Posted on 19 Comments

A Lesson from Improv

I regularly participate in Thursday night workshops for an improvisation group in Las Vegas. Improv is a form of on-stage comedic acting where the scenes are made up on the spot in response to a suggestion from the audience. Although the group I go to is “clean burning,” meaning the language is suitable for all ages, it’s optional with each group whether to follow those rules or not.

Improv requires quick thinking and a sense of humor. On average, the people who come to these workshops tend to be both smart and a smart aleck.  These are my kind of people! I enjoy the group.

I first became fascinated with improv while seeing some “Second City” performances on cruise ships. Second City is a group that started almost 60 years ago and is probably the best-known improv troupe in the world. On cruise ships, most of their shows are family-friendly, but sometimes they’ll have a late-night “adults only” show where the language and gestures are raunchier.

In addition to the Thursday-night workshops, once a month we have a showcase where the better performers in the workshop get invited to perform for audiences who pay $10 to watch. I like the idea of being onstage and so am trying to get invited to perform. There are more wannabe performers than open positions and selecting the actors to perform is a subjective enterprise. Sometimes I get invited and sometimes I don’t. I expect to be invited for the February 16th showcase, but we’ll see.

There are a variety of games that are played during these workshops and showcases. I am best at the ones that involve rhyming. As a writer, I’m sort of a “word nerd” and rhyming comes easier to me than it does to others.

Plus, I study.

In addition to a few games where you have to compose songs on the spot, there are two different games require using words that rhyme with one-syllable first names, so I have prepared a list of words that rhyme with John, Stan, Kate, Pete, and about 30 other relatively common first names.

For a name like Jack the others in the group can “spur of the moment” come up with rhymes like back, black, crack, hack, rack, sack, stack, track, and whack. My list includes such words as amnesiac, Adirondack, Antonin Dvorak, Honoré de Balzac, cognac, almanac, Amtrak, insomniac, anorak and a bunch of others that are a bit outside of the mainstream. I have such lists for 35 names that I review periodically, “in case.” If one of these names is suggested by the audience, I tend to shine, which I am hoping increases my chances of being invited to perform in the monthly showcase. It’s an unpaid gig but being onstage is a type of high for certain of us.

Almost six months ago, on August 21, 2018, I wrote in this column about a buddy and his two kids. One of them, “Jack,” a twelve-year-old boy, also participates in the improv workshop along with his father. The vocabulary of a twelve-year-old is quite a bit less than that of most adults — and especially smart adults of the type who show up in the workshop.

To help compensate for this, I’ve sent Jack a few lists of rhymes and other material.  When Bonnie and I join their family for dinner once a week or so, we frequently play one of the improv rhyming games. As a result, Jack continues to improve and is now a better rhymer than some of the adults in the group who don’t practice. I have enjoyed watching his improvement over the past few months.

I’ve attempted to enlist Jack as an ally in my goal of being called to participate in the monthly showcases. I’ve provided him with a short list of rhyming names where I think I’m better than average. If I’m onstage and we’re going to be playing one of these games, I want him to call out one of these names from the audience that the group onstage will attempt to rhyme. Since I’ll be prepared, I’ll tend to do better than average.

Somehow, either I haven’t explained this well enough to Jack or he is unclear on what it means to be an ally. The last time the opportunity to call out a rhyming name came up when I was onstage, he came up with “Cole,” which is a name for which I was not prepared.

Spur of the moment, I came up with mole, foal, goal, and dole — but since I hadn’t studied this word, words like patrol, parole, rock-and-roll, español, shoal, skoal, and Superbowl, among many others, were not at the tip of my tongue. (They are now. After a name is used in the group, they tend to be re-used.) I had an opportunity to shine, with my helper in the right place at the right time, and he threw me a curve ball.

When I asked him why afterwards, he said he didn’t remember the words on the list I gave him plus he figured I was smart enough to figure it out on the fly. I’m not sure whether his “smart enough” comment was meant as a compliment or a dig. I’m betting on the latter.

While it is true that I could do better at that word than Jack could (assuming he had not extensively prepared for it), or better than many others in the group could do on the fly, I want to shine. I want to be a LOT better at these games than the others. I have only limited opportunities to impress the decision-makers with the fact that I deserve to be in the showcase. I want to be successful when these opportunities come.

So, I’m now asking Jack to review out loud the words I’ve sent him while he and his father drive in to the workshop every week. If Jack and his father, who’s also in the workshop, are both reminded of what’s on my list just before the workshop, perhaps one of them will “come through” for me. I’ve told them both that if they provide me with a list of the words they think are best for them, I’ll try to call one of them out at the appropriate time. I’m willing to be their ally whether or not they return the favor, but I strongly prefer that it be a two-way street. (Jack’s father is definitely an ally of mine — in many ways. Jack is so far a bit unclear on the concept. But he’ll learn!)

So, finally, what does this have to do with video poker? I am a very strong player and so some people conclude that I can play any video poker game in the world competently. Those people are incorrect – big time. There are a number of games I play at the professional level, but there are several dozens of games a casino could offer, along with a good promotion and slot club, at which I’m not currently competent. I can get good fairly quickly, of course, but it’s a process I must go through each time.

