What would you do with this video poker hand?

[Alan Mendelson]

PLEASE NOTE: THE POLL HAS BEEN CHANGED AND NO LONGER REFLECTS THE ORIGINAL QUESTION BELOW. THE POLL NOW REFLECTS AN ACTUAL PAY TABLE FOR A JACKS OR BETTER VIDEO POKER GAME. IT WAS QUICKLY RECOGNIZED THAT THE ORIGINAL POLL AND MY ORIGINAL QUESTION WAS NOT REALISTIC, SO THE POLL WAS CHANGED TO USE A REALISTIC VIDEO POKER PAY FOR A DEALT FLUSH.

Here's a hypothetical question and please explain your answer. Please note the specifics of the question too, because they might affect your response. And if some specific does affect your response, please explain. This is not a question about "correct poker strategy" because every video poker book and software program will tell you what the "correct strategy" is. This is a question about your own personal situation.

The situation:

You are a low limit video poker player and you have a low, fixed budget for every trip. Never before in your life have you wagered more than $200 per trip to a casino, and never before have you ever played any video poker game higher than a 25-cent denomination.

But you just won a players' club drawing at the casino. And the "prize" is a free play of five coins on a $100 video poker game of your choice.

The rules of the free play prize:

1. You are given a $500 ticket to play one hand. You must play the hand for the full value of the ticket.
2. After the one hand is played you can either keep the win, if you won, or if you won, on the initial play you can keep playing as long as you like or cash out whenever you like.

The play: You choose 9/6 Jacks or Better because it is the game you have always played. You press "deal" and you are dealt a flush with four to the royal. The dealt flush is 6c 10c Jc Qc Kc.

Your choices:

A. Hold the dealt flush and keep the $15,000 cash prize.
B. Follow correct strategy, dump the 6 of clubs and try for the royal which is worth $400,000.

What do you do? Please explain.

[spojoey]

Take the 15 grand because I have never had that much money...EVER...And I am the exact person you described..

[arcimede$]

I think you need to get a new calculator.

[Alan Mendelson]

I think you need to get a new calculator.

We need explanations for this, please.

[regnis]

Alan-you can't trip up Arci on the math--only on theory. On a $100 denomination, the flush pays $3000. Your example would be five coins at a $500 denomination or a $2,500 ticket to start.

That being said, it is a great question. I would not take the $3,000. If your example were correct tho, I would take the $15,000.

[Alan Mendelson]

Darn, I thought the big numbers would add a bit more drama. But the drama didn't last very long here. Okay. I would like to say that I happen to appreciate what our new member spojoey wrote. So first, welcome to spojoey. Spojoey took note of the description I gave the players -- that they were low limit, never played higher than a 25-cent game. And he added the comment that $15,000 is a lot of money. Well, would $3,000 (the actual payoff for a flush on a 9/6 $100/coin game) also be too much to risk for a 25-cent player? That $3,000 flush is the equivalent of three royals at the 25-cent level.

Would you substitute a win goal or win satisfaction of $3,000 for making the correct play which would be to go for the royal? Keep in mind that our "players" in this particular hand never had this kind of "gambling money" before with a gambling budget of $200 per trip.

Regnis, you said you wouldn't take the $3K. But would you if you were a 25-cent, $200 per trip player?

[spojoey]

I would also take the 3000.00 and run. I am not ashamed...lol....Bird In the hand.

[slingshot]

I would also take the 3000.00 and run. I am not ashamed...lol....Bird In the hand.

Ahhh! There's the real test. Who would ACTUALLY take the money and run? I would have to play that one hand and THEN take the results because I know the temptations involved and my mind would then be clear that I HAD MY CHANCE, took it and left with whatever.

[Alan Mendelson]

I would also take the 3000.00 and run. I am not ashamed...lol....Bird In the hand.

There is another reason for the 25-cent player to take the $3,000 -- and even for a $1 or $5 player to take it: you can always use that "new bankroll" to play at your regular levels. Is there anything wrong with getting a "nice sized win" on free money and then moving down and back to your regular "comfort level" and play with your new bankroll?

[Vegas_lover]

If I was a 25-cent player I would take the 3000. Then take 2000 back home and use that for future trips and use 1000 to play at the $1 denomination trying to win some more...

[slingshot]

If I was a 25-cent player I would take the 3000. Then take 2000 back home and use that for future trips and use 1000 to play at the $1 denomination trying to win some more...

Good thinking.

[slingshot]

I would go for the Royal. How often in life do you get a chance like that? $15,000 would not be a life-changing amount,even if it should be $3000-LOL. As far as strategy, you can STILL get the flush, or a straight, or a high pair to get your MONEY BACK. And I would not have to ever WONDER if I made the right decision. I'm not downplaying the sure thing, just saying that hand and opportunity may NEVER come again.

