Tag: Bob Dancer

Posted on by — 2 Comments

It’s How You Approach It — Part II of II

Beginning in last week’s blog, I discussed my thought processes for using a fairly large food comp intelligently. If you didn’t catch the start of this discussion, it’s available a few clicks away.

The next question was whether the $250 could be spent anywhere other than in a restaurant? Maybe a gift shop, spa, gaming, or whatever?

Yes, it could be spent at the gift shop — but the gift shop had very modest offerings. Still, at the end of our stay if it comes down to “spend it or lose it,” Bonnie might well decide that one of the purses wasn’t too bad. Or maybe she could get something there as a gift. Bottles of alcohol would have been okay. Yes, the cruise ship would lock them up for the duration of the cruise (they want you to pay shipboard prices for your booze), but we’d get the bottles back. As it turned out, bottles of alcohol were not sold at the gift shop.

Next, while dining at Slack’s, was it possible to buy a bottle of wine without having it opened? Bottles that have been opened will be confiscated by the cruise ship and not returned. Some restaurants will leave the bottle totally unopened for you. Many won’t. Sometimes a small tip will get them to bend the rules for you. (And it’s easy to over-tip here. A bottle you can buy for $20 in a liquor store might well sell for $60 in a casino restaurant. Tipping $10 might make sense if it were really worth $60, but that’s a huge tip for something worth only $20.) You don’t know until you ask.

And I certainly wouldn’t ask at the start of the first meal. When restaurant employees are dealing with strangers, they are more likely to follow the rules to the letter. But on the first night, if we spend five minutes talking to the manager about the various places on Cape Cod that would be good for a day trip the next day, and came back the second night thanking him profusely and telling him how his advice really made our trip, we then are no longer strangers. We are “friends.” And sometimes people do favors for their friends.

(I’m actually writing this after our first night at the restaurant and before the second. I have no idea how the conversation will go and it’s better to leave some things unsaid. This is more about the methodology of how I address this situation than it is about whether I was successful at getting an unopened bottle of wine this particular time.)

(A side issue that interests me is when cruise ships confiscate alcohol while you are boarding for a 7-day cruise is that they typically return it to you on the evening of the night before you disembark. For passengers who are remaining on the ship for 14 or 21 days, do they still give it back to you on the night before the first 7-day cruise is over? Or is their system sophisticated enough to keep it until the very last night of your multi-week cruise?

I’ve decided that if I don’t get the unopened bottle from Slack’s, I’ll stop at a liquor store and buy a bottle of wine to take on the ship as an experiment — because we’re no strangers to back-to-back cruises. It’ll be nice information as to whether we are able to enjoy our wine onboard during our second week aboard the ship in these situations.
Another option, whether we’re back-to-back or not, is to buy a bottle of wine off the ship and pay the $7.50 corkage fee. A $12 bottle of wine on land costs $30 on board. Paying the corkage fee is the better choice.)

I was interested in whether comp dollars could be used to buy free play in the casino. I was told that none of the $250 could be used for that, but any additional comp dollars I had can be redeemed for play-it-through-at-least-once free play at a 2-for-1 rate. That is, I could redeem up to $1,000 comp dollars a day for $500 free play. Playing a 99% game, this has an EV of $495 (with some variance). Would I rather have $1,000 in future meals at the M or $495 in cash? This is not an option available (so far as I know) in Las Vegas at either the M or the Tropicana, which are the two Penn National properties there.

I really didn’t know which was worth more to me, but I decided to exchange $1,000 worth of comp dollars for $500 in free play. On another day, I might have decided to keep all my comp dollars.

(The $1,000 in comp dollars I redeemed had nothing to do with the $250 in spend-it-or-lose-it comp dollars I was given as part of my Icon rewards. But they both happened on the same trip at the same place, so I decided to discuss them in the same article.)

Finally, we could let part of the $250 go unredeemed. It’s not the worst thing in the world. We are neither starving nor destitute. It goes against my grain to leave benefits on the table, but sometimes you have to. Sometimes you do this for strategic reasons. This time we’d do it because there was nothing we could get that we really wanted.