Right now, for example, I don’t play 9-5 Super Double Bonus competently. I used to know it well, but it’s not offered at casinos I frequent, for stakes I’m interested in playing, during the right promotions. So, the exact rules for the correct play when you have an ace along with a suited jack-ten are not front and center in my mind. I know sometimes you hold the ace by itself, sometimes you hold AJ, and sometimes you hold JT. Just knowing those things puts me ahead of most other players, but I want to be perfect at these decisions.

When I started playing Jacks or Better Multi Strike recently after a hiatus of a few years, I spent several hours getting up to speed and learning all the fine points. Now, I’m competent at this game, and so now is when I’ll go into the casino to play it during the right promotion. If I take another break from the game, I’ll need to relearn it one more time. Each time I relearn it takes a little bit less time than previously, as I certainly remember much of the strategy even after not playing for a while. But the fine points don’t stick with me as well as they did when I was younger.

The secret to my success, such as it is, is preparing extensively before I compete. This is true in video poker, improv, and many other things.  I like to “stack the deck,” as it were, so that I’m only competing when I’m prepared. Competing in things where I’m not prepared to succeed is not as attractive to me.

Obviously, none of us can be good at everything, and sometimes you must participate in things where your skills are less than average. I’m less than average at far more things than those things at which I’m better than average. But if I’m required to participate in something over and over again, I usually find it is worth the effort to get good at it. If I can’t get good at it, I’ll usually stop doing it if possible.

Author’s note: If you live in Las Vegas or are in the Vegas area on a Thursday night and are interested in checking out improv, look at //www.lvimprov.com. It will also provide you with information on our monthly showcases, where you are likely to find me, either onstage or in the audience.

Posted on 4 Comments

Worried About Blowing Your Cover?

In a recent Gambling with an Edge episode, Richard Munchkin and I were interviewing “Math Boy,” a Ph. D. in mathematics who for years used that knowledge to beat casinos. Math Boy told of the time in 2003 or 2004 when he met me despite his best intentions.

Math Boy wanted to stay “low profile” to other Advantage Players (or APs). The reason for this was that if he was playing a game, he didn’t want the rest of us to closely check out what he was playing and maybe decide that if Math Boy thought it was a good play, then maybe we should sit down too.

I understand this desire for anonymity, but since tens of thousands of people have attended one or more of my classes, any desire that I personally have for this kind of invisibility has long since vanished.

I have no recollection of this event, but I believe Math Boy’s version of the events. What he claims I said sounds very much like something I would say. I was playing Deuces Wild on the long-gone $1 Ten Play NSU machines at Harrah’s New Orleans. There was a lady sitting next to me, Math Boy’s wife, that I’d never seen before. Very likely there was no communication between us. I usually play quietly and concentrate on the game. Since I didn’t know the woman, there wouldn’t have been a friendship issue that could have sparked some conversation.

Math Boy recognized me and wanted to get his wife away from me without me taking any notice of him. He told his wife that he was hungry for lunch and wanted to go to the buffet. She told him that they would be serving breakfast for another half hour and then they could go to lunch.

Math Boy responded that if they went right then, they could get in for the breakfast price and after a few minutes they’d put out the lunch food which they could eat while paying the lesser price. Although it had nothing to do with me, Math Boy said I piped up and said: “That sounds like an advantage play to me!”

Math Boy went away cursing himself. He figured he had outed himself and that I then knew he was an AP. For the last 15 years or so he has believed that I have known who he is and have been on the lookout for him to find out what he’s up to.

He’s been worried about nothing.

Although I use the same timing ploy sometimes to get buffets for a lesser price, that is hardly evidence that somebody has all the skills to successfully exploit casinos. This is a fairly elementary move that many, many people know about. I probably didn’t even look to see who made the comment because it certainly wouldn’t have told me this penny pincher for lunch was knowledgeable gambling-wise. Or even if he were knowledgeable, he might well play for different stakes, or even play a different game.

If he played, for example, $5 15-9-4-4-3 Deuces Wild, which pays 0.8% less than NSU, I would have ignored him. At that time, I didn’t know that this “lesser” game had a MUCH higher theoretical, on some of the machines anyway, and you’d receive MUCH bigger mailers if you played it. There were possibly other players in the casino that day whose presence at that machine would have caused me to sit up and take notice. But not Math Boy, as he was “invisible” to me.

Sometime a few years later, another player I respected told me about the difference in theoretical. Possibly Math Boy knew this at the time, and possibly he played that game that day, but I need far more evidence than being frugal at the buffet to realize that he might know about the theoretical of the various games.

Apparently, though, Math Boy fretted about this event for many years. Too bad. Still, a lot of us regularly take precautions because we never know when somebody else is paying close attention. Better to take precautions when it doesn’t turn out to be necessary than to fail to take precautions when it actually does matter.

