Category: Video Poker

Posted on by — 12 Comments

A Reason to Leave

In many jurisdictions, including Las Vegas, casinos can restrict players from competing. The restrictions can be complete or partial — permanent or reviewable. For many players, including myself, being restricted is a state of being with which we are quite familiar.

I was waiting for a drawing at a casino in December and a friend, “Charlie,” stopped by to chat until the winners were announced. He started by telling me of the new luxury automobile he had just purchased. Eventually the conversation diverged into casinos at which he (and his wife) and I were or were not allowed to play. I mentioned that in February I was going to apply to Casino A for reinstatement.

When I was restricted from Casino A I met with the General Manager and argued why I thought I should be allowed to continue to play. The GM listened to me but said that my restriction would remain. It was a partial “no mail” restriction, and I was still welcome to play, but without the mailers the edge was too skinny to make it worthwhile in my opinion. It was clear he wasn’t going to budge. I then asked if we could revisit it in 2018, and he agreed.

Although I wasn’t successful in 2017 when I spoke with him, I’m going to try again a year later. I was glad I was able to meet and talk with him and present my case. Every restriction is a negotiation. Some players roll over and play dead with every restriction. They accept the first verdict and that’s that. I treat a restriction as a starting place for a negotiation.

If you ever wondered why some player ended up being restricted at a particular place and some other player with a similar record wasn’t, reread the last four sentences of the preceding paragraph.

I try to find a way that the casino can get basically what it wants and I still get to play. Perhaps I was restricted because I won the Senior Drawing too many times. Okay. What if I agree that whenever I earn at least $500 in such a drawing I don’t participate in them for three months? That way, the casino isn’t bombarded with “that guy always wins” complaints, which in this case might have been the underlying reason for the restriction.

Or perhaps they want me to limit my play on point multiplier days to such and such an amount, rather than being unlimited. Whatever. There are a zillion ways to reach a compromise.

It’s very possible that there’s a happy meeting ground where they can allow my play and I still feel I have a decent-enough edge. We won’t know this until we talk about it. Sometimes it works. Usually it doesn’t. But, for me anyway, it works enough of the time that it’s worthwhile to go through the process.

Although the discussion with that casino’s GM will probably happen before this article is published, the particular results of that discussion will be for a later time — or most likely never. Let’s go back to my conversation with Charlie.

Charlie told me that he thought it was ironic that I was trying to get back into Casino A because he had just decided to stop playing there. I asked him why?

“Because,” he told me, “I’ve been playing $2 8/5 Bonus Poker there (which is the best game at that casino) and I’m down more than $40,000 for the year.”

“Okay,” I replied, “you’ve been unlucky there. Five cycles behind is no fun. But why did you decide you should quit playing there?”

“If I can’t win there,” he told me, “why should I keep throwing good money after bad?”

Before we could continue the discussion, they held the drawing, neither of us were called, and then we each left to do whatever else rather than keep chatting. But I thought this was a good subject to write about. Charlie is certainly not alone in the way he thinks. But I believe that such thinking is incorrect for intelligent gamblers.

Charlie’s logic was basically: I’ve run bad. The future will be like the past. Therefore, I should cut my losses and get out.

My thinking is: This is a 99.2% game. The slot club pays 0.30% there. If you play $xxx a month you generally receive weekly mailers of $yyy, plus food vouchers and other non-cash items. They regularly have promotions and drawings that add considerable equity. Reaching their highest tier level is obtainable for me and it offers benefits I value. Over a year, I expect to have an advantage of $zzz there.

Notice that in my thinking, the fact that I was ahead or behind any given amount in the past year was not part of the equation at all. My assumption going forward is that things will be “average” in the future. The fact that I’ve had non-average results so far this year is largely an irrelevant, albeit sometimes exciting and sometimes frustrating, piece of data.

For many people, being behind $40,000 would create bankroll issues.  In Charlie’s case, I don’t believe this is an issue. (Although clearly it was at least somewhat of a psychological issue if not an actual financial issue.)

I know that things in the future won’t end up being average. Every gambling situation turns out being better or worse than I calculated. Those folks who want guarantees should pick a different hobby. But just because I know things won’t end up being average doesn’t mean that being average isn’t the best assumption to make at this point. If the $zzz I’ve calculated is big enough to meet my needs, and the variance is reasonable enough given my bankroll, and I have time to fit it into my schedule given my other gambling and non-gambling activities, then it’s full speed ahead. Being behind five royals in a year is just so much “noise.” There have definitely been years I’ve been ahead more than that. There will be good and bad streaks in the future.

In my calculation, I mentioned xxx, yyy, and zzz. These are numbers you’re going to have to estimate for yourself for every casino you’re considering. The numbers I get may not be the same as the ones you get. You may or may not like the food at the restaurants in any particular place. If you play at a lot of other casinos, you may already have more food available to you than you can possibly consume. Some promotions make more sense for bigger players — or just for seniors — or just for locals who can come in every day if the situation warrants — or whatever. Estimating these things is something you can get better at over time.

Since I’m writing this before I actually know whether I’ll be re-welcomed at Casino A and, if so, under which conditions, my 2018 “prediction” is that I will be reinstated and Charlie will decide to return. As all gamblers know, sometimes your predictions come true and sometimes they don’t.

Posted on by — 11 Comments

A Different Way to Look at It

In Week 2 of my free video poker classes at the South Point, I usually teach beginning 9/6 Double Double Bonus Poker. Many of my readers wouldn’t be caught dead playing such a game. It returns only 98.98% when played well and there are plenty of better games around, at least in Las Vegas.

