Vegas Overnighter

[Alan Mendelson]

From time to time I do something crazy... like get in my car and drive to Vegas to play some craps for a couple of hours, and then drive back home.

About ten years ago my son and I would do this on Wednesday nights. We'd leave Santa Clarita (north of LA) at about 9pm, arrive at Caesars around 1am, play till 3am, and drive back in time for me to get in the shower then head off to work. I would sleep in the car.

Last night (Tuesday night) I decided it was time for something crazy and I invited forum member ke6cdh to join me. After a pit stop for gas and food at Carl's Jr we left at about 10pm, arriving at Caesars shortly after 2am this morning.

I drove. As we approached Victorville I saw a brilliant shooting star and said to John -- that's a sign that this is going to be a winning trip. Yes, I am superstitious. Just like the time a bird flew into my windshield along the I-15 going to Vegas and I knew it was going to be a miserable trip -- and it was.

I arrived at Caesars with exactly $16 in my wallet. This is normal for me. I rarely bring more than $100 to Vegas, and that's because "markers" are the best way to get money in Vegas.

We found a $10 craps table at Caesars (four were open at 2am) and I took a marker for $1,000. After about an hour or so, I was down $370 and went to the cage to cash in the chips.

Then to video poker. with a $300 initial buy-in. ke6cdh couldn't understand why I would play 7/5 Bonus with its poor paytable but I explained to him that I rarely hit full houses so the 7/5 pay table didn't matter to me. Well guess what? I had a full house tidal wave -- full house after full house either dealt or drawn with trips on the deal. It got crazy. And all I could think about was how Dan Druff would say "see -- you should have played 8/5."

But then the quads came. And I was playing $2/coin. Hit quad 3s three times with each paying $400. And quad queens twice, quad jacks once, quad kings once, quad 6s twice, quad 8s twice. I cashed out more than $2000. Went to the cage, paid off my $1,000 marker and had plenty of "walking around money."

It was now about 4am and we wanted to get something to eat. We headed for Central. I knew Central wouldn't accept my TR gift card but that didn't matter. I was going to spring for breakfast.

But surprisingly Central was closed for "cleaning" the hostess told us. So what was open? The Hash House in the Quad -- and they did accept the TR gift card. Perfect. Steak and eggs for ke6cdh and I had some kind of egg concoction with extra avocado (doctor's orders to eat avocado on a daily basis).

The quad casino is pretty nice. Video poker pay tables suck -- like 6/5 bonus. But the Quad has $5 craps on a small table with a light bounce that was just perfect to play on. Unfortunately no luck there. I lost $300. ke6cdh also lost a bit.

So back to Caesars where I took out another $1,000 marker at the craps table and then things caught fire -- as in the Fire Bet. A shooter hit five different numbers for a $2,500 payoff plus I won about $1,800 on his roll after paying back the $1,000 marker.

I loved going to the cashier with a little more than $4400 in chips.

Then it was time for one more try at video poker -- and back to the same machine but this time playing only $1/coin. I hit more quads, more full houses and then quad aces. The photo below shows my peak on the credit meter -- $970. I now adjusted my "stop loss" to $800 and when I fell back to $800 I hit the cash out button for another $500 profit.

It was time to leave. It really was time to leave -- it was about 10am this morning. Clients were already calling me and I was booking TV spots and shoots. But as we were walking out I had to stop in to the hosts' office to say hello to my host on this surprise visit.

She surprised me and ke6cdh by offering DISCRETIONARY COMPED BREAKFAST for $100. First time ever since Total Rewards started did a host offer a discretionary comp without my asking and without asking me to use my Reward Credits.

We had breakfast at Central. Steak and eggs again for ke6cdh and a Denver omelette for me with a double order of avocado. The check actually came to $96 and I left the tip in cash.

It's actually a good thing the Central breakfast was comped. It appears that all of my play over about 6+ hours only got me about $30 worth of Reward Credits. And that's crazy but true. There were no "bonus reward credits" showing on the video poker machine screen.

We left Vegas at about 11am and shared the driving home -- because neither of us could have stayed awake for the entire ride.

It was a hoot of a time. Keep looking for shooting stars. Avoid running into low flying birds.

[regnis]

I'm jealous. Hard to do that from Chicago on a whim.

In my younger days I would call up my girlfriend on Thursday night and tell her to pack--we are going to Vegas for the weekend. But old age and the price of a last second flight these days don't allow that anymore.

[Rob.Singer]

More proof that any pay table can be beaten.

We'rd taking off for the winter on Oct. 1st, so I'm putting in more casino time than normal. We're in our room at the Peppermill right now. On our way over to Reno, about 40 miles, some hard-working boy in his old pickup went by me and a rock hit the windshield like a gunshot. I need a new windshield and it'll be replaced next Mon. A bad omen? Not at all. I played 25c thru $2 ARTT, and came upstairs up $520. My goal was $200. Four 4's on 8/5 BP sent me up here. We had dinner earlier at Pho inside the Eldorado, where I did not play (out of respect for my wife, who does not enjoy sitting around watching me play when she has no room to go to).

[Dan Druff]

Funny how you thought of me on this trip, Alan.

I could never bring myself to drive to and from Vegas within less than a 24 period. I can do long drives, and I can even do consecutive long drives, but not the exact same drive round trip just to be somewhere for less than a day.

I hit a bird myself for the first time in my life a few weeks ago. It was on the way from Vegas to LA on Labor Day, and predictably the I-15 traffic was jammed. I took the alternate route through Searchlight, and when I was traveling between Searchlight and I-15, a bird took off out of nowhere and slammed into my windshield. I tried to brake to avoid it, but it was impossible. The bird did not damage my windshield, but slammed into it hard enough to where it clearly didn't survive.

I couldn't clean the windshield until I got to a gas station about 20 miles south of the Nevada/CA border on I-15, as there was nowhere to stop to clean it prior to that.

Bad luck for the bird, as that route between Searchlight and I-15 is barely traveled, so the chance of a car hitting it was very small.

[Alan Mendelson]

More proof that any pay table can be beaten.

A better statement would be that you can win on any pay table.

For example, we know you can't beat the game of craps -- because it is a negative expectation game. But you can win playing craps. That's exactly what happened to me and the others when one shooter made five different points for a 250-to-1 payoff on the Fire Bet.

Unfortunately, Rob, as we have seen in other discussions here, the "math guys" can't seem to differentiate between being able to "win" and being able to "beat." We can't "beat" a negative expectation game. We can "win" at a negative expectation game.

Curiously when ke6cdh was watching me play (he witnessed me getting the quad Aces) he commented that I must be making "Singer Special Plays." But I wasn't. I was playing conventional strategy. I always played conventional strategy. But it seems to me that many players do not know true, conventional strategy. For example, three card straight flush draws were called "Singer special plays" when they were in fact conventional strategy. Simply there is a lot of misunderstanding and lack of knowledge about how to play to win video poker.

[Vpnewbie]

Alan, I think if you elaborated on that last paragraph. A lot of people would be interested.

[Rob.Singer]

You're correct about the "beat" vs. "win" terminology, although I regularly use beat just to twist the math guys' panties some.

Few people know absolute correct strategy for any game, and even fewer actually play it religiously--whether by design (myself), by error (AP's like Frank, arci, Dancer etc.), or because they get frustrated with making the proper plays and losing (Jean Scott, Mr. Jean Scott, and many others). No one plays anything perfectly. Even I make missteps on my special plays at times in addition to likely making mistakes on optimal plays. The difference is, some of us admit to it; AP's either won't out of ego, or they claim the percentage is so small it makes no difference. These are the true losers....much like those who return home to "honey, how'd you do today?", and respond with "I about broke even".

[arcimede$]

Unfortunately, Rob, as we have seen in other discussions here, the "math guys" can't seem to differentiate between being able to "win" and being able to "beat." We can't "beat" a negative expectation game. We can "win" at a negative expectation game.

Why are you lying again about what the math guys state? Anyone can "beat any game". That is what the math guys will tell you. Are the odds in your favor? That is the issue, and the lower the return of the game the less likely you will be to "beat the game". If you continue to play a poor game, the odds will continue to drop but they are never zero.

The odds are non-zero that you will hit a RF on every hand you play for the rest of your life. However, I doubt any rational person would expect that to happen.

[Alan Mendelson]

Arc, over on the Wizard's forum there was a brief discussion about winning on negative expectation games vs. being able to beat a negative expectation game. It was a brief discussion because we all "got it." I really don't think you "get it?"

I am glad that Rob wrote this:

You're correct about the "beat" vs. "win" terminology, although I regularly use beat just to twist the math guys' panties some.

Now, Rob, it you stopped trying to aggravate people, then maybe more people would actually listen to what you have to say?

[Alan Mendelson]

Alan, I think if you elaborated on that last paragraph. A lot of people would be interested.

Hi. I am not exactly sure what you mean? Sometimes, the obvious play is not to hold a high card, but to hold certain low cards that do not make a pair. In one simple example, three low cards to a straight flush vs holding a king.

