Most everyone who has read my writings is, in general, aware of my “system” for playing video poker with an edge. Briefly: Total Return is the sum of the return on the game (discounted by your error rate), plus the slot club, plus the mailers, plus other promotions. If that return is less than 100%, don’t play. If that return is greater than 100%, then you’re playing with the advantage and, over time, good things will happen.
A friend of mine, “George,” plays 9/6 Jacks or Better (99.54%) at the Palms while another friend, “Andy,” usually plays 9/7 Double Bonus (99.11%) for approximately the same coin-in. George is convinced that Andy has done better than he has at that casino over the past two years and this “fact” irritates George. With the Palms slot club (0.25%), mailers, and drawings, George is playing with a small edge. Andy is probably playing at a small disadvantage. Yet for the past two years, George is losing and Andy is winning.
George tries to follow my formula pretty much to the letter. Andy often plays lesser games EV-wise because he feels that they are more exciting. Since George believes that Andy has had better results over an extended period of time, George believes my system is only a theory. He wants me to give him facts instead.
Of course George is correct. It is a theory I’ve developed over the years while trying to figure out the best way to win at video poker. I accept it as a fact — and most successful video poker players accept the general truth of the methodology I use — but nonetheless it is really only a theory.
It is possible that in a year or two, when we figure out an improved way to calculate Total Return, we’ll look back and say “the flaw in our theory was that we thought xxxxxx rather than yyyyyy. Now we believe yyyyyy is true and so that changes our methodology.” This is definitely possible and it is actually very likely to happen. The problem is that we don’t know NOW what we will LATER find out to be untrue.
The methodology that I recommend is useful (in my opinion) in deciding which games to play, at which casinos to play, and which promotions to pursue. It allows you to estimate in advance whether or not you have an advantage playing a particular game at a particular casino on a particular day. Since George lives in Las Vegas, there are over-100% opportunities available to him 24/7. This methodology allows him to decide which of these plays is superior.
It is a “before-you-play” theory. Your actual results after-the-fact will rarely match up exactly with the theoretical results. In the long run, they’ll be close enough, but all definitions of ‘long run’ leave something to be desired.
The thing is, I don’t know of a better theory to use. This is the best one I have. Over the past 17 years, it has worked well for me (although my theories have certainly evolved over that time.)
If you compare this theory to other techniques which enable you to decide which games to play, including where and when, this theory stacks up pretty well. If you want a theory that will tell you whether you are going to win today or not, this theory won’t do that. Nor do I know of any that do.
This is reminiscent of the quote attributed to Winston Churchill: “It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.” Whether or not Churchill was correct, the same type of argument can be applied to the theory I promote. The theory I use doesn’t predict perfectly every time, but it’s a better predictor than any other theory of which I am aware.
If and when I do find a model that works better, I’ll use it. And I’m confident that this WILL eventually happen. Casinos are constantly changing and the way to beat them also changes. The model that worked in 1995 doesn’t work today simply because the games, slot clubs, promotions, and skill levels of players are far different today than they were then. I expect that the skills required to win in 2020 will be different yet. And I hope I’m able to keep current with whatever those needed skills turn out to be.
As another gambling metaphor, let’s look at betting on football where you have to pay an 11-10 vig on your bets (‘Vigorish’ is the amount charged by the sports book to take your bet). You have to win something like 54% of the time to break even. If you had a theory that allowed you to make accurate football predictions 60% of the time, you could become quite rich.
Inevitably there will come a Sunday where the betting line says the Giants are favored by four points and your theory says that they should be favored by seven. So you bet the Giants pretty heavily because it’s not often that your theory says the line is that far off. For whatever reason, the Giants’ defense disappears that day, they lose by 21, and you lose your bet.
I’m the kind of guy who says I’m very happy that I have a theory which enables me to predict 60% of the winners. George is the kind of guy who moans that the theory cost him $1,000 for betting on the Giants that day.
Full disclosure: I don’t have such a theory on football betting — I wish I did and I’m not sure it’s even possible to win 60% or more of the time over an extended period of time — so I don’t bet on that game. I DO have a theory on successful betting at video poker — so that is where I place my bets.
Never miss another post