Still, players DO play this game regularly, so they might as well learn how to play it correctly. It might surprise you to know that in 2017, I played more coin-in on this game than any other! (It sure surprises me! If somebody would have bet me this five years ago, I would have bet against it. Of course, had I made a big enough bet, that would have affected the odds and I wouldn’t have played it more than any other!) While DDB is the most popular video poker game in the country, I didn’t play it because I particularly liked it. I played because with certain combinations of slot club benefits and promotions, this was the game that made the most sense to play.

In the class a few weeks ago, I was explaining that you NEVER hold a suited ace-ten in this game. One lady, who apparently goes for the royal every chance she gets, wanted to know how I could justify not going for the royal. The hand in question was A♠ T♠ 8♥ 7♣ 6♦.

As is my practice, I put this hand on Video Poker for Winners and displayed the results on the screen in front of the class. The display showed in Table 1:

 

[table “74” not found /]

 

After class I wondered if I could display these numbers in a way that would make more sense.I said holding the ace by itself was worth 21¢ more to the five-coin dollar player, and I pointed to the column that said holding the ace was worth $2.346 and holding the AT was worth $2.133. The lady nodded blankly, which told me she believed what I said, but these were just numbers. The numbers didn’t mean anything to her.
[table “73” not found /]

In this table, you have the value of each combination in dollars and cents (and tenths of cents.) That is, the chance you get a high pair (most frequently AA, but you can get JJ, QQ, or KK as well) is worth $1.274 when you hold the ace by itself but only $0.911 when you hold AT. This is a difference of $0.363. When you think about it, it’s not too surprising that you get fewer high pairs when you hold a ten in the hand. It both makes fewer “empty spaces” with which to make a high pair and when you pair up the ten, it’s not a high pair.

If you go through the differences on the bottom line, you’ll see that the two biggest advantages of holding AT (namely you can get a royal flush and you have a better chance of getting a flush) are worth almost a quarter apiece. But you lose in most of the other categories.

This chart is a little surprising to many players. After all, did you really think that the amount you get from high pairs is worth about half of the value of holding either the ace or AT? When you see these starting positions, you’re thinking four aces or maybe a royal flush. You’re not thinking of a measly high pair.

Don’t even think about trying to memorize these numbers. They are highly dependent on the exact five cards chosen. If one of the other cards is a spade, it greatly affects how much the flush draw is worth. If one of the other cards is a 2, 3, or 4, it affects both the chances for a straight, the chances for four aces with a kicker, and four 2s, 3s, and 4s with a kicker.

Is it useful to see how much each combination is worth in dollars and cents rather than in the number of occurrences? Maybe. Opinions will vary.

But if you think it’s useful, it’s already included in the Video Poker for Winners software. When you analyze a hand, you have a choice between “Show Possible Outcomes,” which gives you the information in Table 1, and “Show Coins Out,” which gives you the information in Table 2.

I didn’t know this was already included in the software until I looked while writing this article. I’m sure many of you didn’t know it either.

Posted on by — 10 Comments

Video Poker’s Participation Awards   

A ‘participation award’ is one you get just for being there — whether you win or lose. There are people who believe that when raising children, winning and losing isn’t so important, but participation is. With that in mind, there are some sports leagues for children where every player gets a trophy at the end of the year.

I’m not here to argue the merits of such a program and I’m not here to tell you how to raise your kids or grandkids.

What I want to talk about today are video poker’s participation awards. It’s possible you didn’t know there are any such things. But there are!

They are called jackpots!

A royal flush, which is the top award in most video poker games, is really a participation award. Show me a player who has hit 20 royal flushes in the past two months and I’ll show you someone who has played a LOT. Show me someone who hasn’t ever hit a royal flush, and I’ll show you someone who hasn’t played very much at all.

If you want to change the discussion to four aces, or maybe four deuces depending on the game, or dealt quads, or some other hand that pays well, be my guest. If you play long enough, you’re going to get these hands. If you don’t, you won’t.

But, do I hear you say, in the sports league for children that awards trophies to everybody, your skill level doesn’t matter. Surely, it’s different in video poker where you need to make skillful choices.

Well, yeah, sort of. On a hand like K♦ K♠ Q♠ J♠ 4♦, there are games where you should hold the kings and others where you should hold the spades. If you hold the spades, rightly or wrongly, on average you’re going to end up with a royal flush once every 1,081 of these hands. If you hold the kings, you’re never going to get a royal flush on this hand.

So, if the computer says to hold the kings on this hand but you actually held the spades and the 1,080-to-1 shot came in, would you consider that skillful? If you take a picture of the royal flush and show it to your friends, do they ever ask what cards you threw away? Or what game you were playing? Doubtful. Mostly they congratulate you on your good fortune and wonder what it’s like to be such a winner as you!

I participate on several Internet forums related to gambling. On some forums, you’ll see players posting pictures of dealt royals when they’re playing 8/5 Double Double Bonus, which is a game that returns less than 97%. There are other games shown in the pictures as well, yielding approximately the same thing.

Other posters on the forum line up and immediately congratulate the poster on the good fortune. My personal feeling is that anyone who plays a 97% game is clueless about the winning process. Clearly this is a losing player who got a participation award to briefly provide them with some ammunition to play more. To me, posting jackpots on such a bad game announces to the world that you are not a knowledgeable player. Why not keep this secret?

If I actually post such a comment, I get my head handed to me. People want to celebrate their participation awards. People want to be praised for how good they are. They tell me (correctly!) that it’s okay to be a recreational player and rejoice in their successes when they come.

So, I generally don’t comment on these jackpot pictures anymore. But I take note of who posted them. When that person enters into a later debate on some matter on the forum, I’ll understand going in that their opinion does not carry the same weight with me as the people who are actually knowledgeable players.