Author’s note: I sent a copy of this to Math Boy and asked if he wished to comment on it. His response was:

Sounds good. Only I live in a stochastic universe. I wouldn’t say I fretted about it for years. Or that I was sure I outed myself. I knew there was a probability that I might have outed myself. I’ve seen you a few times over the years and you’ve never looked at me with recognition. So the probability went from perhaps 20% down close to 0% over about a year.

Good. I’m glad he didn’t fret about it. Still, since this type of thing applies to a lot of situations and there just might be a lesson there for some players, I decided to leave it as written.

Posted on 6 Comments

A Story from Frank Kneeland

For the first six months of the Gambling with an Edge podcast, my co-host was Frank Kneeland. One of Frank’s claims to fame, video-poker-wise, was that he managed a large team of video poker players for two years in the early 1990s. On one of the shows, about six years ago, Frank told a story about a player on his team way back then.

Video poker teams at the time primarily chased progressives. If a game was breakeven at $8,000, his team might start playing at $11,000 or so (every team had its own strike numbers.) The team members would get a $10/hour “salary” and some percent of the royal if they hit it. The royal money would go to the team owner, who would pay all the taxes — minus the expenses of paying his team members. The tax laws have changed since then, and video poker teams are far less common than they were then.

I may have a few of the details incorrect in the story, but I’m sure I have the gist correct. I’m sharing it because it provides a lesson today

The player involved, “Joe,” had played on Frank’s team for several months. As far as Frank was concerned, Joe was the perfect employee. Joe would show up when called and stay as long as needed. Some players are “high maintenance.” Not Joe. He quietly played and rarely had any special requests.

One day Joe asked Frank if he was about to be fired.

“Fired?” Frank asked. “You’re one of my best employees! Why would I fire you?”

“Because I’ve never hit a royal flush, and obviously the success of your business depends on hitting royal flushes. Since I can’t seem to do that, you must think of me as an undesirable employee.”

“Hardly!” Frank replied. “I really don’t care who hits the royal. That’s all pretty random. But if I have enough competent players playing when the progressive is high enough, I’ll end up ahead. So just keep doing what you’re doing and don’t worry about it.”

Why do I bring this up today? After all, I hardly ever play progressives.

Because there are a lot of players really concerned about their score. If they are ahead, they figure they are pretty good. If they are behind, they figure the opposite. (Of course, players who don’t keep track of how much they are ahead or behind don’t need to worry about this. They have other problems we’ll address another time.)

The key to success, as Frank realized, is playing when you have the advantage. That edge can come from the game itself (as it did back then) or from the slot club, mailers, promotions, or sometimes other things. If you’re playing when you have the advantage, and not playing when you don’t, on average, good things will happen.

You just don’t know when those good things will happen. Every player who plays long enough will go through the type of dry spell Joe was experiencing. I have. Several times. And I’m confident that with my skills and game selection, if it happens to me it will happen to you too. It’s just part of the game. Not a fun part, to be sure. But a part that will surely show up from time to time.

Joe’s “problem,” if you want to call it that, is not that he was running bad. Since he only played when and where Frank told him to, the team as a whole was playing with an edge. Since he was getting $10 per hour, plus a bonus that he hadn’t collected yet but would when he finally hit a royal, Joe was personally playing with an edge.

Joe had one advantage over the rest of us. His salary guaranteed he couldn’t go broke while gambling. (He could certainly go broke if he overspent his income, but gambling losses would never cause him to go broke.) The rest of us don’t have that safety net. At the same time, I wouldn’t want to play for $10 an hour.

Joe was giving up expected value for the sake of a guaranteed salary. That fits well with some people. Especially people without the skill and bankroll to successfully play the games profitably. But also people who are risk adverse — who just can’t stand to lose.

I don’t like to lose. But it doesn’t bother me very much. I’m confident that things are going to turn out pretty well over all and today’s score doesn’t matter too much.

Posted on 6 Comments

I Don’t Do Mornings

For most of my life, I have worked by myself. For a total of about 12 years, I worked in an office. Two years in the 1970s in a think tank, and basically all of the 1980s in IT departments of three different organizations.

In each of the offices where I worked, there was at least one person with a coffee mug that said something like, “I don’t do mornings.” Each of these persons would invariably chug coffee in the morning and not be at his or her best. Most of them performed better in the afternoons, except for one guy who drank his lunch and didn’t do any better in the afternoon than he did in the morning. He didn’t last long.

Biologically, I have a lot in common with these people. If the outside world didn’t interfere, I’d go to bed at noon and wake up at 8 p.m. — give or take a few hours each way. It seems like one of the perks of being a self-employed professional gambler is that you can set your hours however you please. For me, it doesn’t work that way.  

I decided decades ago that I wanted to have more in my life than just gambling. That includes a wife, various sorts of appointments, and personal relationships with people who don’t share my preferred hours. I have yet to find a dentist who has regular office hours that include 3 a.m.

In addition to these relationships, there are many video poker opportunities that are time-dependent. The casino day can start at midnight, 3 a.m., 6 a.m., or at any other time. There is usually less competition for machines during these graveyard hours. Often, whenever the casino day begins, it’s the early bird who gets the worm.