Posted on by — 3 Comments

It’s How You Approach It — Part I of II

I earn a number of “free” cruises for play at various casinos. One casino where this happens is the M Resort in Las Vegas. Icon members ($800,000 video poker coin-in per calendar six months), earn one 7-day Norwegian Cruise Line balcony cabin cruise for two people per six-month period — plus periodically they have extra cruise giveaways as well. Any cruises I earn from Caesars Entertainment are also on NCL.

In addition, Icon members receive $500 annually towards travel to get to their cruise and a 2-day trip to any Penn National resort including $250 in food credit. These are actually two separate benefits, but you can use them on the same trip.

Since Bonnie and I enjoy dancing and relaxing, cruises are pleasant vacations — and we’ve been to all the ports. Once or twice each year, we have enough offers for cruising two or three weeks in a row, but one of the concerns is getting to the cruise locations inexpensively. All the credit card discounts talked about by Jimmy Jazz or Eric Rosenthal are in play, of course, but an extra $500 off is always welcome.

As it happens, Plainridge Park casino is a harness racing racino, part of the Penn National chain, and very near the Foxborough part of greater Boston. If we can find interesting cruises out of Boston, then part of our transportation expenses will evaporate.

For much of the year, they have 7-day Bermuda cruises out of Boston, where the ship docks in Bermuda for a few days and doesn’t move. You have 24-hour on-and-off privileges. It’s a different sort of cruising experience compared to having a ship arrive at a port at 8 a.m. and you must be back on board later that same day.

In the fall, they have “fall colors” cruises for seven days north out of Boston, along the New England coast, and then down the St. Lawrence River (a key part of the St. Lawrence Seaway) to Quebec City. The following week, the ship returns to Boston, stopping at primarily different ports. So, if you plan your dates right, you can have three consecutive weeks where there is a different itinerary each week. Plus, if you stay in the same stateroom, you have an extra day to explore Quebec City or the nearby countryside.

That’s what we did. The last week of the Bermuda cruise season was September 7-14 and the first week of the fall colors cruise was September 14-21, followed by the return to Boston on September 21-28. A key part of making this work for us was to start the “fall semester” of video poker classes at the South Point on July 3 which would allow us to finish up on September 4 and get on a plane to Boston on September 5.

I was certainly willing to play at Plainridge were the pay schedules are “interesting.” They didn’t have much video poker, but the best games were actually better than I expected. The loosest I found was $1 Triple Play 9/6 Double Double Bonus, which is worth a tick under 99%, and the machines were busy enough that I couldn’t do an exhaustive search. They had no table games.  And even though this 99% game is less attractive than I normally play, it was plenty good enough to play some — which I’ll discuss in next week’s blog.

There is no hotel associated with the casino, so they put us up at a nearby Holiday Inn Express. Acceptable. They have nicer places in the area, and if they believed we’d be big players at the casino I’m certain a higher-end hostelry could have been arranged. But we probably weren’t going to play that much, and this was fine.

Arriving at the casino at 7 p.m. on a Wednesday, Bonnie and I had $250 to spend food-wise before Friday 9 a.m., which is when we’d leave the area to travel back to Logan Airport from where we had a shuttle reservation to get to the ship. They have Slack’s, which is an oyster bar and grill restaurant, and Flutie’s, which is a sports pub. They also have a food court, but $250 is simply too much fast food for two people to consume in two days.

The first thing we had to figure out was whether we were able to use the $250 over more than one meal? Although there’s a wine list at Slack’s which would allow us to easily surpass the $250 threshold, the surf-and-turf special ran only $30 apiece — meaning that running a tab of $250 over two days for two people without a significant amount of alcohol would be difficult. Food “to go” was of little interest because we were just about to spend three weeks on all-you-can-eat cruises. Still, we had a refrigerator in the room, so having a bit leftover for “midnight snacks” wasn’t all bad.

Next, we needed to determine what would happen to any part of the $250 that wasn’t spent? Was it placed in my “comp dollar” account — meaning that maybe we could spend it back in Las Vegas or at other Penn National properties? If that was the case, the “How do you spend it all right now?” problem disappears.

I was told by the only host on property Wednesday night that this, however, was not the case. The money wouldn’t “evaporate,” but could only be spent at Plainridge Park. I would have liked to ask this same question to a more senior host, but there was nobody available.