In my own case, I’ve hit more than 500 jackpots of $20,000 and larger. Are they all participation awards? Absolutely! Every last one of them! The only thing that number of jackpots tell you is that I’ve been playing a long time for higher stakes than many others play. It doesn’t tell you anything about how good a player I am.

Until you know why a player was playing a particular machine on a given day, what slot club benefits and promotions were available, and the accuracy of the strategy used, you have no idea how good that player is. You cannot say with confidence that someone who has hit 200 royal flushes is a better player than one who has hit four — although you CAN say the former has participated a lot more than the latter.

Posted on by — 3 Comments

What’s Going On?

On a recent videopoker.com forum post in mid-December, one member, “George,” posted the following. It was in a thread that at the time was discussing players offering advice to players who sit next to them:

For the last few weeks, I’ve been hitting one particular promo spread among a few casinos. I’m going to guess well over 100 hours since Thanksgiving.
Never once, not a single time could I even tell you what game the person next to me was playing. Not if they played it well, just what they were playing.

George is a local Las Vegas player who I think plays quarters. I’m going to assume he plays at that level in the commentary that follows.  

I know George a little and I believe that he is seriously attempting to win at video poker. I have no knowledge of his actual scores, but I know he studies and attempts to play the best games using appropriate strategies. He pays attention to promotions and in this particular example believes he has found an edge.

I don’t know with certainty the particular promotion George has been playing. But I certainly know about believing a casino-promotion offering is so good that I’ve gone in and hit it almost every day until it’s over. I’ve had that experience more than 100 times in the past 23 years. I know well the tunnel vision that can result from this — where nothing and nobody else matters.

I’ve come to the conclusion that for me personally, such tunnel vision is expensive. Being at least minimally aware of my surroundings is important. Let’s look at why, to me at least. As they say, your mileage may vary.

  1. I’m going to assume that George’s tunnel vision included totally ignoring other players to the point of incivility. That may well not have been true with this particular player, but it is with some. One reason I’m using the fake name “George” is that it allows me more artistic license. If the real George wishes to identify himself in the comments on gamblingwithanedge.com and say I’ve pegged him wrong, he is welcome to do so. But this article is meant to be about a behavior of many players rather than one player in particular.

 

  1. I believe you need to be generally aware of your surroundings — including other players. This would include, at a minimum, a nod or a “hello.” It’s fine if you don’t want to talk to anybody, but basic manners make the world go ‘round. Even if you sit down next to a “chatty Cathy,” it’s not that hard to say you really need to concentrate and can’t talk and play at the same time.

There will be times when you accidentally leave your jacket on your chair or leave uncashed credits on your machine. Your odds are much better at getting those things back if there’s at least a basic level of friendliness.

There will be times that the machine you want is busy. If you have some sort of positive relationship, even a minor one, it’s easier to get the current occupant to agree to give you the machine when he is done. Your reputation follows you around. Players will respond better to a “Quiet George” than they will to a “Grumpy George.”

 

  1. A more important reason for at least being aware of other players around you is that they are often your best source of casino information. Even if you’re the most knowledgeable guy around, nobody knows everything. However good this current promotion is, it’s possible there is a better one somewhere else. Or a good one coming up that requires you to do some preparation (such as get a player’s card in another casino or perhaps learn a new game). It can be very cost effective to share information with a limited number of other players who play in approximately the same casinos at roughly the same stakes as you do.

 

You don’t want to share information with everybody. It’s wise to have some secrets. But to figure out with which players are worth sharing, you need to evaluate them. That evaluation includes which games they play, when they play, and how competently they play.

As a quarter player, if the person next to you is playing nickels, you can basically ignore them as a person with whom to share information. In most casino locations, nickel pay schedules are so bad that anybody willing to play them is almost always clueless. That player’s goal is to gamble as inexpensively as possible and he doesn’t have the knowledge to recognize that in most environments, he’ll lose less playing the best quarter games than playing most nickel games.

If your neighbor is playing quarters, you need to look at the game he is playing. On most multi-game machines there are a variety of games. If the player is not playing one of the top two or three games, again he can be ignored — assuming you’re a player who wishes to win. Winning may or may not be possible on the best pay schedule or two. It is virtually never possible on lesser pay schedules.

If this player is playing on a game you’re unfamiliar with, you should take note of what it is — perhaps 8/5 Super Double Double Bonus. When you go home, it’s easy to check out how much this game returns. It’s possible that it is a better game that what you are already playing.

You need to eventually evaluate this player’s play. On occasion, glance over and watch a hand or two. It won’t take long to conclude whether the player is basically competent or not.

If you identify the player as playing the right game and playing it competently, this person is at least a potential ‘friend’ with whom to share information. If you identify the player as not ‘up to par,’ that’s useful too.

Over time, you’ll get to know a number of potential allies. Depending on your personality and preferences, some will be a better fit than others. To see if they’re interested, share something you know (e.g. “Have you heard of the new policy at Sam’s Town about xxxx”). If they seem interested, share this information with them and see what comes in return. Some people are very good at taking all the knowledge you’re willing to share and sharing nothing in return. You don’t need friends like that.

This is a lengthy process, but to me it is very valuable.

George is enough of a “regular” at several casinos that others know him. If he is at least minimally friendly, he’ll have a number of unofficial allies. If he totally ignores everybody, he’ll have a much harder time in casinos. If he wants people with whom to share information, he’ll have some basis for making an intelligent decision about whom to trust.

This isn’t rocket science and everybody’s style is a bit different. But to be so absorbed in your game that you see nothing around you is not a good idea.

