Frank Kneeland on Rob Singer?

[Alan Mendelson]

I can answer your question, Vegas Vic. You are more likely to catch a royal with Rob Singer's system than with Bob Dancer's system. The reason is simple, and I will use a game such as Bonus Poker as an example.

In conventional play in bonus, dealt a hand such as As Qh 5d 9s 2d:

Singer would likely tell you to hold the single ace for the possibility of drawing quad aces or a royal. Singer might also make the conventional play, as Dancer would, 95% of the time holding the AQ.

Again, the question arises: when would Rob make the special play of just holding the Ace vs. holding the conventional AQ?

By the way, I've had my share of Royals. I've just had a miserable drought this year. Last year (2010) I had 6, with 3 at the $5 level, 1 at the $1 level, one playing Super Times Pay at the 25-cent level with a 3X multiplier, and yes, even 1 playing 50 line DDB at the 5-cent level.

2009 was my big year when I hit the two big progressives. My "killer year" was 2006 (I think) when I was dealt a royal on a 50-play machine for 50 royals.

So far this year a bit more than 144-thousand hands without a royal, and more 4 to the royals than I care to count. But I've had more than my share of SF hands. About two months ago playing Bonus I had FOUR straight flushes in less than two hours of play, with two of the four dealt to me.

Weird how things happen.

[Frank Kneeland]

I can answer your question, Vegas Vic. You are more likely to catch a royal with Rob Singer's system than with Bob Dancer's system. The reason is simple, and I will use a game such as Bonus Poker as an example.

In conventional play in bonus, dealt a hand such as As Qh 5d 9s 2d:

Singer would likely tell you to hold the single ace for the possibility of drawing quad aces or a royal. Singer might also make the conventional play, as Dancer would, 95% of the time holding the AQ.

Again, the question arises: when would Rob make the special play of just holding the Ace vs. holding the conventional AQ?

By the way, I've had my share of Royals. I've just had a miserable drought this year. Last year (2010) I had 6, with 3 at the $5 level, 1 at the $1 level, one playing Super Times Pay at the 25-cent level with a 3X multiplier, and yes, even 1 playing 50 line DDB at the 5-cent level.

2009 was my big year when I hit the two big progressives. My "killer year" was 2006 (I think) when I was dealt a royal on a 50-play machine for 50 royals.

So far this year a bit more than 144-thousand hands without a royal, and more 4 to the royals than I care to count. But I've had more than my share of SF hands. About two months ago playing Bonus I had FOUR straight flushes in less than two hours of play, with two of the four dealt to me.

Weird how things happen.

Sorry Alan, but your answer to the "More likely to catch a Royal" question is not correct, or at least incomplete. The question Vic asked can only be answered correctly if you employee limits (time limits-and bankroll). And it will have a different answer depending on duration of play and bankroll.

For long time spans your chance to hit a Royal goes down holding something like an Ace over AQ off-suit.

This would be a perfect question for Arci to answer. I seem to remember a really good post from him on this exact topic before. No need for me to reinvent the wheel.

[Alan Mendelson]

Ahhh... but Frank, you're taking the long term view vs. the short term view. Hold AQ offsuit will never give you a royal on that hand. Holding only the Ace or the Queen or dropping all five cards leaves open the possibility of a royal on the draw. You should brush up on "Singer" before you write that article. LOL

[Frank Kneeland]

Ahhh... but Frank, you're taking the long term view vs. the short term view. Hold AQ offsuit will never give you a royal on that hand. Holding only the Ace or the Queen or dropping all five cards leaves open the possibility of a royal on the draw. You should brush up on "Singer" before you write that article. LOL

The question did not state short or long term. You added that and gave the short term answer. What I'm saying is that without adding a time span (and bankroll) the question cannot be answered.

You added one silently and made no mention of the distinction.

If you were going to play only one hand in your life and you were dealt AQ off-suit, then your chances of hitting a Royal are significantly better holding only the Ace, since it is impossible holding the AQoff.

Tell me Alan, "Have you met a lot of VP players that only have and only will ever play one hand in their life".

The concept of short-term is an illusion for people with bad memories and poor foresight. How we perceive time is truly an illusion generated by our perceptions and altered by a host of cognitive distortions and cognitive biases. Some are more distorted than others.

Anyway answers are only as good as the questions and the question about hitting a Royal is the wrong question anyway. A better question is what hold generates the best return.

All pays in all games in all casinos have TWO elements needed to calculate their value:
1. Amount
2. Frequency

You divide the former by the latter. If you don't include how often with how much it is known as frequency blindness.

[Comment on blind leading the blind redacted]

[Alan Mendelson]

Frank, let's compromise.