[Alan Mendelson]

Funny how you thought of me on this trip, Alan.

I didn't just think about you... we talked about you.

[ccerts]

Wow! An all nighter. I can't do that anymore or my whole next day is toast. I'm impressed Alan & ke6cdh. Great story. Thanks for sharing.

[Dan Druff]

Alan, let's take this to the simplest forum: Coin flips.

Your chance of winning a coin flip is 50%. Let's say you are always choosing heads.

Let's say you flip a coin one time and win. You've just beaten the odds.

Does this mean you should stop, because now you're ahead and therefore don't want to "lose it back"?

Let's say you do this for 1000 flips, but stop every time you start out ahead. So if you flip heads, you quit a winner and start again tomorrow. If you flip tails, you keep flipping until you either "get even" or fall behind by 5 tails (stop loss point). You count the flips until you've gone exactly 1000 times, over however many days it takes.

Now let's say that my strategy is just to flip 1000 consecutive times and not quit until then, no matter what the result.

Who has the better odds to win here? Or is it the same?

[Alan Mendelson]

Dan don't be absurd.

This isn't worth discussing anymore.

[arcimede$]

Arc, over on the Wizard's forum there was a brief discussion about winning on negative expectation games vs. being able to beat a negative expectation game. It was a brief discussion because we all "got it." I really don't think you "get it?"

What you "think" is irrelevant. You've demonstrated a major inability to understand simple mathematical concepts. I'm simply providing you insight into reality. You can either accept reality or deny it. It appears you choose to deny it without even thinking twice about it. Quite humorous really.

[Alan Mendelson]

Arc, did you read what regnis wrote in the other thread? You just don't get it.

[arcimede$]

Arc, did you read what regnis wrote in the other thread? You just don't get it.

Yes, I read his comment and commented. I get it just fine. You are living in a fantasy world.

[Alan Mendelson]

Yes, I read his comment and commented. I get it just fine. You are living in a fantasy world.

On the contrary. I am talking about cashing out real money. I am not dealing in theory. If there is a profit on the machine and I hit the cash out button I beat the machine and I beat the casino. The math is the math, and no one disputes the math. But if I cash out a profit that's all that matters.

It's not a matter of coin flips either, because in video poker your wins can be more than even money. It's also not like sports betting where it's either lose it all or win it all. In video poker you have an opportunity for multiple bets and because some bets pay more than others you have a greater chance of hitting the cashout button with a profit showing on the meter. And yes, you can do this over and over again with a little luck.

You preach expected return. Well, if I walk up to a 7/5 Bonus Machine and on the first play hit two-pair and cash out I just had a 200% return.

Edited to add: Actually I shouldnt have used the word "beat" above. I should have said I "won" on the machine. And I won against the casino.

[arcimede$]

On the contrary. I am talking about cashing out real money. I am not dealing in theory. If there is a profit on the machine and I hit the cash out button I beat the machine and I beat the casino. The math is the math, and no one disputes the math. But if I cash out a profit that's all that matters.

It's not a matter of coin flips either, because in video poker your wins can be more than even money. It's also not like sports betting where it's either lose it all or win it all. In video poker you have an opportunity for multiple bets and because some bets pay more than others you have a greater chance of hitting the cashout button with a profit showing on the meter. And yes, you can do this over and over again with a little luck.

You preach expected return. Well, if I walk up to a 7/5 Bonus Machine and on the first play hit two-pair and cash out I just had a 200% return.

Edited to add: Actually I shouldnt have used the word "beat" above. I should have said I "won" on the machine. And I won against the casino.

Alan, it all gets down simply math. We have all cashed out ahead on a machine at some time in our lives. However, if one has played any amount of time they also know there are times you don't cash out ahead. You put in money and lose it. The reason for this is called variance. It is well understood and the reason casinos put in games at high variances. They realize that losing every time would quickly cause the average person to lose interest and never return. They hope that the few wins will be enough to keep the people coming back. And, given the number of casinos out there, this strategy works nicely. There is no way control variance with random events.

There have always been fools that think they can outsmart the math. Most of them end up broke.

[Alan Mendelson]

Bulletin news: Arc is starting to understand what I've been talking about. He said:

Alan, it all gets down simply math. We have all cashed out ahead on a machine at some time in our lives. However, if one has played any amount of time they also know there are times you don't cash out ahead. You put in money and lose it. The reason for this is called variance.

Now Arc: have there been times when you were ahead but you didn't cash out when you were ahead? What if you had cashed out when you were showing a profit? Would the variance have helped your bottom line then?

Understand please no one disputes the math. It's money management when you get lucky.