Some promotions, including most drawings, take place during the day or evening hours. Although I did play regularly at a bar years ago that gave you an extra $500 if you hit a royal flush between the hours of midnight and 6 a.m., such promotions are rare. Usually time-sensitive promotions happen on the other side of the clock. For twenty weeks a year, I teach classes from noon to 4 p.m. It never seriously occurred to me to try to teach the same classes between midnight and 4 a.m. Those hours would be better for me, but I’d have far fewer students in my classes and very likely no casino would be willing to sponsor them.

Another problem is that the best times to gamble vary from day to day. It could easily be that I teach classes in the daytime on Tuesday, but a special promotion happens somewhere beginning at midnight Tuesday. I need to choose whether I can function at a high level for a lot of consecutive hours or find time to take a nap after class.

Me, I’m a napper. I try to arrange my schedule so that whenever I need to mentally “perform,” I’m well rested, fed, and exercised. This requires the willingness to go to bed at all hours of the day and night. My exercise routine takes place sometimes in the morning and sometimes in the evening (and, unfortunately, sometimes not at all). And I can eat “breakfast stuff” at any time of the night or day.

I know some video poker pros and semi-pros who absolutely will not (or possibly cannot) change their sleeping schedule around to fit circumstances. If that works for them, great. For me, I decided that it was far too expensive to act this way.

Many friends are nervous about calling me at any time of the day or night because they don’t know whether I’m sleeping or not. If I am, they don’t want to wake me up. And I’m glad they are nervous. I much prefer texts or emails anyway. If I do pick up the phone, at any time of the day or night, I usually say “good morning.” If I have indeed just awoken, I may not know what time it is. If I haven’t just awoken, I may not want you to be sure.

Before I married Bonnie about five years ago, I had a long talk with her about my lifestyle. She was 70 years old at the time and had always kept “normal” hours. She had never much believed in napping and frankly had never known anybody with such an unusual sleeping schedule. She and her heirs were already nervous about her getting involved with a professional gambler. Fortunately, she decided she could live with all this and now sees the advantages of napping herself.

Now that I’m in my 70s, I’m finding myself sleeping more than ever. How much is age and how much is my biological clock being screwed up from not having any sort of regular schedule for decades, I just don’t know. Probably both are factors.

Posted on 12 Comments

Playing 9/6 Jacks or Better Multi Strike

Except for the last few weeks, I haven’t recently played any version of Multi Strike. In the past, I played 9/6 Jacks or Better, 8/5 Bonus Poker, and 9-4-4 Deuces Wild Bonus in the Multi Strike variation, but it’s been so long that I felt I needed a tune-up. Now in my seventies, my memory isn’t what it used to be.

I’ll be teaching the 9/6 Jacks or Better Multi Strike class on January 29 at the South Point. Although my notes for the class are prepared, I teach better when I have recent experience. This gives me “depth” and a better ability to deal with some questions that I would have otherwise forgotten. Teaching classes well is one of my goals.

Plus, since the game returns 99.79% and the South Point’s everyday slot club is 0.30%, it’s not as though it’s a financial burden to play. The only version offered at the South Point is the 25¢ Five Play variation, which requires a bet of $25 per play. Even though the player has a slight edge, Multi Strike has a higher variance than many other video poker games. I did lose $1,500 on my first foray back into the game. But that loss was recovered in later sessions.

As most of you know, Multi Strike is a four-line game where you pay for all four lines up front — namely 20 coins. (I’m referring to the game in most of this article as a single-hand game, rather than the Five Play version you find at the South Point. This is done to make the explanations easier.) If you earn nothing on the bottom line, your 20 coins are gone. And this can sometimes happen several hands in a row.

If you at least get your money back on the first line, you get to play the second line (called the Level 2x line) “for free” and at double the payoffs. Earn something there, and you play the third line (called the Level 4x line), again for free, at quadruple the stakes. The same pattern holds for the fourth line (called the Level 8x line). Periodically you get a “Free Ride” after the draw but before you decide on which cards to hold; this moves you up to the next higher line whether you score anything on the current line or not.

What isn’t so obvious to all players is that you use four different strategies for the four different lines. The logic behind this is that in regular video poker the pay schedule falls into the “what you see is what you get” category. When the hand is over, it is completely over.

That’s not the case in Multi Strike. If you score on the bottom line, you now get to play the second line for free, and sometimes the third line, and sometimes the fourth line. Those are very valuable “plusses.”

The second line can give you two extra plusses. The third line can give you one extra plus. The top line, and any Free Ride you get, gives you nothing extra. The strategies depend on how many additional plusses you stand to get when you succeed.

If you know regular 9/6 JoB (which may well be the easiest video poker game to learn), you’re well on your way to learning the Multi Strike version of the same game because the strategies you use for most of the hands are considerably easier than the regular strategy. Why? Because for the bottom two lines you avoid ALL 3-card straight flush draws, which are the most complicated hands to play for most players.

This is not to say you can forget part of the 9/6 JoB strategy when you play Multi Strike. You still need the entire strategy because whenever you either reach the top line or receive a Free Ride, the regular strategy is appropriate.