[Rob.Singer]

I have a slightly different perspective. When I played SPS (& I would never have played job BTW) and my other strategies where I always had win and loss goals, if holding the flush allowed me to attain a win goal or mini-win goal (mini-win-goal meaning winning enough to get back to at least my previous denomination and restart at $25 BP or lower), I would hold the flush. If not, I would go for the royal. But if this happened today, where I am no longer restricted by procedures, I would go for the royal. Of the 47 remaining cards you have 1 that will produce a royal, 1 for a SF, 6 that will give a flush, 6 that will give a straight, and 9 that will give you your money back. So you're not automatically going for broke here because almost half the remaining cards will yield a push or a winner.

[slingshot]

I have a slightly different perspective. When I played SPS (& I would never have played job BTW) and my other strategies where I always had win and loss goals, if holding the flush allowed me to attain a win goal or mini-win goal (mini-win-goal meaning winning enough to get back to at least my previous denomination and restart at $25 BP or lower), I would hold the flush. If not, I would go for the royal. But if this happened today, where I am no longer restricted by procedures, I would go for the royal. Of the 47 remaining cards you have 1 that will produce a royal, 1 for a SF, 6 that will give a flush, 6 that will give a straight, and 9 that will give you your money back. So you're not automatically going for broke here because almost half the remaining cards will yield a push or a winner.

I don't mean to hijack this thread, but I just HAVE to know the answer to this question. If this happened in artt, Rob, and you had just started on the strategy-what would be wrong with shortening the strategy and abandoning it if the Royal or ANY winning hand failed to materialize? If this turned out to be a scare, what would be the use of continuing anyway-since it could likely be in a cold cycle? And I know the rest of you and your opinions on this subject, so please allow me the opportunity to ask Rob. Thanks.

[Max A Million]

I would go for the Royal in this situation. Considering that this was a free play at a high limit machine, the saying, "No guts, no glory", would apply. If I were to get a small win or push, I could continue to play anyway.

[Alan Mendelson]

I would go for the Royal in this situation. Considering that this was a free play at a high limit machine, the saying, "No guts, no glory", would apply. If I were to get a small win or push, I could continue to play anyway.

Let me play devil's advocate for a moment: didn't the player already get his glory with the flush, even at $3,000?? The player turned a $200 gambling trip into $3,000 with no additional risk? That $3,000 is fifteen times the original budget for the trip. How many multiples of your original budget do you need before you call it quits?

[Rob.Singer]

I don't mean to hijack this thread, but I just HAVE to know the answer to this question. If this happened in artt, Rob, and you had just started on the strategy-what would be wrong with shortening the strategy and abandoning it if the Royal or ANY winning hand failed to materialize? If this turned out to be a scare, what would be the use of continuing anyway-since it could likely be in a cold cycle? And I know the rest of you and your opinions on this subject, so please allow me the opportunity to ask Rob. Thanks.

ARTT is also bounded by rules that say if a hand appears on the deal that allows me to go back to the lowest denomination, it gets held no matter what it is. However, if the flush were dealt and it was in the advanced BP game enough so that holding it did not allow me to reach a goal, I'd of course go for the SF & royal. Also, I don't consider a machine not converting a four card royal, on its own, as it's being in a cold cycle, unless other hands prior and/or after also meet the criteria.

[slingshot]

ARTT is also bounded by rules that say if a hand appears on the deal that allows me to go back to the lowest denomination, it gets held no matter what it is. However, if the flush were dealt and it was in the advanced BP game enough so that holding it did not allow me to reach a goal, I'd of course go for the SF & royal. Also, I don't consider a machine not converting a four card royal, on its own, as it's being in a cold cycle, unless other hands prior and/or after also meet the criteria.

That really takes the discipline! However, it makes sense to keep a winner.

[Alan Mendelson]

I have a slightly different perspective.... if holding the flush allowed me to attain a win goal ... I would hold the flush. If not, I would go for the royal.

Rob, I remember the first time we discussed this, and frankly I can't disagree with you even though it violates "proper strategy." Win goals and leaving with a win can be more important than "proper strategy" to a casual player. Is a $3,000 bird in the hand worth a $400,000 bird in the bush? It's easy to say when the $3,000 is not in your hand, isn't it folks? But when the $3,000 is in your hand is it that easy to take that shot at a royal when you usually show up in Vegas with only a gaming budget of $200 (my example)?

So let me take it one more step: I've never in my life bet $500 on a single hand of video poker. I'd have to be either drunk or on acid to do it (and I never dropped acid and only once was I drunk watching 2001 A Space Odyssey on the quad at Syracuse University in 1971). But if by chance, one time, I was drunk and decided to "blow" $500 on a hand of video poker and was dealt a flush with four to the royal I would have to be triple-drunk not to take the $3,000 payoff. I might drive home and then drive myself crazy for not taking the 1/47 chance of hitting a $400,000 royal (or many other combinations of "wins") but I would console myself saying I was $2500 ahead of where I was before I pushed the button.

However, if I was guaranteed that on the very next play I would at least get a high pair paying $500 and I would be back to where I started I would certainly take the gamble. But to have started with $500 and then hit $3,000 and then give back $3,000 on one single play is not my cup of tea or bottle of Great Western Pink Catawba which is what I was drinking during the movie.

[Alan Mendelson]

So far, only one poster is putting himself in the shoes of the 25-cent player. Should I take this to mean a player's budget has nothing to do with the decision about what to do with this "gift"??