Vegas Free-for-All - Quantifying Good & Bad Decisions

Quantifying Good & Bad Decisions

LurkerPoster

Feb 13, 2012
1:53am

Quote

Originally posted by: FrankKneeland

Quote
Originally posted by: KayPea
Quote
Originally posted by: LurkerPoster
People tend to take more risks with the money of others than with their own money.

Really? What is your basis for this line of thinking? Is it because that is how you'd act?

Personally I won't take any risk with someone else's money. Therefore, based on 100% of my sample size saying "less", I conclude that people take less risks with the money of others than with their own money.

That's certainly how I was looking at it. I've had no experience with people who would be less cautious with another's money, and I certainly call none of these people friend.

Basically it's a moot point in my business. There isn't the opportunity or motive to do things which are more or less risky. ~FK

Sorry Frank, I don't buy this. Even vp team members are humans. They make mistakes and they can be losing more and longer than others at the team. Couldn't it be possible that as soon as a team member is far below the average result they would take some more risk at certain hands for a bigger paying hand? A risk they wouldn't take if it was their own money. Just hoping their figures would improve compaired to the rest of the team?

Is it possible that a team member playing on the sponsor's dime turns up one day, after a late night party with family and starts the grind, knowing he's not in the best shape, also realising that if it was his own money he was playing with, he would have stayed at home? But since he's playing in a team he can hide behind randomness, the money is not coming out of his own pocket, and more errors (because of lack of concentration) doesn't immediately influence his own financial position?

Does all of this sound impossible?

FrankKneeland

Feb 13, 2012
2:00am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: mrmarcus12LVA Does this immutable moral absolute apply in other cases? For example, if I consistently take one route while walking my dog, but consistently take a different route while walking my neighbor's dog, am I abusing my neighbor's trust? Am I abusing his dog?

If I get paid to prepare a tax return, and I take a different position on the client's return than I would on my own return, am I stealing from the client? Am I stealing from the govt.? Are there OTHER FACTORS that need to be considered?

To me there is no gray area. Your analogies are not applicable here. You seem to favor real world example, so let's drop the metaphors entirely. If someone pays me money to play a high video poker progressive a certain way with a certain strategy it is in my job description to follow their orders to the letter. If I do anything other than what they expect of me it is dishonest.

BTW: I make most of the strategies for our team, so usually my orders are to tell them how to play. But the point is still valid. Since our strategies are pure math, it doesn't really mater who creates them and prints them out. Not following correct strategy is considered at worst stealing, at best poor job performance.

I can think of no job on the planet where failing to do what's expected of you would not be considered poor job performance.

~FK

alanleroy

Feb 13, 2012
2:10am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: FrankKneeland

Perhaps it would help if I told you what originally inspired the post. Someone on VP.com commented that all the posted jackpot pictures they had seem were on bad pay-tables. I know full well that not all Jackpots hit are on these low return games and I sought a plausible explanation for the bias, and why people hitting jackpots on high return machines didn't feel the need to post them or talk about them.

I believe I succeeded in coming up with a plausible explanation. It's not the only possible explanation, but I believe it is the most likely. If you'd like to contribute you could try to come up with an alternative explanation.

~FK

Did you verify that all posted jackpot pictures were on bad pay-tables? Maybe you're trying to explain a non-fact. Maybe there are only a few posters who post the majority of jackpot pictures...and they happen to play bad games, but like to post jackpot pictures. Maybe they don't even know they play bad games. Maybe sharing a jackpot picture (or many jackpot pictures) is driven by some other ego fullfilling concept....like being congratulated by others. So by way of alternate explanation...

1. The originating comment of all posted jackpot pics were on bad pay tables could be wrong.
2. Your hypothesis on root cause could be wrong. The sample could be biased toward those who may be oblivious to the odds in the first place and are just looking for some general gratification...or to share their good fortune with like minded people.
3. What do you think the ratio of machines with 'Good Paytables" to machines with "Bad Paytables" is?

FrankKneeland

Feb 13, 2012
2:13am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: LurkerPoster

Quote
Originally posted by: KayPea
Quote
Originally posted by: LurkerPoster
People tend to take more risks with the money of others than with their own money.

Really? What is your basis for this line of thinking? Is it because that is how you'd act?

For example slots: why do people often play higher denominations on freeplay than they would do on their own dime? What's key to the professional VP scene as Frank describes it that a professional player would go for the optimal result (math) within the budget and boundaries his sponsor sets. So yes, it would be appropriate to play optimal strategy. Now, would it be the same if somebody would give you a 1000 bucks and ask you to play with it. Part of the deal is, we'll split the winnings whatever the outcome.......Would that 1000 bucks always be spent on VP playing by the math book for the optimal return, or would there be people running to the HL room playing 50 bucks a spin or more to get a big price? I know vp is different than slots or table games but I also believe vp-players ain't no better than anybody else handling somebody else's money. I don't know much about professional vp-teams but I do wonder how well sponsors are into the math and if they would monitor how the team plays or let it all in the hands of the manager. I personally don't get why a sponsor would trust a team handling his money with gambling.

News flash: some people turn into greedy, dishonoust pigs as soon as money is involved. Especially not their own money. 1000's of law suites every year are proof of that. Reminder: the recent front page story about the person that gave 7 bucks to a co-worker travelling to Vegas to play with? They had an agreement that they would split the jackpot might the co-worker win it. Well lightning struck and he won a jackpot......guess who didn't feel like keeping their end of the deal anymore. I'm actually surprised you didn't get where I'm coming from.

@ Frank, thanks for your reply. From a professional point of view it makes sense. There are people out there that don't consider you much of a professional because there's no risk of hat loss involved since you are playing on somebody else's dime. Not my idea....

Everyone in the current group I'm associated with is an ex-team manager except for one. And all of them (less 1) are math savants with at least my skill or better. The only reason I get to do a lot of the grunt math work is because they're older and would rather delegate it.

The definition of a "professional" is someone that makes their living at a profession. I qualify and them some as a professional gambler. That I choose at this time not to take risk is in my opinion proof of only one thing, that I get the choice. I make only very slightly less than the investors and have no risk. What sane person wouldn't take that deal if offered it? Now consider this, how skilled do you think one needs to be to get offers like that?

As far as the examples you offered related to "normal" gamblers, I can't comment, other than to say I'm glad I don't know anyone like that.

FrankKneeland

Feb 13, 2012
2:27am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: LurkerPoster
Sorry Frank, I don't buy this. Even vp team members are humans. They make mistakes and they can be losing more and longer than others at the team. Couldn't it be possible that as soon as a team member is far below the average result they would take some more risk at certain hands for a bigger paying hand? A risk they wouldn't take if it was their own money. Just hoping their figures would improve compared to the rest of the team?

Is it possible that a team member playing on the sponsor's dime turns up one day, after a late night party with family and starts the grind, knowing he's not in the best shape, also realizing that if it was his own money he was playing with, he would have stayed at home? But since he's playing in a team he can hide behind randomness, the money is not coming out of his own pocket, and more errors (because of lack of concentration) doesn't immediately influence his own financial position?

Does all of this sound impossible?

If you're asking is it possible for individual people to be dishonest, yes of course it's possible. Those folks get weeded out of our business. You'd be surprised how easy they are to spot.

In a totally homogeneous group such as ours where you could ask a strategy question of any of us and get exactly the same answer from any of us, except for Wayne, who'd tell you to ask Mike...none of these issues apply...at all...even a little bit!

None of us makes emotional decisions or has to fight with our human nature where gambling is concerned. We always do what we want, but what we want is to follow the math.

FrankKneeland

Feb 13, 2012
2:31am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroy

Quote
Originally posted by: FrankKneeland

Perhaps it would help if I told you what originally inspired the post. Someone on VP.com commented that all the posted jackpot pictures they had seem were on bad pay-tables. I know full well that not all Jackpots hit are on these low return games and I sought a plausible explanation for the bias, and why people hitting jackpots on high return machines didn't feel the need to post them or talk about them.

I believe I succeeded in coming up with a plausible explanation. It's not the only possible explanation, but I believe it is the most likely. If you'd like to contribute you could try to come up with an alternative explanation.

~FK

I like all your ideas, and I don't think they are mutually exclusive. They could all be contributing factors.

What I think is most interesting in all of this is just how biased on-line information is prone to be.

RoadTrip

Feb 13, 2012
2:59am

Block User

Just curious......

When chasing/playing for those jackpots, you indicated you print out the strategy for that specific game/prize.

Do your team players keep that strategy shee in front of them while playing until known by "heart"? Are they expected to play at a certain speed, and if so, what?

And how are the team players compensated? Hourly, or only a percentage of a "win"? Does the person who hits the big prize get a larger piece of the prize or do all players share equally whatever percentage is paid?

thanks

FrankKneeland

Feb 13, 2012
3:48am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: RoadTrip
Just curious......