There were more things to consider in how to spend these comp dollars, but I’ll leave the discussion for that until next week.

Posted on by — 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 by — 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.”

Posted on by — 7 Comments

Getting It Straight

Every now and then I share results with somebody in a drawing or tournament. Sometimes, other people do it to lower the fluctuations in their bankroll. That is, they would much prefer to get half the amount twice as often. Assuming they are playing with an edge, this smooths out the swings. One can think of it as getting to the long run more quickly.

That’s not the primary reason I share results. I share results for social reasons. Simply put, it’s more fun to do things with your friends.  Sometimes the decreased bankroll variance is important to the friend with whom I would share. Sometimes not.

Once you’ve agreed to share, only half the work is done. You need to carefully lay out what is and is not included in the agreement. For example, is this agreement for one drawing only? Is it always in effect unless otherwise specified? Is it never in effect unless explicitly specified?

If the award is in free play, do you share in cash? (That is: Let’s say one of the players earns $1,000 in free play. When it plays it through, he runs salty and only collects $900. Does he owe his partner $500, $450, or some other number?)

If the prize is in cash, are 1099s to be issued? If the prizes are $1,000 or less, the tax implications are fairly minor. If there is a rare $50,000 prize, the tax implications are not minor at all. Issuing a 1099 for $25,000 is the cleanest way to handle it, but if this isn’t agreed upon up front, hard feelings will abound.

Several years ago, Jamie Gold won the World Series of Poker main event for $12 million. He had a partner putting up some fraction of his entry fee, and possibly the partnership wasn’t thought through clearly enough. There was a major disagreement as to how the tax liability would be handled. The poker community generally appeared to be against Gold. Eventually it got settled and Jamie resumed his career — probably because he was wealthy and willing to play in games with significantly stronger players. But there were hard words and angry feelings until it got resolved. I’m not involved in any sharing opportunities where a jackpot anywhere near that large is possible, but that incident offers a lesson nonetheless.

At a recent Big Draw lottery at the M resort, most people earned zero, but you could earn $50, $200, $1,000, $10,000, or (with a less than 1-in-50 million chance) $250,000. The lower amounts were in free play and the largest one was in cash. The deal I had with another player was all prizes would be settled for the full 50% amount in cash, and if lightning struck and one of us got $250,000, a 1099 would be issued for half that amount.

Was that the best way to do it? I don’t know. But it was agreed upon up front and both of us thought it was fair. So that means it was fair.

Sharing isn’t always symmetrical. In a slot tournament where it’s just “hit the button as fast as you can,” everybody has more-or-less an equal chance and you can share with anybody who’s not completely senile.

In a video poker tournament, it’s a different situation. Some players are simply much faster than others, some can make better decisions than others in a split second, and some can correctly adjust their strategy in the middle of a round when it’s appropriate to go for a “royal-or-bust” strategy. You need to be very careful with whom you partner.

I recently shared in a video poker tournament with someone who I later discovered was a slightly faster player than I was. However, I probably made better decisions than he did because I’ve been doing this a couple of decades longer than he has. Neither of us know this for sure. It was close enough to being fair that neither of us were worrying about it.

Sometimes there are drawings where once you’re selected as one of the winners, you have an equal chance at each of the prizes. In these circumstances, if you’re one of the winners and want to make a deal with another of the winners, it’s fair. However many tickets you had going into the drawing no longer matters. At this point, you’re both in there and have equal chances.

If you have unequal numbers of tickets in the drum, it isn’t easy to come up with a fair system for sharing — simply because you usually cannot win more than one prize. For that reason, if I have 1,000 tickets and you have 500, giving me 2/3 of the prize money would be unfair to you unless there is only one prize. I have twice the chances as you to be called first, but then the rest of my tickets are dead while yours are still alive.

Still, if there’s enough goodwill between the players, usually players would go with a 2/3 and 1/3 split in this example. It’s “close enough,” and you’re friends. If there wasn’t sufficient goodwill, normally no split is done.

Finally, some people can be trusted with money and some can’t. Whenever I’ve felt I’ve been intentionally shortchanged by a player, I let others know — sometimes by an article in this blog. Once somebody shows he will steal from or shortchange me, I never will give him a second chance.  