When dealt AQ offsuit and three low cards you can hit a royal holding either the Ace alone, or the Queen alone, or drawing 5 new cards. You will never draw a royal holding AQ offsuit.

When playing Bonus poker you will win more money holding AQ than trying for a royal holding either the A or the Q or drawing five new cards.

But, let me throw a little twist to the problem: when playing Double Double Bonus or Triple Double Bonus, the correct play is only to hold the Ace when dealt AQ offsuit.

[Alan Mendelson]

Henry Tamburin in the www.casinocitytimes.com has a good article on the math for hitting royals. Link: http://tamburin.casinocitytimes.com/...al-flush-59934

[Frank Kneeland]

Frank, let's compromise.

When dealt AQ offsuit and three low cards you can hit a royal holding either the Ace alone, or the Queen alone, or drawing 5 new cards. You will never draw a royal holding AQ offsuit.

When playing Bonus poker you will win more money holding AQ than trying for a royal holding either the A or the Q or drawing five new cards.

But, let me throw a little twist to the problem: when playing Double Double Bonus or Triple Double Bonus, the correct play is only to hold the Ace when dealt AQ offsuit.

That is not a twist. That is a different game with different pays.

1. Amount
2. Frequency

How hard can this be to understand? If you alter either of those variables the little part after the "=" sign changes.

[Alan Mendelson]

Ok, want to play tough? (LOL) You will never get a royal flush holding AQ offsuit. Put that into your amount/frequency equation. (LOL)

[Frank Kneeland]

Ok, want to play tough? (LOL) You will never get a royal flush holding AQ offsuit. Put that into your amount/frequency equation. (LOL)

You are aware that there are other paying combinations of cards other than AKQJT suited?

There is no functional difference between a Pair of Queens and a Royal Flush other than how often they come up and how much they pay.

Your mistake seems to be thinking a Royal is something special. It's just one of many paying hands one can get on a video poker machine.

If you hold only the Ace you have one set of paying combinations with their corresponding frequencies and amounts.

If you hold AQ off you have a different set of paying combinations with their corresponding frequencies and amounts.

The chances of getting a Royal holding one card are about 1 in 1.7 million, which means we divide that over-alluring 4000 coin Jackpot by such a large number it becomes meaningless. .000236 coins

Do you also worry about lighting strikes out of a clear blue sky. Let me guess you're the guy with tinfoil on his head?

We can talk about Royal chances all day long but until you include all the paying hands it is a meaningless discussion.

[Alan Mendelson]

You are aware that there are other paying combinations of cards other than AKQJT suited?

There is no functional difference between a Pair of Queens and a Royal Flush other than how often they come up and how much they pay.

Your mistake seems to be thinking a Royal is something special. It's just one of many paying hands one can get on a video poker machine.

If you hold only the Ace you have one set of paying combinations with their corresponding frequencies and amounts.

If you hold AQ off you have a different set of paying combinations with their corresponding frequencies and amounts.

The chances of getting a Royal holding one card are about 1 in 1.7 million, which means we divide that over-alluring 4000 coin Jackpot by such a large number it becomes meaningless. .000236 coins

Do you also worry about lighting strikes out of a clear blue sky. Let me guess you're the guy with tinfoil on his head?

We can talk about Royal chances all day long but until you include all the paying hands it is a meaningless discussion.

Frank: sometimes being too smart gets in the way of common sense.

And please consider the following:

Chance of being dealt a royal is 1/629,740

Chance of drawing a royal when holding one card is 1/178,365 (You wrote: The chances of getting a Royal holding one card are about 1 in 1.7 million, which means we divide that over-alluring 4000 coin Jackpot by such a large number it becomes meaningless. .000236 coins)

Chance of getting a royal on the draw after holding no cards is 1/383,484 when there were no royal cards on the original deal.

Why don't we just leave it at this: When holding AQ offsuit, you can't draw a royal.

[Frank Kneeland]

Frank: sometimes being too smart gets in the way of common sense.

And please consider the following:

Chance of being dealt a royal is 1/629,740

Chance of drawing a royal when holding one card is 1/178,365 (You wrote: The chances of getting a Royal holding one card are about 1 in 1.7 million, which means we divide that over-alluring 4000 coin Jackpot by such a large number it becomes meaningless. .000236 coins)

Chance of getting a royal on the draw after holding no cards is 1/383,484 when there were no royal cards on the original deal.

Why don't we just leave it at this: When holding AQ offsuit, you can't draw a royal.

Yes I added a zero. Sorry. So the RF adds .0224 coins to the value of holding just the Ace. Still a very tiny inconsequential amount.

Oh, and thank you for catching my math error.

The point is Royal Flushes are just one of many paying hands, and they are very infrequent. The only thing special about them is in people's minds. You'll remember one Royal. You won't remember all the thousands of two pairs and pay pairs that got you there which contribute to return far more than the Royal.

[Vegas Vic]

The point is Royal Flushes are just one of many paying hands, and they are very infrequent. The only thing special about them is in people's minds. You'll remember one Royal. You won't remember all the thousands of two pairs and pay pairs that got you there which contribute to return far more than the Royal.

Which is why my favorite game is 8/5 Bonus. Short term, it keeps me playing. A whole lot of good short terms are extremely beneficial to me. Without those, I find myself sitting home. I don't hit very many royals when I stay home.

[Alan Mendelson]

Frank Kneeland wrote: "So the RF adds .0224 coins to the value of holding just the Ace. Still a very tiny inconsequential amount."

Question Frank: Is there any video poker game that has a positive paytable or is a positive game without hitting a royal?

[Frank Kneeland]

Frank Kneeland wrote: "So the RF adds .0224 coins to the value of holding just the Ace. Still a very tiny inconsequential amount."

Question Frank: Is there any video poker game that has a positive paytable or is a positive game without hitting a royal?

Yes many. I have made significant money on games where hitting the RF was not really an issue.

[Alan Mendelson]

Yes many. I have made significant money on games where hitting the RF was not really an issue.

That's not the question, Frank. Is thee any video poker game that has a positive paytable or is a positive game without hitting a royal?

Yes, you can have lots of luck hitting quads or two pairs or full houses. But I am talking now strictly about the math of the game. What game? Thanks.

[Frank Kneeland]

That's not the question, Frank. Is thee any video poker game that has a positive paytable or is a positive game without hitting a royal?

Yes, you can have lots of luck hitting quads or two pairs or full houses. But I am talking now strictly about the math of the game. What game? Thanks.

Yes there have been games where if you never hit a Royal the edge was still very large. I continue to play some of them to this day. No I cannot say what they are.

One now dead game was Flush Attack. Another was Rapid 5-Ways and 6-Ways. There have been many. Too many in fact to list here in a timely fashion.

[Alan Mendelson]

Frank, Please let us all know where those games are-- and when they are available for play. There is a lot of interest in "positive pay tables" and knowing that they are out there would help. (Progressives excluded since most of us watch various progressives and know about them.) Thanks, Frank.

[Frank Kneeland]

Frank, Please let us all know where those games are-- and when they are available for play. There is a lot of interest in "positive pay tables" and knowing that they are out there would help. (Progressives excluded since most of us watch various progressives and know about them.) Thanks, Frank.

No I'm sorry I can't do that Alan. I was told in confidence and I can't share. In the pro community it is quite common to give plays to a single person with the condition they tell no one else. Not even my partners know about all the things I do, and I don't even share them with my roommate.

None of my partners are happy about the fact that I share anything with the community. This is why mostly I share good advice and logical thinking. It's the only thing I can talk about safely.

[Alan Mendelson]

No I'm sorry I can't do that Alan. I was told in confidence and I can't share. In the pro community it is quite common to give plays to a single person with the condition they tell no one else. Not even my partners know about all the things I do, and I don't even share them with my roommate.

None of my partners are happy about the fact that I share anything with the community. This is why mostly I share good advice and logical thinking. It's the only thing I can talk about safely.

Really Frank? Is knowledge of a machine, open to the public, with the paytable on the machine, in a public casino, considered to be inside information?

Edited to add: I'm leaving for The Commerce to play in the charity poker tourney. Men the Master and Scotty Nguyen are playing to help raise money for the Renal Support Network to help those with kidney disease (I had a kidney transplant three years ago) and to help a charity for families in Vietnam. With my luck, my tourney seat will be right at their table.

[Frank Kneeland]

Really Frank? Is knowledge of a machine, open to the public, with the paytable on the machine, in a public casino, considered to be inside information?

Edited to add: I'm leaving for The Commerce to play in the charity poker tourney. Men the Master and Scotty Nguyen are playing to help raise money for the Renal Support Network to help those with kidney disease (I had a kidney transplant three years ago) and to help a charity for families in Vietnam. With my luck, my tourney seat will be right at their table.

Yes, really Alan. Even what types of games you can get an edge on are considered closely guarded secrets and machine locations even more so. I do not talk about anything current in public forum. I'm surprised you would even ask. I double surprised you would be surprised that I can't answer. If I knew of one machine with a bizarre pay schedule in some bus stop somewhere that's worth $40 an hour with no risk, what do you think would happen if I told the world about it?