1. When chasing/playing for those jackpots, you indicated you print out the strategy for that specific game/prize.

2. Do your team players keep that strategy shee in front of them while playing until known by "heart"? Are they expected to play at a certain speed, and if so, what?

3. And how are the team players compensated? Hourly, or only a percentage of a "win"? Does the person who hits the big prize get a larger piece of the prize or do all players share equally whatever percentage is paid?

thanks

1 & 2. We are all seasoned veterans and commit the strategies to memory before playing. We use them only at home to practice on a trainer if it's a new game. By the time we hit a real casino taking it with us would be redundant.

3. Everyone in my current group is an investor except for me (I'm straight salary) and one paid player/scout (hourly). The investors split everything equally and take a 5% signing bonus for jackpots. I waved any bonus in lieu of extra salary. WE have no lone rangers and everything is done as a group activity and requires consensus.

Of course since we are all math savvy the debates don't last long. One person says, "I think we should do this." Everyone agrees and we close the meeting.

When I ran the really big team in the 90's there was one single investor (also a math guy) and everyone else was a paid employee. That business model for progressive teams doesn't work well anymore due to changes in the tax code made in 1996. Now the rule rather than the exception is coalitions of equal partners.

Husband & Wife and Family teams are also quite common. There's a Philippino and a Chinese team we bump into every now and then. It's unclear how experienced they are and I don't know how they get compensated. My guess is one of the family members employees the others. It's just a guess. From what I've seen their strategy level is poor.

RoadTrip

Feb 13, 2012
4:18am

Block User

Frank,
Thanks for answering.

More questions....

1: Do the players use their club cards, and how does that compute into your teams overall finances? (points, cash back, comps, etc)
2: What about when playing during promotions such as a "lucky seat" drawing, etc?
3: What about the disparity for speed of play by different players? Is that "ignored" completely? Are all players expected to exceed xxx hph?
4: Does slow and steady but 100% perfect vs fast and 99.9999% perfect impact success or results? Which would be better for the team chasing those big jackpots?
5: Does your team ever chase slots, or other games, or stick strictly to VP? (ie: an overlay on a progressive caribbean stud jackpot type situation?) I ask this because I've "team played" in poker rooms where the bad beat was a monster, or bonus type promotions or drawings make it worthwhile. Our team would all play different tables, and only share for jackpots, drawings, or promotion high hand payouts. So not really a "team" in the literal sense, we still do it occasionally.

thanks

FrankKneeland

Feb 13, 2012
7:30am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: RoadTrip
Frank,
Thanks for answering.

More questions....

1: Do the players use their club cards, and how does that compute into your teams overall finances? (points, cash back, comps, etc)
2: What about when playing during promotions such as a "lucky seat" drawing, etc?
3: What about the disparity for speed of play by different players? Is that "ignored" completely? Are all players expected to exceed xxx hph?
4: Does slow and steady but 100% perfect vs fast and 99.9999% perfect impact success or results? Which would be better for the team chasing those big jackpots?
5: Does your team ever chase slots, or other games, or stick strictly to VP? (ie: an overlay on a progressive caribbean stud jackpot type situation?) I ask this because I've "team played" in poker rooms where the bad beat was a monster, or bonus type promotions or drawings make it worthwhile. Our team would all play different tables, and only share for jackpots, drawings, or promotion high hand payouts. So not really a "team" in the literal sense, we still do it occasionally.

thanks

1. We alway use cards. How the cash-back is divided up and whether or not it's just kept by the player is handled on a case by case basis. Where CCB is a substantial part we always consider it.

2. That would be split evenly amongst the investors.

3. Everyone in the group ranges between fast and very fast. But yes it's more or less ignored. Those that play slower also tend to play longer.

4. Accuracy is always more important than speed. No attempt is made to play faster than one can play without serious errors.

5. We will basically play anything with a strong enough edge, but the numbers have to add up. Usually only high progressives get to our criteria level. About the least we consider worth doing is 102%.

~FK

P.S. One of the members likes to play things the rest of us feel are too risky. So when he does he simply announces,"I'm playing such and such on my own". It's of no interest to us. Basically he's choosing to spend his off hours doing the same thing he does when he's working, but for less money. Yes, I think he has a problem.

He's the only one in our group that really likes gambling.

«‹6 ›

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:

Diamond Membership

$3 per month

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Limited Member Rewards Online

Join Now

Platinum Membership

$50 per year

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Exclusive Member Rewards Book

Join Now