Any 99%+ VP games left at CET properties in Vegas?

[Alan Mendelson]

The problem with the $1/credit 99.17% BP machines are that they take forever just to earn 2500 tiers, because they are 1-play.

If you play 500 hands per hour, it will still take 10 hours to earn 2500 tiers. Yuck.

I think I'll stick with the Double Super Times Pay 9-5 JoB where you can at least do 3/5/10 play.

What is the EXPECTED RETURN on the Double Super Times pay 9-5 JoB game? Are you giving up too much to the casino just to earn your Seven Stars?

[jbjb]

98.95% with a shit ton of variance.

[jj5957]

My wife and I both playing on my card were able to put on 2,500 TC in just under 3 hours playing the $1 8/5 Bonus at the Rio. Yes, it was tedious. I'll probably stick to plays outside of Vegas in the future.

[Rob.Singer]

It's absolutely astonishing how enthralled you guys remain with being tortured over CET pay tables when there are much better vp plays to be had in Nevada for those who worry about tiny percentages.

[Alan Mendelson]

It's absolutely astonishing how enthralled you guys remain with being tortured over CET pay tables when there are much better vp plays to be had in Nevada for those who worry about tiny percentages.

What's astonishing is that on one hand these folks will criticize non optimal play but they will make their own non optimal plays just to get comps.

[Dan Druff]

What's astonishing is that on one hand these folks will criticize non optimal play but they will make their own non optimal plays just to get comps.

It's not astonishing at all.

If the comps you get (which you actually have use for) dwarf the expected loss of the games you're playing, then you are doing the right thing, provided that you are okay playing -EV games to get there.

It is only a mistake to play for comps if you either don't need them or if it's too expensive getting there.

[RS__]

It's not astonishing at all.

If the comps you get (which you actually have use for) dwarf the expected loss of the games you're playing, then you are doing the right thing, provided that you are okay playing -EV games to get there.

It is only a mistake to play for comps if you either don't need them or if it's too expensive getting there.

I think Alan has heard the "never play for comps" thing one time too many and believes that playing for comps in every situation is bad bad bad.

I say, don't play for comps if the cost of getting the comp exceeds the value you get back. IE: Don't do 10k coin in on a 2% loser just to get something worth $50. But if whatever you're getting back exceeds $200 in value, go for it.

[Rob.Singer]

This isn't unusual. Every self-annointed "AP" who's ever come down the pike likes to think of themself as getting "huge" comps that offsets their losses in order to create the illusion that they're playing with some kind of "edge" over the casinos. That's why they're famous for concocting their own value for their sacred slot club benefits. It's all about the feeling. It's all about the safety. It's all about the justification.....and it's all as phony as a three-dollar bill.

[Alan Mendelson]

The "problem" with playing for comps is that you are basing their value on the "expected return" of the game. How many times have you played a 99.17% video poker game but lost 50% of your $3,000 bankroll? Or, let's say you lost only 10% of your $3,000 bankroll? Then, is that $200 a night room you are getting for free really worth what you just played?

The people who preached never play for comps weren't tossing out worthless advice.

[Dan Druff]

The "problem" with playing for comps is that you are basing their value on the "expected return" of the game. How many times have you played a 99.17% video poker game but lost 50% of your $3,000 bankroll? Or, let's say you lost only 10% of your $3,000 bankroll? Then, is that $200 a night room you are getting for free really worth what you just played?

The people who preached never play for comps weren't tossing out worthless advice.

Why gamble at all if you can't stomach such variance?

Nobody is saying that playing for comps is always going to work out as planned.

We are saying that playing for comps -- if done right -- is one way to play casino games with a form of positive expectation.

For example, when earning my Seven Stars in 2013, I ran far worse than average, and lost a lot more than I wanted. It wasn't worth earning it that year.

However, in 2015, I won $7600 earning Seven Stars. So there not only did I earn the benefits, but I also won money at the same time.

It didn't have to "even out" like this, but saying that you shouldn't play for comps because you might lose more than expectation is equivalent to telling people never to gamble because they might have bad luck.

[Bill Yung]

The people who preached never play for comps weren't tossing out worthless advice.

It's a psychological thing. However, it's often best to get a card where you're playing. A red flag to play big money, and refuse to be documented when queried at the table.

Another downside is that if you wind up suing a casino, the fact that you signed on as part of a players' club will be used against you.

[Alan Mendelson]

saying that you shouldn't play for comps because you might lose more than expectation is equivalent to telling people never to gamble because they might have bad luck.

I never said you should not gamble because you might have bad luck. What I am saying is that you shouldn't gamble with any expectation that you are going to come out ahead because of comps or even winning.

You know my position: gambling should be entertainment only. If you happen to win, and if you happen to get comps, great.

[RS__]

I never said you should not gamble because you might have bad luck. What I am saying is that you shouldn't gamble with any expectation that you are going to come out ahead because of comps or even winning.

You know my position: gambling should be entertainment only. If you happen to win, and if you happen to get comps, great.

And that's your position.

If you don't want to play for comps or have a chance at playing with an expectation to win or come out ahead, that's up to you.

But for those who take it seriously and don't view gambling strictly as "entertainment", but view it as a job and a way to earn an income, "never play for comps" is awful advice, IMO.

By the way, that 99.17% 8/5 BP game likely does not have a theoretical of 0.83%, it's probably much higher, I'd say it's likely to be around 1.5 to 2.5%.

[Dan Druff]

And that's your position.

If you don't want to play for comps or have a chance at playing with an expectation to win or come out ahead, that's up to you.

But for those who take it seriously and don't view gambling strictly as "entertainment", but view it as a job and a way to earn an income, "never play for comps" is awful advice, IMO.

By the way, that 99.17% 8/5 BP game likely does not have a theoretical of 0.83%, it's probably much higher, I'd say it's likely to be around 1.5 to 2.5%.

What do you mean by this?

Are you talking about the actual theoretical loss, or the way the casinos rate it?

Because yes, it's true that casinos almost always "overrate" theoretical losses versus the machine's theoretical loss, due to both user error and the fact that few players know how to play perfectly.

[RS__]

I almost always refer theo/theoretical as how much the casino expects you to lose (from their POV), and use HE or EV for how much I actually expect to lose (my POV).

HE or EV for 8/5 bonus is 0.83 (or -0.83%, depending on how you look at it).
Theo or theoretical loss for 8/5 bonus is likely 1.5 to 2.5%.

[Dan Druff]

I almost always refer theo/theoretical as how much the casino expects you to lose (from their POV), and use HE or EV for how much I actually expect to lose (my POV).

HE or EV for 8/5 bonus is 0.83 (or -0.83%, depending on how you look at it).
Theo or theoretical loss for 8/5 bonus is likely 1.5 to 2.5%.

Yes, I also noticed the theo is way too high for the expected loss.

This especially is true on some multi-game machines. For example, I generated $1800 theo in New Orleans on a 99.73% NSUD, running 125k of coin-in. That should have been a theo of $337.

[redietz]

I'm not sure if this has been previously addressed, but would you expect theo, as a "subjective," corporation-dependent variable, to vary much from company to company? In other words, do you have any sense of the theo metric for a particular machine varying from CET to MGM to Boyd and so on? Any evidence for much variance?