For me, there were two different times where I found I could be making a mistake. First was remembering where I was in the game. Did I need the Level 1x strategy or the Level 2x strategy? From K Q♠ 9 7 3, on Level 1x, I should hold the KQ and on Level 2x I should hold the hearts. For A Q♠ 9 7 3, I hold the hearts on both of these levels. It’s easy to get these confused. Each of the strategies by themselves aren’t so difficult, but holding them all in my mind at once and using the right one each time is not trivial.

I made another mistake, which may well be the biggest mistake I’ve ever made in video poker. Perhaps you’ll make it someday too.

This mistake came from the different way Multi Strike deals cards. When Multi Strike finishes a level where the player advances, it deals the next level immediately. That is, let’s say you’re dealt A♣ J T 9♣ 8 on Level 1x and correctly hold AJ. (You only hold JT98 on Level 8x or with a Free Ride.) If you are playing the Five Play version, let’s say you end up with a pair of aces on one of the hands and two pair on another. The 15 credits will add up, and immediately the Level 2x hand will be dealt.

The problem came when I had three hands live on Level 4x and held trip 5s. On two of the three hands, the trips converted into quads. This is an unusually good result. Each of the quads paid 500 coins ($125), which is four times the normal $31.25 you regularly get for these hands in quarter 9/6 JoB, and the trips registered $15 instead of the usual $3.75.

Certainly, I’ve had many thousands of jackpots higher than $265 in my life, but I took a few seconds to admire my good fortune. When I was finished “admiring,” I hit the button to play the next hand — which is my normal practice in every other video poker game I play.

Except in Multi Strike, the next hand was already dealt. When I hit the button intending to play the next hand, what I actually did was throw away all the cards on the hand that had already been dealt! With three live hands on Level 8x, this was equivalent to throwing all the cards away sight unseen on $2 Triple Play!

What were the cards I threw away? I have no idea! By the time I realized what I had done, the original cards were long gone. I know I wasn’t dealt a royal flush or that would have locked up, but other than that, I just don’t know. Very likely throwing all the cards away was the wrong play — potentially a very big error.

Oh well. Spilt milk. The reason I bring it up is that it strikes me as a relatively common mistake others might make as well, at least on occasion. So, I tell you in the spirit of “forewarned is forearmed.”

Posted on 6 Comments

An Early Christmas Present

In my email inbox, I regularly receive pictures of royal flushes and other video poker jackpots. Frequently, I get thanks in the email saying that if my writing and classes hadn’t taught the emailer how to play, they’d never have a chance. And then the picture of the royal is from an 8/5 Double Double Bonus game. I don’t recall ever saying anything about such a game other than to not even think about playing it if you want a chance at winning.

Recently, I received an email with a picture of a royal on a quarter 8/5 Jacks or Better game. While this game returns almost a half percent more than 8/5 Double Double Bonus, it’s still in the “no play zone” from my point of view. The subject line of the email said: “You’re Going To Want to Read This.” I would have read the email anyway, and the subject line made me think this was going to be junk mail, but it turns out it was from a reader of mine.

This player was playing quarter 8/5 Bonus Poker at a casino in a southern state. This 99.17% game is the highest paying game at that casino and, along with the slot club and other benefits, he felt it “wasn’t too bad” for a recreational player. Okay. I certainly don’t insist that others use my “if it doesn’t return more than 100% it should never be played” philosophy. It sounds like this guy, “Mark,” made a considered, intelligent, choice.

While Mark was playing, a cleaning lady named Sophia came running up to him. Sophia was regularly stationed in the area that included the machines he played, and he recognized her. About half of his visits he slipped her $2. Cleaning machines and picking up after sloppy players wasn’t a fun job or one that paid well. Plus, Sophia had come from somewhere in Central America and her grasp of English was rudimentary at best.

When Sophia reached Mark, she frantically signaled him to follow her. He asked her what was going on and she just kept saying, “Please come. Hurry! Hurry!”

Thinking there might be some type of emergency, Mark cashed out and followed Sophia upstairs. She took him to a bank of quarter 8/5 Jacks or Better progressives. Mark occasionally played these machines if the progressive was more than $2,000 which rarely happened because the meter was quite slow. Still, he didn’t expect Sophia to be cognizant of video poker pay schedules, although it didn’t surprise him greatly that she knew when it was relatively high.

When he looked at the meter, he saw it was at $9,400! Later he figured out that this was a 119% game, but all he knew now was that the game was much better than any other gambling opportunity he’d ever seen. He surmised that the casino shut down a progressive and they had to put the accumulated progressive somewhere — and this is where they dumped it! There was a bank of four machines and so far, all of them were vacant. Clearly that wouldn’t last long.

He thanked Sophia profusely, sat down, and started banging away. It didn’t have to happen this way, but he hit the royal before any other players even noticed how high it was. After the employees came and took his ID, he hunted Sophia down and gave her a $300 tip. Tears came to her eyes. Nobody had ever given her that much money before.

Karma doesn’t always work this way. It could easily have happened that he got a seat and somebody else ended up hitting the royal. But just getting a seat on a 119% game is pretty sweet. And if Sophia hadn’t come and found him, he would have never known.

If you treat people well, often they’ll be only too happy to help you back. That jackpot more than reimbursed Mark for all the tips he’d ever given to casino employees. And if he didn’t hit it? Well, that’s okay. If Mark can afford to gamble recreationally, his life is likely better off financially than Sophia’s. And helping others, whether it’s the holidays or not, is one of the things that makes the world go ‘round.

Posted on 9 Comments

Counting the Same Thing Twice

I received some emails from a player, call him “Sam,” who was trying to talk himself into playing 8/5 Double Double Bonus Poker Multi Strike, a game that returns 97.07% when played well. It returns far less than that for most players because the game requires four separate strategies to play correctly.

As most of you know, Multi Strike is a game where you pay 20 coins for four lines before you start. If you get no score on the bottom line, the hand is over. You’re out 20 coins.

Should you at least get your money back on the bottom line, you get to play the second line at double stakes “for free.” It’s not actually free. It’s simply that you’ve already paid for it.  Five of the coins you initially paid go for playing the second line, which happens about half the time, at double payoffs.

Score on this line and you get to play the third line at 4x. Score on the bottom three lines and you get to play the top line at 8x. Each of these two lines were pre-paid, five coins at a time. Periodically, to make the math work, you get a free ride on one or more of the lines which allows you to move up to the next higher line whether you score on the current line or not.

Sam had read enough of my writings to know that I would not be a fan of a game that paid so little. You can play it if you want, but for me, the game plus the slot club, plus the various promotions must exceed 100% to be playable.

However, Sam argued, if he hit a royal on the second line, he’d get $2,000. On the third line this was worth $4,000. And on the top line, the royal was worth $8,000. Surely, he argued, those big numbers would boost the 97.07% payout. Couldn’t that boost be enough to make the game worthwhile?

The answer is ‘no.’ Those rare hits are already included in the 97.07% figure. One or more of those jackpots could make you a winner today, but when you don’t hit them (which is far more likely), you’re going to be losing at a much faster rate than you’re used to. It’s not 97.07% PLUS the royals. It’s 97.07% INCLUDING the royals.

Another factor is taxes. The tax law is different today than it was a few years ago. W2Gs are the same now as they used to be, but for many recreational players who used to itemize, the standard deduction is now high enough so that itemization doesn’t make financial sense. And if you are in that category, W2Gs are taxable.

The only time you can “write them off” is if you itemize, and there are so many things that are no longer deductible. The math behind itemization has totally changed. The first $20,000 or so worth of W2Gs each year are far more taxable than they were a few years ago.

Therefore, playing a game that generates extra W2Gs is a game to be avoided unless you play enough that you’re going to get a lot those jackpots. So, a quarter Multi Strike game should be less desirable this year than last. The same conclusion applies to Ultimate X and other games involving multipliers.

Keep in mind that I’m not a tax expert and my explanations here are simplified. See your tax professional for guidance.

Posted on 6 Comments

Learning a Second Game — Part I of II  

A few weeks ago, I wrote some articles about making adjustments to a strategy based on the pay schedule. The purpose of those articles was for the situation when you were attempting to “fake it” reasonably well. You already knew the strategy for one game and were attempting to play another similar game.

Today’s article, which will continue next week, is somewhat related, but with a different emphasis. Today’s article assumes you already know one game and are trying to learn an unrelated game — and you don’t want to keep getting the two games mixed up.

The first thing to know is that some of my readers will not be able to do this very well. It takes a certain amount of the right kind of intelligence to do this. Many people are plenty smart enough in other areas, not nearly smart enough in this one.

That’s not necessarily a showstopper to playing video poker successfully, because we are starting with the assumption that you play one game well. So long as you can find that game for the stakes with which you are comfortable, everything is all right in your world.

Today’s article, however, is for players who are capable of learning at least two games well. Perhaps they play at two different casinos and the casinos differ on their best games. Perhaps they are ready to move up in denomination and the casino doesn’t offer the same games in both denominations.

Hopefully, it’s not because they are bored playing the game they already know how to play. Video poker is basically a boring game. There are occasional exciting hands (like drawing to three aces or perhaps four to the royal), but most are rather mundane. Unless you can concentrate on playing these mundane hands correctly, you will probably end up earning much less than the expected value. Unless you can deal with this boredom (or, perhaps, even not be bored!), you will never be successful at this game.

So, to flesh out the example, let’s assume you already play 9/6 JoB and are trying to learn NSU Deuces Wild — which is the version where the pay schedule at the lower end is 16-10-4-4-3-2-1. The methodology I’m going to explain works on all games, but I’m just mentioning these for convenience.

The first step is to have good strategies for both. I recommend the Dancer/Daily strategies, but there are several other sources as well. Some are free (such as the ones on wizardofodds.com) and some are “free” if you already own software that computes it for you (e.g. Video Poker for Winners).

The next step is to learn how to read the strategies. In NSU, for example, you’ll see WW45, which you’ll never find on a JoB strategy. Looking at the notes that come with the strategy, you’ll see that the W refers to a deuce of any suit and the 45 refers to a 4 and 5 that are suited with each other. You’ll also see that hand referred to as a 4-card straight flush, with certain attributes.