Posted on by — 1 Comment

But Wouldn’t I Get My Money Back More Often?

I was teaching beginner 9/6 Bonus Poker Deluxe in my Tuesday noon class at the South Point. (The semester will continue every Tuesday until September 4.) The hand we were discussing was 3♦4♦5♦Q♣J♣.

The class is taught using a top-down strategy where you select the rule that comes first. Holding 3♦4♦5♦ (along with certain other 3-card straight flushes) was covered by Rule 8. Holding Q♣J♣ (along with the other two suited high card combinations) was covered by Rule 9. Since Rule 8 comes before Rule 9, the correct play is to hold the 3♦4♦5♦.

One student asked the question: “But wouldn’t I at least get my money back more often if I held the clubs?”

My answer was: “Absolutely. But the system we use to determine the correct play maximizes Expected Value. With Expected Value, it is the frequency of the win multiplied by the value of the win – not just the frequency.”

The following chart shows this. To make the numbers big enough to read easily, I had to split the chart in half.

The Expected Value of 3♦4♦5♦ is shown to be 3.025. Since you are drawing two cards, there are 1,081 different combinations you could draw. About 87% of the time (actually 937 out of 1,081) you end up with no win at all.
But of the times you do score, most of them are straights and flushes, paying four and six times the value of high pairs respectively.

All the numbers in the preceding paragraph came from either the pay schedule or the chart below — which was copied directly from the Video Poker for Winners software. If you wish to be able to understand simple video poker mathematics, this is a good chance for you to practice.

 

Holding EV Total No Win High Pair 2 Pair 3K ST
3♦4♦5♦ 3.025 1,081 937 18 27 9 45
Q♣J♣ 2.9374 16,215 9,827 5,022 711 281 189

 

Holding EV Total FL FH 4K SF RF
3♦4♦5♦ 3.025 1,081 42 0 0 3 0
Q♣J♣ 2.9374 16,215 162 18 2 2 1

When you start from Q♣J♣ and draw three cards, there are 16,215 possible draws. This number is exactly 15 times as large as the 1,081 possible draws when you only draw two cards.

You get a high pair or two pair 5,733 times out of the 16,215 (which is about 35% of the time), but these are only 5-coin wins. You score something about 40% of the time, but most of the wins are small.

Other players use the logic that holding clubs gives them a chance at a royal flush and holding the diamonds doesn’t. But a 1-in-16,215 chance at 4,000 coins is only worth about 0.24 coins. The 3-in-1,081 chance of getting a straight flush holding 3♦4♦5♦ is worth 0.69 coins and that is something usually omitted by seat-of-the-pants players thinking, “It seems to me.”

A lot of players try to reason correct plays out in their heads. While this is certainly an appropriate avenue to address the problem if you don’t have a strategy handy, correct strategies are fairly easy to come by and figuring out how many times in 1,081 or 16,215 (or even bigger numbers when you draw four or five cards) is a tedious, error-prone process and basically impossible for most people to do by themselves.

A computer program, however, can figure this out almost instantaneously and very accurately. It’s one of the tools of the trade that makes it possible to play well.

Posted on by — 9 Comments

Why Play When It’s Not Worth Very Much?

Sometimes on holidays, the South Point offers 2x points — which means 0.6% because the base is 0.3%. This is equivalent to 6x points at the myriad of casinos that offer 0.1% base points.

This past July 4, they offered a Hot Seat promotion instead. This is a promotion where approximately 20 players an hour are randomly awarded $100 in free play from 8 a.m. through midnight. Let’s look at this a bit.

At 8 a.m., there might be 200 players in the casino — so each active player has about a 1-in-10 chance to win $100 in an hour — which means $10 per hour. At 8 p.m., there might be 1,000 players in the casino, so the promotion is worth $2 per hour at that point. Both my 200 and 1,000 numbers are wild-ass guesses. Still, they are the best estimates I have, and I need some basis to figure out how much a promotion is worth.

Is this better or worse than 2x points? This part is simple math, but many of my readers aren’t comfortable with doing this calculation. Let’s say you’re playing 800 hands per hour. If you play quarter single line, 800 hph comes to $1,000 coin-in, and 2x points is worth an extra $3 per hour. If you play $2 single line, 800 hph comes to $8,000 coin-in and 2x points is worth an extra $24 per hour.

Neither of these numbers mean you are necessarily a favorite when you play. It depends on which game you are playing. If you’re playing NSU Deuces Wild, which returns 99.728% when played perfectly, the numbers above pretty much represent expected dollars per hour if you play the game well. If you’re playing a lesser game, the casino may well still be a favorite no matter which promotion you are playing. If you’re playing a game that returns more than NSU, the numbers above are additional expected profit over and above what you’re already earning.

Using the information in the preceding paragraph, you can extrapolate to figure out what your game is worth. If you play smaller stakes, then the Hot Seat promotion, where every player who plays at least $1 per minute has the same chance, is the more valuable promotion. If you play for higher stakes, then the 2x points promotion would be worth a lot more.

I play for higher stakes, so clearly the Hot Seat promotion isn’t worth too much to me in terms of dollars per hour. And, yet, I hammered the promotion — playing more than ten hours. Playing ten hours straight used to be a walk in the park for me. I’m 71 years old now. It’s a struggle to play that long and still be alert. And yet I did.

The question becomes:  If the promotion wasn’t worth very much, why did I play it so hard? At first glance, this doesn’t seem to make much sense.

The answer is that I already committed to play $83,340 on both my card and Bonnie’s sometime during the month because we liked another promotion going on — namely play and redeem $8,334 worth of points and get a $50 Chevron gas card or $50 Walmart gift card — maximum ten per player. This is already similar to 2x points, because usually that much play earns you $25 in cash or free play and in July you get a $50 gift card.

So, it now becomes a matter of: If I’m already planning to play that much during the month and playing during the Hot Seat promotion gives me “something extra” which I wouldn’t receive playing at other times during the month, getting something extra is obviously better than getting nothing extra.

This still doesn’t address the alternative costs. Other casinos might be having good promotions as well on July 4. If my expected earnings were “a lot” at other casinos, this could easily surpass the perceived value of the opportunity at South Point. If it were important to Bonnie to go somewhere that day, that could easily be more important as well. Each person needs to make his own decision based on his own life.

As it turned out, I played ten hours at South Point and two hours somewhere else where they offered a little something that I felt was worth going for.

My results? To me, this is the least important matter in the whole affair. The critical part of the situation is the analysis that goes into the decision. Many people, however, want to judge the decision after the fact by the results. This does not give you useful information, because you don’t have this information before you make the decision. If I don’t include my results, you can bet someone will ask, “How did you do?”

So, on July 4 I was called once for the Hot Seat promotion for $100, and I lost considerably more than the value of the gift cards I earned. Oh well. That’s gambling. I care much more about expected value than I do about actual results.

If the circumstances are the same at some future time, I will likely play the promotion the same way — possibly modified because I’ll be older then and maybe won’t be able to play so long.

Posted on by — 7 Comments

Looking at 9-5 Double Double Bonus Poker with Multiple Progressives

The Vegas Stats & Information Network radio studio is located in the middle of the South Point casino floor, and periodically I’ve been a guest of the early morning show hosted by Paul “Paulie” Howard and Mitch Moss. Paulie mentioned that he found the DDB progressives interesting and wanted me to talk on the show about when you should get on the machine.

Such numbers do not make for good radio, especially since some of the listeners are probably driving to work and can’t take the time to write down anything. When I was last on the program on June 29, I gave some numbers and said that I’d be going into greater detail in my July 17 blog. And here we go!

If you’re serious about progressives, you should get Frank Kneeland’s “The Secret Guide to Video Poker Progressives.” That has by far more useful information on progressives than you’ll find anywhere else.

For today, I’ll assume you’re just going to be playing the game occasionally — and basically want to know how to figure the return on the game.

The game in question at the South Point contains a number of progressives, but does NOT have a progressive on the straight flush. Today I’m going to assign a number to the straight flush progressive because this same progressive is found in numerous casinos — sometimes with a progressive and sometimes without.

In addition to telling you how to evaluate the game, I also want to explain how I came up with the numbers. That way readers who are interested can apply the same technique to other progressives.

