random. But I have interesting stories about my royals: I got one progressive for $35K shortly after hitting quad aces with a kicker for $10k. And I got one progressive for $36K after putting 6-thou into the machine over the previous four hours. Now there's a range for you on DDB. And then there was the weekend when I hit one progressive for $24K and then went to play craps, and after eight hours of playing craps with just $200 in a machine I hit another progressive for $21K. And then I went 180-thousand hands between royals -- and that was over a year of playing without a royal.

[arcimede$]

Once again robki demonstrates his amazing lack of any mathematical knowledge whatsoever. It's actually laughable to anyone with a mathematical background.

Streaks happen. Get used to it. That doesn't mean the future expectation changes. There is no regression to the mean in VP. That is a simple, easily explained fact.

[Alan Mendelson]

There is no regression to the mean in VP. That is a simple, easily explained fact.

This is what needs some explanation. If there is no "regression to the mean" how do you justify the concept of "99.54% return over the long term with expert play" and similar statements?

[arcimede$]

This is what needs some explanation. If there is no "regression to the mean" how do you justify the concept of "99.54% return over the long term with expert play" and similar statements?

The E in ER stands for "expected". It is referring to future play. Anything that you've done in the past is over, kaput, past. Those hands don't participate in the future events.

Think about throwing dice or flipping a coin. How can any past event have any impact on your result? This is true for all random events.

Now, the reality of play is you will vary both over and below the ER as you play. They will tend to average out but that is not something that the math promises when any of those events are in the past. Over time your play will converge on the ER just like flipping heads will approach 50% of total flips.

It is obvious that past independent events can't affect what you're doing in the present or what you do in the future. However, most people do have trouble understanding this concept.

[Alan Mendelson]

The E in ER stands for "expected". It is referring to future play.

This is all very confusing. Isn't expected return a combination of past and present and future? I mean without a combination of past and present and future, wouldn't paytables just be "fortune telling"?

In fact, I recall a very wild discussion about "expected return" vs "actual return" and you seem to be devoted to the "rightness" of expected return. Now you seem to be backing off of it?

[arcimede$]

This is all very confusing. Isn't expected return a combination of past and present and future? I mean without a combination of past and present and future, wouldn't paytables just be "fortune telling"?

In fact, I recall a very wild discussion about "expected return" vs "actual return" and you seem to be devoted to the "rightness" of expected return. Now you seem to be backing off of it?

Not in the least. Remember, the actual return is determined by a bell curve centered close to the ER. You can be either above or below the ER.

Look, I'm not saying your past events combined with your future events won't also be very close to the ER. It's just that there is nothing that forces that to happen. All we can say about future events is they will converge in the ER over time.

As I said before there's nothing that gives "heads" a higher chance of occurring if you just flipped 4 "tails" in a row. The odds are still 50-50 on the next flip. That is all I am saying about VP. No matter what you've done in the past the future odds are not changed.

[Rob.Singer]

Jamie, you MUST pay attention to what I said. Imagine going on a losing streak at casinos that puts you four or five royals behind expectation, and thousands of dollars in the hole. Would you rather that happen at home or in those casinos? Then, just as all the AP's promise and seem to tell us AFTER the fact--you WILL experience the math working for you as you head into the casinos for your next 500,000 hands. Why? Because the more you play, the closer to expectation you will come. It's all right there in the math books!

[Rob.Singer]

You're of course correct about what ER actually means. ER was identified yesterday, it is there today, and it is about the future as well. The problem here is arci knows that but now you're cornering him, and the only thing he can do is try to make it appear he knows more than you about this. So what else is new

[Alan Mendelson]

Very good arc. I accept that you used the wrong words to describe the principles you were commenting on.

Regarding Rob Singer's suggestion about having miserable video poker results on your home computer and then going to a casino to catch the royals-- wouldn't it be wonderful if that was true: We could sit at home and have 100 losing "practice sessions" at home and then be assured of a winning session with real money in a casino?

I certainly would like to see that demonstrated!! It would set the world on fire!!

[slingshot]

This is beginning to sound like voodoo. Play a bunch of hands on a home computer and then expect it to influence the outcome on a very real casino computer?

[arcimede$]

This is beginning to sound like voodoo. Play a bunch of hands on a home computer and then expect it to influence the outcome on a very real casino computer?

About the same as thinking a progression can change one's results ... or a rabbit's foot, or rubbing the screen, or covering the screen, or special plays, ...

[slingshot]

About the same as thinking a progression can change one's results ... or a rabbit's foot, or rubbing the screen, or covering the screen, or special plays, ...

Are you a politician? Just wondering-when they want their laws passed, they always mix in truths with their reasoning.

[arcimede$]

Are you a politician? Just wondering-when they want their laws passed, they always mix in truths with their reasoning.

All truths, nothing but the truth. Some people just can't handle the truth.

[Alan Mendelson]

About the same as thinking a progression can change one's results ... or a rabbit's foot, or rubbing the screen, or covering the screen, or special plays, ...

Are you a politician? Just wondering-when they want their laws passed, they always mix in truths with their reasoning.

Arc, here's where your diction (choice of words) causes trouble again. I am not disagreeing with you because I think I know what you really mean. But unfortunately you substituted the word "results" for "odds" in the phrase "a progression can change one's results...."

If someone is playing $1 video poker then suddenly switches to $100 video poker and hits any kind of a payoff, it is likely that they just changed their results for their trip. However, switching from $1 VP to $100 VP does not change the odds of their play. And by this, I mean it doesn't change the hold or payback on the machine. The hold or payback on the machine is what is stated on the screen and it is no more and no less regardless of what denomination you play at.

A progression will not change the hold or payback but a progression can change one's results if they get lucky and hit at the higher denomination. Of course they could also lose at the higher denomination and lose more of their money faster.

In order for Rob Singer's progression to work, he has to get lucky at the higher denominations. Sometimes it works and he hits a $100,000 royal at the $25 level. Sometimes it doesn't and he chases his losses to the tune of $50,000+.

The same is true for "special plays." If they hit you win. If they don't hit you lose. And the same can be said for conventional strategy. If you make the conventional holds and they hit then you have a winner. And if you make the conventional holds and they don't hit, then you have a loser.

About your other statements:

Everyone knows that rabbit's feet when dipped in gold and sprinkled with platinum talc work wonders, but few of us can afford them, so I am not going to discuss them here since I think it involves cruelty to animals. And I can't fathom the idea of having Peter's foot in my pocket.

Rubbing the screen worked very well for a player at Rincon the other night. He hit a royal for $20k after rubbing the screen. However, he rubbed the screen in a particularly special way that time. I know he rubbed the screen in a particularly special way that time because he rubs the screen before every play but he never hit a royal after those other rubs. His experience the other night proves that only a special rub can work.

Covering the screen also works when royals are dealt which is about 1 out of 629,740 hands. Never has a covered screen prevented an RNG from dealing a royal.

[Alan Mendelson]

This is beginning to sound like voodoo. Play a bunch of hands on a home computer and then expect it to influence the outcome on a very real casino computer?

Thanks for posting that slingshot.

Now Rob, are you serious or just joking with us??

[Rob.Singer]

Thanks for posting that slingshot.

Now Rob, are you serious or just joking with us??

If it's a joke to you please define the joke. You think there's a difference between playing a random vp machine at home vs. at a casino? I wrote an article about this in Gaming Today, and the result was a stunned AP community. They blab all the time about getting into that "theoretical long-term" then when I brought up how you could actually do it for free at home they were completely stupified and bombarded the GT phones with incomprehensible comments.