Posted on by — 13 Comments

If You Weren’t Such a Hypocrite . . .

Periodically I receive a version of the following email:

Mr. Dancer:

I have read your books and practiced on Video Poker for Winners. I’m a really good player. I live in Las Vegas and can see there are good games to play — except I simply do not have the bankroll to play at the stakes necessary to succeed.

But you do! So why don’t you bankroll me? I’ll share the results with you 50-50 of course and we can both do well!

If you weren’t such a hypocrite, you’d see the wisdom of this! This is a chance for you to put your money where your mouth is. If what you’re writing is just a bunch of lies in order to sell books, I could see why you’d pass this up. But you’re not doing that at all, are you?

So, when can we start?

Eve

 

Dear Eve:

I’m not interested. For a lot of reasons.

First, even if you are a player with the same (or better) abilities that I have, playing 100% honestly, you’re asking me to receive half of the wins and bear 100% of the losses — on a game where only a tiny advantage is possible. That would not be an intelligent gamble on my part.

Second, Eve, I don’t know you from Adam. Even if you tested out really well when I was watching, who’s to say what you will do when I’m not around watching you?  I’m not saying you’re a cheater. What I AM saying, though, is that some people do cheat and I’m not proficient at detecting beforehand who’s going to cheat me and who’s not. Since I’m not very good at this, I believe it is better for me is to stay away from it.

Third, this is not my business model. I have no desire to form some type of insurance company. Maybe somebody else can see the opportunity here and prosper at this sort of thing, but I’m 70 years old now and that’s not how I want to spend the rest of my life.

Fourth, there’s a big difference between investing in myself and investing in somebody else. Those are very different mindsets. Those involve very different risks.

Lastly, I don’t respond well to “If you’re not a hypocrite then you’ll do what I want you to do” types of arguments. It’s reminiscent of grade school challenges like, “I double dare you to jump off of that building!” No thanks. Go try and manipulate somebody else!

I have bankrolled two players in the past. One went pretty much as expected and I won a bit. The other player lost at a very high rate — possible, but unlikely. It’s been more than 20 years and I still think I was cheated — but I couldn’t prove it at the time and certainly can’t prove it now. I promised myself “never again” at the time and see no reason to break that promise to myself now.

Posted on by — 11 Comments

Is There a Different Strategy and How Can I Be Sure? — Part II of II

This is a continuation of last week’s column. You may wish to read that one before you start here. I actually suggested you do some homework between then and now. I understand that many of you did not do the homework (it’s not too late!) but those of you who did will get more out of this.

The Wizard of Odds strategy calculator provides a basic strategy and a list of exceptions to that basic strategy. These exceptions are generally caused by what are called “penalty cards.” This is going to be the area where we’re going to find our strategy deviations. A 1% change in hard-to-get hands is not going to cause major differences.

In the group of hands where it says you should hold the J instead of the normal unsuited AJ, the top nine hands are as follows:

  1. 2♣3♣4♦J♥A♦
  2. 2♣3♣4♦J♥A♠
  3. 2♣3♦4♣J♥A♦
  4. 2♣3♦4♣J♥A♠
  5. 2♣3♦4♦J♥A♣
  6. 2♣3♦4♦J♥A♠
  7. 2♣3♦4♥J♠A♣
  8. 2♣3♦4♥J♠A♦
  9. 2♣3♦4♥J♠A♥

 

These hands may look the same to some of you, but they are all different. The difference between the first two, for example, is whether the ace and four are suited with each other or not. Sometimes the two and three are suited with each other; sometimes not. Once you focus in on these types of differences, you can see they are all different.

What’s more, each one stands for a variety of hands. The first one stands for all cases where the ace and four are suited, the two and three are suited (in a different suit that the ace and four), and at the same time the jack is unsuited with each of the others. There are actually 24 different hands that are represented by that one line. In every line where there are three or four suits (which include all of these), there are 24 different hands represented.

What I did is copy all of the hands for the regular SDB strategy and pasted them into an Excel spread sheet. There turned out to be 334 of them. I then copied and pasted the hands from the Dotty’s version of SDB and pasted them side-by-side with the regular SDB hands. There were also 334 of them. I spot checked the two lists side by side and determined they were identical. Therefore, I concluded that I had to look elsewhere for the strategic differences.

The next type of hand I looked at was being dealt an unsuited ace king and only holding the ace. In the regular SDB version, there are 276 cases where only the ace is held. ALL of these 276 cases include a ten unsuited with the ace. In the Dotty’s version, there were 48 hands which did not include a ten, and also 354 that did include a ten. That means there are at least two types of strategic changes to identify.

I’m going to print, in black and white, the 48 cases where there is no ten and we hold the ace by itself rather than AK. How would you describe these hands in a way that accurately describes these hands and no other ones?