You’re going to need computer software to analyze progressives. I’m going to use Video Poker for Winners and WinPoker as those are the ones I use regularly and know well. If you have Wolf Video Poker, that can work as well. While it’s not quite as user-friendly, the wizardofodds.com has a free calculator you can use online. For many, it’s hard to beat free.

To start with, we need the base return of this dollar game, which is 97.87%. We’re going to be coming back to this base game over and over again.

To see how the progressive on the royal increases the return, I’ll set the royal on the game to 8000 coins. When I do this, I see the return is close to 100.13%. Assuming the return increases linearly (not completely accurate, but close enough for the analysis we’re going to be doing today), this means that when the royal increases $4,000, the value of the game increases 2.26%. Dividing by 4, when the royal increases by $1,000, the return on the game increases 0.56%. Once we have this multiplier, we can figure it out for any royal. Say the royal is at $7,356. That is 3.35 “$1,000 increments” more than the base game, and 3.35 * 0.55% adds 1.84% to the game.

Those who have actually followed along with the math will have noticed that I have rounded downward. The reason for this is that there are strategic changes to be made as each of the progressives change in value and it’s virtually impossible to get them all correct. By lowering the estimates of what the return will be, we somewhat take this into account.

Now we look at aces with a kicker. This jackpot starts at $2,000. So, we return to the base game and enter $3,000 for aces with a kicker. This gives up a return of 99.23%, which is an increase of 1.36% over 10 $100 increments, or 0.13% for every $100 (again rounding downward)

For aces without a kicker, this starts out at $800. Increasing that to $1,800 from the base game gives us 101.37% — an increase of 3.50% over ten $100 increments. So, whenever this progressive increases by $100, I add 0.35%.

For four 2s, 3s, and 4s with a kicker, this starts out at $800. Increasing that to $1,800 gives us 101.11% — an increase of 3.24% over ten $100 increments. So, whenever this progressive increases by $100, I add 0.32%.

I’m looking now at the straight flush, even though it does not have a progressive on the South Point machines. Sometimes, it does elsewhere. I’ll set the straight flush to $1,250 to get a return of 100.61% — an increase of 2.74% over ten $100 increments. So, whenever this progressive increase by $100, I add 0.27%.

The other two progressives, 2s-4s without a kicker along with 5s-Ks with or without a kicker, turn over fairly rapidly. These add some value, as you might collect $403 or $256 instead of $400 or $250 respectively, but these never get high enough to make that much of a “sit down and play or not” decision.

I assign 0.13% as the sum of these no matter how high they are. Why? Because that makes the base game an even 98% instead of 97.87%. This is a much easier number to work with, especially if I’m doing this in my head rather than with a calculator or some other means.

The final question you need to address is, “How high does it need to be before it’s worth playing?”

This depends on you. Since they have a number of 9/6 DDB games in the casino, which return 99.0%, the minimum sum of the progressives that you need is this figure. For players who wish to play a winning game, however, this isn’t nearly high enough.

You need 99.7% to make it an even game with the 0.3% slot club. Actually, that makes it slightly positive because you will also receive mailers and be able to participate in promotions while playing this game.

I can tell you I’ve seen it above the 99.7% level frequently. This is a decent game for dollar players to add to their repertoire at a casino with a number of good choices.

Posted on by — 7 Comments

If It Looks Too Good to be True . . .  

I just finished a two-part analysis of Maria Konnikova’s The Confidence Game where one of her warnings was (paraphrased) “If something looks too good to be true, it probably is. Very likely there’s something fishy going on.” Soon thereafter, a friend, “Sam,” who’s a knowledgeable video poker player, sent me the following pay schedule on a Bonus Poker game in the Palms High Limit Room:

(The numbers on the left represent the “new” pay table. The numbers on the right represent “standard” good Bonus Poker which is worth almost 99.2% if you play it appropriately. Compare the two sets of numbers and you’ll see why Sam was excited about the new game).

Royal Flush 800    800
Straight Flush 50    50
Four Aces 80 80
Four 2s-4s 40 40
Four 5s-Ks 25 25
Full House 9 8
Flush 7 5
Straight 5 4
Three of a Kind 4    3
Two Pair 2 2
Jacks or Better 1 1

The new game returns 111.2% and it can apparently be played from 25¢ through $5, Triple Play through Ten Play. My my!