You’ll see that WW45 is less valuable than WW57 and more valuable than WW46. The reasons behind this are all explained in the Dancer/Daily Winner’s Guide or in my classes, but if this is the first time you’ve tried to play NSU competently, the first sentence of this paragraph just might contain rather surprising information.

The next thing to notice about an NSU strategy is that it’s divided by the number of deuces dealt. That is, the rules for the 3-deuce section are different than the rules for the 1-deuce section. I think of these five sections as making the strategy easier — because you can instantly find the right section of the strategy simply by looking at the number of deuces. And each section is relatively small.

Probably the part of the strategy that will be the most difficult for you is the no-deuce section — because this is the part that compares directly to JoB and the basic concepts of the games are different. In JoB, K♠ K♥ 9♥ 7♥ 3♥ is played differently than T♠ T♥ 9♥ 7♥ 3♥. In Deuces Wild, they are always played the same, depending on how much you get for the flush. In NSU, you hold the hearts both times, but in certain other versions of Deuces Wild you hold the pair each time. It’s going to take a while before you get the concept that there are no high cards in Deuces Wild because you don’t get your money back unless you get 3-of-a-kind.

A related place where the games have different concepts has to do with the value of Q♣ J♣ versus Q♦ T♦.  In JoB, the clubs are more valuable because both the Q and the J are high cards, meaning you get your money back if you get of pair of either of them. In NSU, the two hands have identical values.

You’ll also need to learn the difference between the way straight flush draws are evaluated. In JoB, 4♥ 5♥ 6♥ is equivalent in value to 5♣ 6♣ 7♣ and A♦ 3♦ 4♦ is worth about the same as 5♣ 6♣ 8♣ and more than 3♠ 4♠ 7♠. In NSU, none of these relationships are the same as they are in JoB. You need to be able to change the way you evaluate combinations of cards while still retaining the old evaluation methodology for when you are playing the original game! It’s not a trivial task!

I’ve gone over a few of the things you need to know. There are many more — but this is not supposed to be a “how to play NSU” article. It supposed to be a “how do you learn to keep both games in your head at the same time” article.

We’ll continue this discussion next week.

Posted on 8 Comments

Figuring Out a New Strategy on the Fly

There are a LOT of video poker games out there. Sometimes you come across one that you haven’t studied before. There are some rules of thumb that can get you pretty close. This week we’re going to talk about doing that in games without wild cards where you get your money back for a pair of jacks or better. Next week we’ll talk about doing the same thing for Deuces Wild variations.

The first step of the process is the most critical. If you skip over that, your results down the road won’t be as good as they otherwise could be. And that first step is to know the strategy for at least one game cold.

This game that you know cold could be Jacks or Better, Double Bonus, Double Double Bonus, etc. But you need to know instantly how to play the following hands correctly. None of these are particularly difficult for an intermediate level player, but beginners will miss a goodly percentage of them.

  1. K♥ Q♥ J♥ K♣ 3♦
  2. A♠ K♠ J♠ 5♠ 2♥
  3. A♦ K♦ T♦ 4♦ 3♣
  4. 4♦ 4♠ 5♥ 6♣ 7♦
  5. 9♦ T♠ T♥ J♣ Q♦
  6. J♠ T♠ 9♠ 8♠ 7♦
  7. J♠ T♠ 9♠ 7♠ 8♦
  8. Q♦ J♣ T♦ 8♠ 3♠
  9. K♠ Q♠ T♥ 9♣ 2♦
  10. A♦ 2♠ 3♥ 5♣ 9♦
  11. A♠ Q♥ J♣ 5♠ 2♥
  12. 2♣ 4♠ 5♥ 6♠ 9♥
  13. A♦ K♦ J♣ 4♦ 6♠
  14. K♠ J♠ 3♥ 4♥ 5♥
  15. Q♥ J♥ 2♠ 3♠ 4♠
  16. A♠ A♥ 3♠ 3♥ J♠  
  17. K♠ K♥ 3♠ 3♥ J♠  

Now let’s look at how changes to the pay schedule will affect these plays. Note that my statements are strong tendencies, but exceptions may be found sometimes. I’m using the following notation here:

2P — two pair

3K — three of a kind

ST — straight

FL — flush

FH — full house

4K — four of a kind

SF — straight flush

RF — royal flush.

 

When flushes pay 30 on a 5-coin basis, I’ll say FL pays 6-for-1. I went back and forth about whether to say “pay” or “pays.” I can argue persuasively against either way of doing it, but I had to pick one. So, I did.