6♣7♣8♦K♣A♥ 6♣7♣9♦K♣A♥ 6♣8♣9♦K♣A♥ 7♣8♣9♦K♣A♥
6♣7♣8♦K♦A♥ 6♣7♣9♦K♦A♥ 6♣8♣9♦K♦A♥ 7♣8♣9♦K♦A♥
6♣7♣8♦K♥A♠ 6♣7♣9♦K♥A♠ 6♣8♣9♦K♥A♠ 7♣8♣9♦K♥A♠
6♣7♦8♣K♣A♥ 6♣7♦9♣K♣A♥ 6♣8♦9♣K♣A♥ 7♣8♦9♣K♣A♥
6♣7♦8♣K♦A♥ 6♣7♦9♣K♦A♥ 6♣8♦9♣K♦A♥ 7♣8♦9♣K♦A♥
6♣7♦8♣K♥A♠ 6♣7♦9♣K♥A♠ 6♣8♦9♣K♥A♠ 7♣8♦9♣K♥A♠
6♣7♦8♦K♣A♥ 6♣7♦9♦K♣A♥ 6♣8♦9♦K♣A♥ 7♣8♦9♦K♣A♥
6♣7♦8♦K♦A♥ 6♣7♦9♦K♦A♥ 6♣8♦9♦K♦A♥ 7♣8♦9♦K♦A♥
6♣7♦8♦K♥A♠ 6♣7♦9♦K♥A♠ 6♣8♦9♦K♥A♠ 7♣8♦9♦K♥A♠
6♣7♦8♥K♣A♠ 6♣7♦9♥K♣A♠ 6♣8♦9♥K♣A♠ 7♣8♦9♥K♣A♠
6♣7♦8♥K♦A♠ 6♣7♦9♥K♦A♠ 6♣8♦9♥K♦A♠ 7♣8♦9♥K♦A♠
6♣7♦8♥K♥A♠ 6♣7♦9♥K♥A♠ 6♣8♦9♥K♥A♠ 7♣8♦9♥K♥A♠

The three features you need to notice are:

  1. Each of the three bottom cards is in the range six through nine.
  2. None of these three cards are suited with the ace.
  3. The three bottom cards are not all the same suit.

On my strategy sheet, I omit the third element above simply because a 3-card straight flushes with no high card and either one or no insides are quite a bit higher than either an unsuited ace king or an ace by itself.

I write the other two rules as AK . . . . (< A with no fp and no lsp)

The “fp” stands for “flush penalty” and refers to a card suited with the ace. The “lsp” stands for “low straight penalty” and means a 2, 3, 4, or 5.

Now let’s look at the 78 cases, including a ten, where you hold the ace rather than AK when you’re playing the Dotty’s version rather than standard SDB.

2♣3♣10♣K♦A♥ 2♣4♦10♣K♥A♠ 3♣4♦10♥K♥A♠ 3♣5♦10♣K♥A♠
2♣3♣10♦K♣A♥ 2♣4♦10♦K♣A♥ 2♣5♣10♣K♦A♥ 3♣5♦10♦K♣A♥
2♣3♣10♦K♦A♥ 2♣4♦10♦K♦A♥ 2♣5♣10♦K♣A♥ 3♣5♦10♦K♦A♥
2♣3♣10♦K♥A♠ 2♣4♦10♦K♥A♠ 2♣5♣10♦K♦A♥ 3♣5♦10♦K♥A♠
2♣3♦10♣K♣A♥ 2♣4♦10♥K♣A♠ 2♣5♣10♦K♥A♠ 3♣5♦10♥K♣A♠
2♣3♦10♣K♦A♥ 2♣4♦10♥K♦A♠ 2♣5♦10♣K♣A♥ 3♣5♦10♥K♦A♠
2♣3♦10♣K♥A♠ 2♣4♦10♥K♥A♠ 2♣5♦10♣K♦A♥ 3♣5♦10♥K♥A♠
2♣3♦10♦K♣A♥ 3♣4♣10♣K♦A♥ 2♣5♦10♣K♥A♠ 4♣5♣10♣K♦A♥
2♣3♦10♦K♦A♥ 3♣4♣10♦K♣A♥ 2♣5♦10♦K♣A♥ 4♣5♣10♦K♣A♥
2♣3♦10♦K♥A♠ 3♣4♣10♦K♦A♥ 2♣5♦10♦K♦A♥ 4♣5♣10♦K♦A♥
2♣3♦10♥K♣A♠ 3♣4♣10♦K♥A♠ 2♣5♦10♦K♥A♠ 4♣5♣10♦K♥A♠
2♣3♦10♥K♦A♠ 3♣4♦10♣K♣A♥ 2♣5♦10♥K♣A♠ 4♣5♦10♣K♣A♥
2♣3♦10♥K♥A♠ 3♣4♦10♣K♦A♥ 2♣5♦10♥K♦A♠ 4♣5♦10♣K♦A♥
2♣4♣10♣K♦A♥ 3♣4♦10♣K♥A♠ 2♣5♦10♥K♥A♠ 4♣5♦10♣K♥A♠
2♣4♣10♦K♣A♥ 3♣4♦10♦K♣A♥ 3♣5♣10♣K♦A♥ 4♣5♦10♦K♣A♥
2♣4♣10♦K♦A♥ 3♣4♦10♦K♦A♥ 3♣5♣10♦K♣A♥ 4♣5♦10♦K♦A♥
2♣4♣10♦K♥A♠ 3♣4♦10♦K♥A♠ 3♣5♣10♦K♦A♥ 4♣5♦10♦K♥A♠
2♣4♦10♣K♣A♥ 3♣4♦10♥K♣A♠ 3♣5♣10♦K♥A♠ 4♣5♦10♥K♣A♠
2♣4♦10♣K♦A♥ 3♣4♦10♥K♦A♠ 3♣5♦10♣K♣A♥ 4♣5♦10♥K♦A♠
3♣5♦10♣K♦A♥ 4♣5♦10♥K♥A♠

 

The two features here are:

  1. There is a ten unsuited with the ace. It may or may not be suited with the king.
  2. There are exactly two cards in the range of 2-5, neither of which is suited with the ace.

The second rule can lead you astray if you’re unfamiliar with regular SDB advanced strategy. In the regular strategy, AK (<A with no fp, a T, and at most one lsp). In the Dotty’s version, we have simplified to AK (<A with no fp and no T).

Something to keep in mind is that ace king is exactly equivalent to ace queen and ace jack. So, using an H as a “high card lower than the first card listed” our rule becomes

AH …. (< A with T and no fp) (<A with no fp and no lsp)

A few weeks ago, I wrote a column about having an ace with a suited jack ten. Those rules take precedence over the ones I’m discussing today.

Next, I looked at a suited jack ten versus an unsuited king jack. Since a suited jack ten could become either a straight flush or a royal flush, and both of those pay schedule categories had a 1% increase, it’s possible there’s a change here. But copying and pasting the lists of exceptions to an Excel spread sheet side by side told me the two cases were identical — hence no strategic changes here.

For the suited queen ten with a flush penalty, sometimes you just hold the queen. It turns out there is a difference between the two games. I can print out the differences and let you see if you can figure out the rule, but you can do that yourself if you like. I’ve shown you enough examples so that you get the idea. In regular SDB, you hold the Queen by itself in these cases where one or more of the following conditions apply.

  1. There is at most one card in the 2, 3, or 4 range.
  2. There is an 8 in the hand.
  3. There is a 9 in the hand.

In the Dotty’s version, the first condition disappears and to hold the queen by itself there must be an 8 and/or a 9 in the hand. That is, on a hand like Q♣T♣3♣ 5♦7♥, in regular SDB you hold the queen while in the Dotty’s version you hold queen ten. In both games, on a hand like Q♣T♣3♣ 4♦ 7♥, you hold the queen ten. You might remember from last week’s column that you get fewer quad Js-Ks in the Dotty’s version of the game. This one type of hand is the primary reason why.

I checked the rest of the hands and couldn’t find any more differences. If you can identify some other case where the strategy varies, I’d appreciate you letting me know.

Finally, the question sometimes arises as to whether I really attempt to play these games taking into consideration all of these things. The answer is: “Yes I do.” It’s part of playing the game correctly and that’s my aspiration. I don’t always succeed and I sometimes make mistakes for a variety of reasons (mainly being tired, sticky buttons, or simply mis-fingering), but my goal is to play perfectly.

Posted on by — 13 Comments

Is There a Different Strategy and How Can I Be Sure? — Part I of II

One of the casinos I play at is Dotty’s, which is a chain of more than 100 15-machine outlets all across Nevada, plus a few larger ones. There are perhaps 10 of them within 10 miles of my home.

One of the promotions that attracts me relates to W2Gs. Every week, 10% of the W2Gs earned company-wide earn a 10% bonus. That is, if you receive a $4,000 royal flush, 10% of the time you receive an additional $400 in cash. I estimate the value of that by assuming I’ll get an extra $40 for every such jackpot. (in other words, $40 every time adds up to the same number as $400 10% of the time.)  I’ll end up with the same EV, although I’ll be underestimating the variance a little.

My game of choice currently is 9/5 Super Double Bonus. If I play that game for at least $25 per hand, I’ll get W2Gs for all quads as well as for each straight flush and royal flush.

I’ve known the strategy for that game for some time and I’ve written about it periodically. The question I’m looking at today and next week is: Does the strategy change with the Dotty’s promotion? And if so, what are those changes? Further, assume that I’m not a computer programmer and I don’t have access to computer software that you don’t. So how do I go about this?

I wish to learn to play the game perfectly. I understand that this may not be your goal. Still, learning how to do it is what this week’s and next week’s columns are all about. Someday there may well be a promotion that you wish to figure out.

The software I’m going to use for this analysis is the Wizard of Odds (WOO) Video Poker Strategy Calculator. It will give you a perfect strategy and it’s available for free online. Although I’m not a huge fan of the notation used on that product, it’s hard to complain too loudly when it’s free and completely accurate.

For the base game, the pay schedule is 800, 80, 160, 120, 80, 50, 9, 5, 4, 3, 1, 1   Adding 1% to each of the top six figures will make the return on one of them 50.5. Although the WOO software does accept decimal points, I prefer to multiply all of the amounts by 10. That is 8000, 800, 1600, etc. Since the strategy is calculated using relative values, multiplying all pay schedule categories by a fixed amount has no effect whatsoever on the strategy.

For the Dotty’s version, I enter the payout amounts as 8080, 808, 1616, 1212, 808, 505, 90, 50, 40, 30, 10, 10. The lowest six pay schedule categories don’t receive the 1% increase because they don’t result in W2Gs. If I wanted to bet $134 or more per single-line hand, I could get W2Gs on full houses as well. For today we can ignore that refinement.

In the chart below, the numbers in red indicate numbers for the base 9/5 SDB game. The numbers in green represent the numbers for the Dotty’s version.

The actual chart created by the WOO software has several more columns to it that I’ve omitted here. If you duplicate either the red or green Payoff numbers in the WOO Video Poker Strategy Calculator, you’ll see the omitted columns. Those columns include useful information, but not information we’re using today. If you don’t duplicate this information yourself, how do you know if you can do it? It’s not difficult, but “practice makes perfect.” If you don’t know how to use a tool, it’s the same as not having the tool at all.

In the red section of the chart, find the number 490,732,320. That’s the number of occurrences for royal flushes out of 19,933,230,517,200. (In a recent Gambling with an Edge episode, Michael Shackleford explained where this number comes from.) In the green section, the corresponding number is 491,575,464.

That means that when you change strategies to take advantage of these W2G bonuses, you get more royals. You should be able to see you also get more straight flushes, more aces, more 2s-4s, and more 5s-Ts. For some reason I’ll explain next week, you get fewer Js-Ks.

Okay. Now I know there are strategy changes. This is the first part of what I wanted to know. I now need to find out what these changes are.

I’m going to tell you what those changes are — next week. I’m going to use the WOO Video Poker Strategy Calculator to do this. What I strongly recommend is that you work this out yourself. All the information you need is in the software which is online and free. As I said before, if you don’t know how to use a tool, it’s the same as not having the tool at all.

Posted on by — 42 Comments

If That’s Random, You Can Bite Me!

This column is inspired by an email I received about 20 years ago, when TITO tickets weren’t found everywhere. I don’t have the email in front of me, but I remember the gist of it and certainly the line that I’m using as a title. For the rest, I’m using some artistic license that I believe is fairly close to the original.

Dear Mr. Dancer:

Life is so unfair!

I was playing quarter 9/6 Jacks or Better at my local casino. With the 0.67% cash slot club, it’s mildly positive. The lady next to me, let’s call her “Lucky Lucy,” was playing 9/5 Double Double Bonus, a game that you say is so bad that it should be avoided.

Anyway, Lucky Lucy was dealt AAAA2 for a $500 hand pay. Three hands later LL got 22223. The 800 quarters started to spill into her tray, but the hopper went dry before she got the whole $200. So, they came and filled up the machine. About 10 hands later, LL nailed a $1,000 royal flush!

I’m playing the so-called good game and losing my ass! In less than 20 hands, which took more than 20 minutes because she needed so much servicing from the casino staff, on a terrible game, she was ahead $1,700. I’m starting to believe that pay schedules mean squat. You’re either lucky or you’re not!

And random – smandom! If you think this was a random result you can bite me!

Frustrated Fred

 

Dear FF:

Yes, I think it was a random result, but I respectfully decline your culinary invitation.

LL had an extremely lucky run that she’ll be talking about for the rest of her life! Thirty years from now, she’ll be saying, “Let me tell you about that time back in 1996 when . . . .“  She was playing a less-than-98% game that normally eats her lunch. There will be ugly stretches where that game pays less than 90% over a few thousand hands — as well as very occasional times where she wins big. Even including the “never-in-my-wildest-dreams” session you just described, she’ll be a big loser on this game over time.

Could it happen that she quits forever and ends up a net winner on that terrible game after such a wonderful run? Theoretically, I suppose, but it usually doesn’t work that way. What is more likely is that she’ll come back as soon as possible to see if she can capture lightning in a bottle one more time. And the most likely result is that she is going to lose — because that’s the nature of that game.

You, on the other hand, are playing a dull little game where, over time, you’re going to lose almost a half percent, which is more than offset by the generous slot club. There will be days you win and more days you lose, but over time it will come pretty close to the half percent it’s supposed to (assuming you play well) and you’ll be a net winner after collecting your slot club benefits.

What “random” means in this case is that the results mimic those of a freshly shuffled fair deck. Sometimes you’re randomly dealt four aces and a kicker (one time in 216,580, if you’re counting). Unusual? Yes. It certainly doesn’t happen every day or even every year to a given player. But it happens. It happened to LL while you were sitting next to her and she got $500. It’ll happen to you just as often, maybe next time will be a year or three down the road, but you’ll only get $31.25. At times like that, it’s hard to see that receiving an extra $1.25 for every time you end up with two pair pays off better in the long run. But it does! If you want to complain about playing the wrong game when such a nice hand is dealt, you won’t be the first one to do so! Many video poker players complain a lot!

“Random” includes lots of results that are surprising because they happened TODAY. It never happens that you play 1,000 hands and get the exactly predicted number of every hand. It can’t happen because some hands have cycles much longer than 1,000 hands. It’s going to take about 40 of those 1,000-hand cycles to receive a royal, and 650 of those cycles to be dealt a royal. But dealt royals happen randomly — once every 649,740 hands on average. Keep playing and you’ll occasionally be dealt a royal. It happens. Randomly!

Good video poker players have come to believe that over time, the results end up where they should. Over millions of hands, you’ll end up with approximately the correct number of royals, straight flushes, 3-of-a-kinds, etc. If you’re playing where you have the advantage, you’re very likely to be ahead after millions of hands. If you’re behind after millions of hands, it most likely is because you were playing games where you did not have the advantage.

Can I guarantee this? No. Of course not. Depending on how big your edge is and how many hands you’ve played, you might be an 80% favorite to be ahead, or a 90% favorite, or a 99.993% favorite, or whatever. You will never be a 100% favorite to be ahead, but we don’t live our lives with 100% guarantees. (You can’t 100% guarantee that you’ll be alive a week from now, for example.)

But you can BET you’ll be ahead, and really that’s what we’re doing when we gamble. It can be a very, very smart bet to make, even if we can’t be positive that we’ll always win.

But even though I can’t guarantee I’ll win over the next however-many years, I 100% believe I’ll do very well and am betting considerable amounts that it’s true.

Posted on by — 18 Comments

Whose Responsibility Is It?

For the November 16 Gambling with an Edge podcast, Richard and I welcomed David Clary, author of the book Gangsters to Governors: The New Bosses of Gambling in America. That podcast speaks for itself and I’m not covering here what we talked about on the podcast.

The last chapter of the book, called “Double or Nothing,” discussed something we didn’t talk about — problem gambling. It’s a real thing. While exact numbers are elusive, millions of Americans suffer from it.

In many jurisdictions, casinos and government agencies chip in to provide some help to these gamblers. There are a number of “self-exclusion” programs in various states that sometimes are more-or-less effective in keeping some of these people out of casinos. A strong case could be made that more needs to be done.

With some players for whom gambling is not a problem, it’s easy to conclude that having a problem is simply a self-control issue. Like, if you have a gambling problem, just stay out of casinos. Like, alcoholics should just stop drinking. And obese people should just show restraint at the dinner table. And tobacco addicts should just plain stop smoking. It’s like, “I don’t have a problem with this and you shouldn’t either!”

