Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 117

Thread: Sequential Royal hit at Red Rock $217,592

  1. #21
    Originally Posted by quahaug View Post
    8,6? am I missing something. Isn't that bonus poker deluxe where 8,5 is "full pay"?
    Originally Posted by quahaug View Post
    Thanks. I've never seen it at 9,6 I guess. I don't play it anyway.
    https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...s+poker+deluxe


    Did you not see the thread I posted about a 1, 2 and 5 dollar bank of 9/6 BP Deluxe at Stations?
    A couple of pages on the above link/thread posted about current 9/6 BP Deluxe at Stations.
    This bank still exists and I play it when point days roll around.
    No big secret really... it is located at Boulder Station near the high limit area.
    12 machine bank. 1, 2 and 5 Dollar games available.
    Happy Hunting.
    Last edited by monet; 12-16-2018 at 08:47 PM.

  2. #22
    Baddest man in Vegas, lol.

  3. #23
    I've never seen a "sequential" machine that was not also "reversible"

    Order of the deck (in any game is)

    2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 J Q K A

    Ranking in order of Clubs, Diamonds, Hearts, Spades.


    Has anyone seen the full image of the royal? I do not see the 5th card... (using my detective skills it is the 10 of Spades)... Was this guy dealt 3 or 4 to the royal? If it was 4 to the royal, how long do we think he sat there praying for it to fill in?

  4. #24
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    V is a two faced liar.
    Really?

    Where have I lied?

    I play craps and high limit slots, period: I do not play VP nor do I pay particularly close attention to arcane VP discussions, although I sometimes jump in to take a shot at a worthy target.

    To my knowledge I've told no lies here or on WoV: obviously you think you've got the goods on me to prove it, so go ahead, show me a post where I have lied.

    I'll wait.

    *sips coffee, pets cat*

    Name:  cat meow moving.gif
Views: 304
Size:  476.5 KB
    Last edited by MisterV; 12-16-2018 at 10:16 PM.
    What, Me Worry?

  5. #25
    MisterV - on Red White and Blue 7's slot machine, gets Blue 7, White 7, Red 7 and complains he doesn't get Red White and Blue Jackpot...

  6. #26
    Originally Posted by BadBeet View Post
    I've never seen a "sequential" machine that was not also "reversible"

    Order of the deck (in any game is)

    2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 J Q K A
    I beg to differ, but ironically A can also be low as well as high.

  7. #27
    A royal has 120 permutations. The 1st card can be any of the five, 2nd any of the four remaining, etc. So the math is:

    5X4X3X2X1 = 120

    Since it's a reversible sequential you need to hit either AKQJT or TJQKA. Without a strategy shift the sequential chance is 1 in 60. A strategy shift doesn't improve the odds much and raises the cost between sequentials. At 8/6 Bonus Poker Deluxe the royal chance is 42,077. So the chance of hitting a reversible sequential royal is:

    42,077 X 60 = 2,524,620

    The easy way to calculate the payback on the software is to determine the average pay for a royal.

    59 royals pay 4000 coins
    1 royal pays 217,592 coins

    That averages to 7560 coins per royal. So I ran a 7560 coin royal on 8/6 BPD and the return showed 100.5457%.

    Is this anything a real AP would get involved in? No. There is more to advantage play than just having an edge. When can you expect a payday? Since the frequency is 2,524,620, at 800 hands per hour you are looking at 3,156 hours of play per sequential royal.

    Then there is the cost. The expectation is a 1.5% loss between sequentials:

    2,524,620 X 5 = a 12.6 million dollar wager.

    The 1.5% loss rate = $189, 346. That's the average cost to produce the sequential.

    There are a lot better plays around.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  8. #28
    There are a lot better plays around? Tell THAT to the guy who hit the sequential for $217-thousand and see what he says!

  9. #29
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    There are a lot better plays around? Tell THAT to the guy who hit the sequential for $217-thousand and see what he says!
    How is this not trolling? This site is a joke.

  10. #30
    How much would it cost to have Alan do a psych evaluation & IQ test? I might be willing to throw down a few shekels if he does them and shares the results. There's definitely something wrong.
    #FreeTyde

  11. #31
    Originally Posted by MaxPen View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    There are a lot better plays around? Tell THAT to the guy who hit the sequential for $217-thousand and see what he says!
    How is this not trolling? This site is a joke.
    What's a joke is someone saying this was a "bad play" while some player got a $217,000 return on a five dollar wager.

    I'm sure this player lost some money along the way to hitting his $217,000 but are you really going to tell him that he made a bad play? He'd laugh at you while laughing all the way to the bank. Meanwhile you will sit back and say "I didn't make that bad play" but you don't have the $217,000 jackpot.

  12. #32
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Originally Posted by MaxPen View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    There are a lot better plays around? Tell THAT to the guy who hit the sequential for $217-thousand and see what he says!
    How is this not trolling? This site is a joke.
    What's a joke is someone saying this was a "bad play" while some player got a $217,000 return on a five dollar wager.