 

  1. When FL pays 5-for-1, KK is always correct. When FL pays 6-for-1, KQJ is correct if 2P pays 1-for-1, and KK is correct if 2P pays 2-for-1. If FL pays 7-for-1, KQJ is correct.
  2. When FL pays 6-for-1 or less, hold AKJ. When FL pays 7-for-1, hold AKJ5.
  3. When FL pays 5-for-1, hold AKT. When FL pays 7-for-1, hold AKT4. When FL pays 6-for-1, it depends on how much you get for 2P. When 2P pays 2-for-1, hold AKT. When 2P pays 1-for-1, hold AKT4.
  4. Hold 44 when ST pays 4-for-1 and 3K pays 3-for-1. If either ST pays 5-for-1 or 3K pays 2-for-1, hold 4567.
  5. If 2P pays 2-for-1 and ST pays 4-for-1, hold TT. If 2P pays 2-for-1 and ST pays 5-for-1, hold QJT9. If 2P pays 1-for-1, hold QJT9 unless 4K pays more than 50-for-1.
  6. Hold JT987 if SF pays 50-for-1. If it pays more than that, hold JT98.
  7. I don’t know of any games (other than special cases with progressives on the straight flush) where you don’t hold all five cards.
  8. Hold QJT8 when 2P pays 1-for-1. Hold QJ when 2P pays 2-for-1.
  9. Hold KQ by itself always.
  10. Hold A by itself unless ST pays 5-for-1, in which case hold A235.
  11. Hold QJ in every game except Triple Double Bonus and Super Aces Bonus, in which case you hold the ace by itself.
  12. Hold 2456 when 2P pays 1-for-1. Throw everything away when 2P pays 2-for-1.
  13. Hold AK when FL pays 6-for-1 or less. Hold AK4 when FL pays 7-for-1.
  14. Basically, always hold 345 unless you’re dealing with a progressive. How high the progressive must get to justify holding the KQ depends on the game.
  15. Basically, always hold QJ. Comparing the last two hands, 234 is significantly less valuable than 345 because of its nearness to the ace.
  16. Hold AA33 unless 2P pays 1-for-1 and four aces pay 160-for-1 or more.
  17. Hold KK33 unless 2P pays 1-for-1 and four kings pay 120-for-1 while FH pays 8-for-1 or less.

During my classes, I frequently give out this kind of information when it is relevant to the game I’m teaching that day. One of my students asked me to put it all down in one place, so that’s why I wrote this article.

Posted on 3 Comments

A Certain Kind of Approach

A month or two ago, I mentioned on the Gambling with an Edge podcast that I have a buddy with two kids — “Jack,” 12 years old and “Mary Ann,” 10 years old — who are becoming fascinated with the game of backgammon. I’ve agreed to provide them with some backgammon instructions, and I’m enjoying the process of teaching them. I’ve taught adults for years but have had limited experience with teaching children.

The lesson on this particular day was about the doubling cube.

“Let’s say,” I began, “that from a certain position, your opponent will win 26 times out of 36 and you will win 10 times out of 36.” Backgammon players will have no trouble constructing one or more positions that meet this criterion, but I want today’s column to be understood by those readers who do not understand backgammon as well as those who do.

“Let’s say that you are playing for $1 and your opponent,” I continued, “offers you the doubling cube.  What this means is that you have the choice of accepting the cube and playing out the game for $2 or passing the cube and conceding $1 right now. What would you do?”

Both kids are pretty bright and are in STEM schools, which specialize in science and math, but the boy is two years older.  When it comes to figuring out mathematical problems (which is what I thought this was), those extra two years make a difference.

At this point in time, neither knew how to figure this out (I hoped that this would be different by the end of the lesson), so both went with instinct. Jack could see that he was a big underdog to win, and he’d much prefer to lose $1 rather than $2, so he announced that he would pass the double.

Mary Ann wasn’t interested in the math at all. Her goal was to beat her brother. Since she knew she couldn’t beat him by going with the same answer he gave, she announced she was going to take the double.

Then I went through the math so they would know how to solve these “take-or-pass” backgammon problems in the future.

If they passed the double, like Jack wanted to do, they would lose $1. That much was clear to everybody.

But if they took the double, how do you figure that out?

Well, 10 times out of 36 you win, which would put you ahead $20 on those rolls. Twenty-six times out of 36 you lose, which would put you down $52 on those rolls. Your net loss in 36 rolls is $32, so the average loss is $32/$36 which comes out to 89¢. Since 89¢ is smaller than $1, the correct play is to take the double.

The acronym “QED” comes from the Latin quod erat demonstrandum and means I have shown that which was to be demonstrated — or, basically, this math proves my case. Neither child, however, was impressed by what I had done.

Jack assured me he understood the math, but he would still pass the double. He simply didn’t want to risk losing the extra dollar most of the time.

Mary Ann cared even less for the math. The important thing to her was she got it right and her brother got it wrong! What could possibly be a better result than that? “That was fun! Do you have another puzzle for us, Bob?”

There was nothing more for me to say. In my opinion, playing games successfully depends on understanding and following the math. They both rejected the math. I was out of ammunition.

I spoke to their father, a successful gambler, a few days later about this. I think he took the right approach. He said, “I really don’t care if they become professional gamblers or not. But if they do, I want them to know the math backwards and forwards. They certainly don’t need to know this math when they are pre-teenagers — and who knows what their aptitudes will be in a decade or more? Later, if and when they decide that playing games competently is what they want to do, that’s when it’s important that they learn this stuff.”