I personally don’t believe anything of the sort described in the preceding paragraph. I believe these are real problems with real pain and costs associated with them. What it’s caused by, I don’t know. Bottom line, though, is that I’m not at all certain what to do about it.

I regularly write things like, “If the pay schedule combined with the slot club and promotions isn’t good enough, don’t play.” I know that’s a key part of success at video poker. Players who don’t follow that advice basically have no chance of being a long-term winner. I think this is considerably different from, “If you have a problem with gambling, just stay out of casinos,” but it’s easy to envision disagreement on how different the two phrases are.

My writings assume that people CAN refrain from playing. But I also assume that very few problem gamblers read my scribblings. I have no idea how valid this assumption is, but surely some problem gamblers occasionally read my works.

Every reputable and conscientious how-to-gamble-effectively writer faces this dilemma. How do you provide information to players who can benefit from it without simultaneously giving problem gamblers false hope? If I knew the answer to that, I’d do it. But I just don’t know.

I am NOT planning on stopping my writing. Whatever your opinion on the matter is, I believe I help more people than I harm. I do not believe that the problem would be cured or even lessened if I stopped writing.

I do donate to Gambler’s Anonymous. Is that the best place to give? I don’t know. How much I give is none of your business. I’m not giving out of guilt. I do not feel guilty for being a video poker teacher. But it bothers me that in at least a few cases, my writings have ended up being harmful rather than helpful.

Most people who read my columns are players in the video poker community. While I’m more famous in that community than most of my readers are, the “how-to-deal-with-this-issue” problem is not mine alone.

You may turn a blind eye to this problem or you can try to do something about it. You’re going to have to decide for yourself. The only thing that is certain to me is that the problem isn’t going to magically disappear just by ignoring it.

I know this column is a bit of a downer, but sometimes the real world is like that. Sometimes it’s important to shine a spotlight on problems and, for me, this is the day to do it for this particular problem.

Posted on by — 9 Comments

You’re Upsetting Our Players

In 1999, I started communicating with “Richard,” the marketing director of the Laughlin Flamingo hotel. (Today the same property is called the Aquarius, and it may change names again because the parent company is in the process of changing owners.) Richard knew my name because I wrote columns for Strictly Slots and Casino Player, both of which were distributed for free in that casino.

He wanted to use my “fame,” such as it was, to draw in customers, but he didn’t really want me to teach his players how to beat him. Was there any middle ground?

I suggested he hold a video poker tournament, giving away whatever amount he wanted, and I could teach a class on “How to Succeed in a Video Poker Tournament.” His players would get real value because tournament play definitely has some skill elements to it (in addition to a considerable amount of luck) and most of the lessons for tournament play don’t translate into regular casino play. We reached a deal for me to host two events over the next year.

The only tournament software they had was for Jacks or Better.  An unusual choice for a video poker tournament, but I could adjust my class accordingly.

One of the major points in tournament strategy is that on the last hand, if you aren’t “in the money,” you should go for broke. If a tournament had 250 entrants and paid out 50 places, then being in 51st place was tied with 250th place. Zero is zero. This is very different from casino play, where 51st place might represent a profit of $100 and 250th place might be a loss of $500. These aren’t the same at all.

Players are used to the concept that a higher score is better than a lower score, but this is only true in tournaments if you’re above the “bubble.” If you’re below the bubble, all scores are equal.

Since it was a Jacks or Better tournament, the example hand I used was being dealt AAAAT on the last hand where you weren’t already in the money. Assuming 125 coins (the payout for four aces in this game) wouldn’t be enough to move you into pay dirt, you should throw away three of the aces and just hold the suited AT. Your only chance was to get a royal flush. You didn’t have a big chance — actually 1-in-16,215, but a small chance was better than no chance at all.

If this were the more standard Double Double Bonus tournament, I would have picked a different hand. Four aces pay at least 800 credits, maybe 2,000, and just that score would usually be enough to move you into the money.

The following year I received a call from “Cheryl” who was Richard’s assistant. She said Richard was busy, but she was asked to call and see if they could get me to Laughlin again for two more events. But there would have to be a few changes in the contract.

First, they wanted to lower my fee by $100 each time. Since I had already prepared my notes, it would be easier on me and that should be reflected in the price. I told Cheryl that I wasn’t crazy about this change. At that same time, there was a casino in Las Vegas that was giving away the store (I didn’t tell her this was the MGM Grand).  To induce me to come down to Laughlin for two days at a time would take more money, not less. But what was the other change you were talking about? Maybe that would offset the money.

She told me there were complaints from some of the seniors that I was telling them to throw away four aces! They didn’t get such a good hand very often and they just KNEW this couldn’t be right. Since the complaints went through her, it would be making her life easier if I never told them to throw away four aces.

I asked her if she understood the context behind sometimes throwing away the aces. She didn’t. She didn’t care. She never gambled anyway so she paid no attention to somebody else’s silly ideas about gambling. She really only cared about getting fewer complaints from the players.

I asked her if Richard knew about the changes she was requesting. She said no, but she was sure he would be proud of her for reducing the costs and not making the players angry.

I told her “No thanks,” but if they wished to increase my fee and allow me to teach the class as I saw fit, she knew how to get in touch with me. She never did.

I never taught there again, but as I recall things worked out pretty well for me at the MGM Grand.

 

Author’s Note:  The next semester of classes at the South Point will begin Tuesday January 9. The original schedule of classes on bobdancer.com accidentally said Sunday January 7. The schedule has been repaired, but I want to make sure everybody has gotten the word.

Should anyone be worried about the classes upsetting them, I promise that this semester I will never tell you to throw away four aces!