    I'm sure this player lost some money along the way to hitting his $217,000 but are you really going to tell him that he made a bad play? He'd laugh at you while laughing all the way to the bank. Meanwhile you will sit back and say "I didn't make that bad play" but you don't have the $217,000 jackpot.
    You don't have the 217K jackpot either, dumkoph. You have some really screwed up logic. It would number in at least the hundreds, the number of people that blew their money on that bank. So tell THEM it was a good play, Alan. And the guy that got lucky? He's a sucker. They just made him a loan is all. The house will get it all back and more. That's what they've been doing with you for years. Those 100K royals you hit? Nothing but fricking loans. You blew it all back and more. What's that saying? A sucker is born every minute.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  13. #33
    Listen mickeycrimm. I'm not telling the losers that it was a good play. I'm saying you can't tell the winner it was a bad play. READ WHAT I WROTE.

  14. #34
    This is the type of discussion that separates the AP boys from the men.

    There are two types of plays here: good plays and bad plays. Any player--AP or not--who sat down and played at the bank of machines and was a net winner over the course of the progressive, made a "good play". And any player who lost money while playing at that bank of machines during this progressive, made a "bad play". It is as simple as that.

    Whatever the theoretical "going in" expectation was or is, is completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters are the actual results. Not "the play is worth X amount per hour" useless bs or "because the guy who hit it is stupid for playing it I know for a fact that he'll give it all back and more" envious nonsense.

    Most of you idiots pontificate from your armchairs anyway, while a toad like mickey hops around in two-bit territory. Which of course is why you dummies all want it to be that Alan simply "handed back" his big royals that NONE of you could even come close to affording to play for in the first place.

    When reality faces theory, reality wins out every single time.

    Oh....good to see everyone agree what a dunce this MrV really is. Lawyer my ass.

  15. #35
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    I'm saying you can't tell the winner it was a bad play.
    What you are saying is irrelevant. You have a penchant for saying things that are irrelevant to the subject at hand. Secondly, not all sucker gamblers are totally stupid. People hit jackpots all the time that know they were playing a sucker game and just got lucky. The math says there will be some lucky suckers in the bunch. Your reasoning is the rationale all sucker gamblers use. "Hey, I might get lucky." As Fats said, luck is for suckers.
    Last edited by mickeycrimm; 12-17-2018 at 08:03 AM.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  16. #36
    Okay mickeycrimm. You just want to argue. I'm not going to argue. I say congratulations to the winner. He made a great play. He's got the $217,000. The next time I see him at Red Rock I'll tell him congratulations. But you can tell him what a sucker he is. Okay?

  17. #37
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    This is the type of discussion that separates the AP boys from the men.

    There are two types of plays here: good plays and bad plays. Any player--AP or not--who sat down and played at the bank of machines and was a net winner over the course of the progressive, made a "good play". And any player who lost money while playing at that bank of machines during this progressive, made a "bad play". It is as simple as that.

    Whatever the theoretical "going in" expectation was or is, is completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters are the actual results. Not "the play is worth X amount per hour" useless bs or "because the guy who hit it is stupid for playing it I know for a fact that he'll give it all back and more" envious nonsense.

    Most of you idiots pontificate from your armchairs anyway, while a toad like mickey hops around in two-bit territory. Which of course is why you dummies all want it to be that Alan simply "handed back" his big royals that NONE of you could even come close to affording to play for in the first place.

    When reality faces theory, reality wins out every single time.

    Oh....good to see everyone agree what a dunce this MrV really is. Lawyer my ass.
    Then lay me 2 to 1 flipping coins at a $1000 a pop. If you win its a good play. If you lose its a bad play. No need to think about anything. Let's do it.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  18. #38
    Mickeycrimm just stop. Really.

  19. #39
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Whatever the theoretical "going in" expectation was or is, is completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters are the actual results. When reality faces theory, reality wins out every single time.
    More quackery from Robocchio. And his video poker tactics are nothing but a theory.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  20. #40
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Mickeycrimm just stop. Really.
    You started it. Your butt buddy, Robocchio jumped in with a bunch of psychobabble bullshit. Did you ask him to stop?
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Sequential Reversible Royal machine ($210k jackpot)
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 131
    Last Post: 11-12-2018, 12:45 AM
  2. IT problem at Red Rock
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 08-30-2018, 09:28 PM
  3. Your thoughts on Red Rock
    By ThreeCardPoker in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: 02-02-2017, 10:46 AM
  4. Tahoe labor day weekend trip report: A sequential royal saves trip
    By FABismonte in forum California/Western US Casinos
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 09-19-2016, 01:28 PM
  5. Huge Progressive Jackpots for Sequential Royals
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 07-12-2015, 01:42 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •