I had a trip to take not related to gambling. There was a casino nearby. I knew that if I gave them some action, I could get a comped room and possibly a meal or two. I figured if they had at least 8/5 Bonus (99.166%), I was money ahead by staying at the casino.
I looked at www.vpfree2.com. This is a site that tries to list the loosest games in most casinos around the country. It is run by volunteers, and it is not always completely accurate. It is usually accurate, and sometimes you need to make decisions based on the best information available.
This website said 8/5 Aces & Faces was the best game. This is a 99.255% game. It is the same as 8/5 Bonus, except that you get the 40-for-1 quads on kings, queens, and jacks rather than twos, threes, and fours. It certainly qualified as being “at least” 8/5 Bonus, so I booked the room.
When I got there, I found the game as advertised. They also had 8/5 Ace$ Bonus at 99.407%. This game has “sequential” aces, meaning that if you got the aces in alphabetical order in either positions 1-4 or 2-5, you get paid 4,000 coins rather than 400.
It is clearly superior to 8/5 Bonus, except the sequential aces bonus feature kicks in approximately every 250,000 hands. Assuming you don’t hit the sequential aces, it’s worse than 8/5 Bonus because you make some plays “going for it.” The most common such play is that when you’re dealt aces full with the three existing aces in sequential position, you toss the pair and go for the fourth ace, hopefully in the correct position.
I was only going to be playing a few thousand hands. Which is the better play?
Assuming variance isn’t an issue financially or psychologically, it’s clear that going for the game with the highest EV is the better choice. And that’s what I chose. I didn’t hit the bonus hand and there was not dealt an appropriate aces full hand.
I did not torture myself by taking special note of how many of which quads I hit so I could afterwards decide whether the Aces & Faces version would have been better. Some folks do this, but you need to make your decisions beforehand and whatever happens this particular time is pretty unimportant.
But for many people, discounting variance shouldn’t be done so cavalierly.
If you live and die with today’s score, the Aces & Faces game is a better choice. If you’re playing for stakes that are a bit higher than your comfort zone, the same answer applies.
We will never know why the Ace$ Bonus game wasn’t included on the www.vpfree2.com listing. It could have been the monitor didn’t see it, didn’t know how much it was worth, or was afraid of the game because of the variance. There could be other reasons as well. It is, after all, a site where you don’t know who does the work behind-the-scenes and you never find out their motives or abilities.
Even though the information I sought was incorrect on the site, I’m glad the site exists. It’s generally correct and when you’re going to a location where you haven’t scouted recently, it’s a major time saver. I wouldn’t depend on it for a frequently visited casino where I play a lot, but for “just popping through” for a few days, it’s satisfactory enough.
Never miss another post
Bob,
If you were going to pay a few hundred hands rather than a few thousand hands, would your decision change?
What if you had a sign-up bonus of $10 of free play and just want to play that? Is there for you a pivot point on variance vs EV?
I think the main thing to figure out is the theoretical on those games and also are there other games with slightly lower returns to players but with even better theoreticals. As a general rule you’re looking for something just under 99% return, like DDB. And of course I’d run through the “advantage slots” and the table games before I’d look at the video poker. These days at most casinos video poker is viewed extremely negatively, even though it’s usually not even the best game. There’s often more heat on video poker than there would be on a single deck blackjack game.
If I were to play 1 hand or 100,000, I use higher EV the vast majority of the time. To me, 1 hand and 100,000 are basically the same — they are mere data points on my year’s play of several million hands. I have goals for the year, but not for each individual day.
The blame for not having an up to date video poker database lies with players more than anyone. It’s up to you and me and all other video poker players who value vpFREE2 to report updates (other than games that are best kept quiet). Following this paragraph is what the vpFREE forum admin wrote on the vpFREE Yahoo Group forum about this today. I’m copying it here with his permission.
At one time the monitors for the vpFREE database were asked to
regularly scout their casinos, but the program has evolved over time.
Now the vast majority of updates are provided by players who use
vpFREE2.com.
Monitors are no longer even required to regularly visit their casinos.
They do make the updates that players submit to them or post on the
vpFREE forums. I help out where I can sometimes making updates
submitted for casinos I’ve never even been to.
So it’s up to everyone who values vpFREE2 to submit changes that
should be made. Just look at what’s listed there now, then click on
“Submit update about this casino” and let them know what should be
changed (excluding anything that it’s best not to advertise).
vpFREE Forum Administrator
So did you send in an update to list the better game?
I think u must be a registered monitor to do that but im not sure . the vpfree2 site is usually very good as bob alluded to .
Philip, no you don’t have to be a vpfree2 monitor to send them an update. You don’t even have to have an account there. Just look at what’s listed there first, click on “Submit update about this casino” and tell them what to change. You must provide an email address in case they have any follow-up questions.
You do NOT have to be a “registered monitor” [I never heard that term before today] to submit info to the vpFREE2 Web site. There is one guy (I forget his name at the moment) who seems to be in charge, and he has been responsive to me and both my questions and my submissions, making some updates due to my input. Of course one guy can’t go all over the place checking everything out at every casino; that would be impossible. He has to trust the submitters like me, and there’s really no reason why he shouldn’t: Why would submitters intentionally submit false information? Not to put down Mr. Dancer, but I think the vibe in his depiction of the vpFREE2 Web site was too negative; I’ve found the site to be right-on, probably 95% to 99% correct. As for why that certain game wasn’t listed on the site, it could be one of many reasons: The game might have been recently installed. It might have just gone unnoticed. The machines (how many have this game?) were maybe all being played when the monitor saw the game, so he couldn’t really check the game out. And there could be other reasons I’m not thinking of. But vpFREE2 is GOLD; let’s treat it as such!
There’s one thing I don’t understand. You wrote: “This website said 8/5 Aces & Faces was the best game. This is a 99.255% game. It is the same as 8/5 Bonus, except that you get the 40-for-1 quads on kings, queens, and jacks rather than twos, threes, and fours.” If the only difference is that the 40-for-1 quads are K-Q-J instead 2-3-4, then why isn’t the EV the same as with regular 8/5 Bonus Poker?
Because some times you hold a single high card or 2 high cards that can convert to quads. You never hold a single 2,3 or 4 or 23,24 or 34
If you play millions of ace$ bonus hands per year, you are most likely going to get at least one. On the other hand, if you play less than 297,222 hands (wizard’s numbers) per year, your chances don’t look so good. At 297,222 hands you have about a 2/3rd’s chance.
I watched a guy hold a single 4. He was playing Atlantic City Joker Poker, wherein you get 4000 coins for 5 of a kind, and only 500 coins for a royal or a straight flush. Boom! He hit the 5 of a kind for $1,000 in quarters. I asked him why he would hold a single 4. He said 4s had been coming up a lot. Location: Treasure Bay Casino, Biloxi, MS.