Except, this was not a standalone pay schedule. It was on Dream Card.

Dream Card is a 10-coins-per-line game where you periodically get a Dream Card on the draw and that card turns into the best available card to go with the other four cards in the hand.

On Bonus Poker games, the occurrence of Dream Card has historically been 46.7%. If that same frequency is in effect on this game, that would turn this game into a 112% monster, or thereabouts.

Sam generously said that in exchange for my analysis of the game, I could play it, but I should please try not to kill it. After all, games this good don’t come around very often.

I told Sam that I wouldn’t play it at all. Although I’m allowed to play at the Palms now that Station Casinos owns it (and made it worse, in my opinion), I am severely restricted in the benefits I receive. The net effect is that I voluntarily stay away.

Still, on a 112% game where I could play up to $500 per deal, it wouldn’t matter much if I got benefits from the slot club or not. I would have major paydays as long as the machine and my welcome lasted.

The problem is that many of the slot department employees who now work there are the same employees who worked there back in the “good old days” and would instantly recognize me on sight. If I started hammering a machine, word would get to management within a few minutes.  If the game were really a mistake, either the machine would be pulled off the floor or I would be pushed out the door. So, it wouldn’t do any player any good if I tried the game at all. If it was a mistake, all my presence would do is help the Palms identify a problem. No thanks.

But I suggested to Sam that he play 100 hands on the game for the lowest possible stakes (which is 25¢ Triple Play costing $7.50 per deal) and keep track of the occurrences of the Dream Card. If it’s close to 46, which would be standard for Bonus Poker Dream Card, then he should go ahead and play it for the largest stakes he could afford. But if it’s a lot lower, we should do further research.

He did this. He actually played 200 hands and got 40 Dream Cards — which is less than half of the 93 or so he would get under the “normal” Bonus Poker Dream Card frequency. Whether playing 200 hands was statistically significant or not, he became convinced that it was and didn’t want to continue.

I told him I could contact a source I had at IGT — who is the guy both Michael Shackleford (the “Wizard of Odds”) and I use to get accurate information we can publish about games. But, I told Sam, if the game really was a mistake, likely my friend at IGT would notify the casino and that would be the end of it.

Sam said he wanted to know. He was likely done playing it and he didn’t see anybody else knowledgeable playing it, so almost certainly it wasn’t a mistake. Just “misleading,” because it would mean the frequency of Dream Cards wasn’t fixed for a game type.

It turns out that the game is worth 98.6%.

One of the unusual things about the game is that when you play five coins, the game is 7-5-4-3 Bonus Poker (returning 98.0%), but when you play 10-coins, it is 9-7-5-4. In the past, the Dream Card pay schedule was the same on the 5-coin and 10-coin versions, at least in my experience. Many of us would see the 7-5 Bonus pay schedule and not look any further.

Keep in mind that if the Dream Card frequency were zero, the return on this 111.2% game would be 55.6% (illegal in Nevada and many other places) because you’re betting 10-coins per line. I do not know the actual dream card frequency here, but it’s clearly lower than the normal Bonus Poker frequency, and higher than zero. Once I found out that the game is worth 98.6%, that’s all I needed to know.

It could well be that this is the best game in some casino someday where they have suitable-enough slot club and/or promotions to make this playable. Which is why the 98.6% number is important to me and may be useful information at that time. But until that time, it’s just a curiosity.

This again was a case of it looked to good to be true, and indeed, it wasn’t nearly as good as it looked. But we couldn’t know for sure until we did some further research.

Posted on by — 4 Comments

A Look at The Confidence Game – Part 2 of 2

 Two weeks ago, I explained why I found Maria Konnikova’s book, The Confidence Game: Why We Fall for It . . . Every Time, worthy of study. Today I’m going to pick and choose among some of the parts of the book.

Konnikova has a Ph.D. in psychology and is a writer for The New Yorker and other publications. While this is not an academic treatise with numerous footnotes, there are a LOT of references to publications by academicians who have studied con artists and related subjects. I say this to note that this does not read like a novel. It’s a pleasant read. It’s a charming read. But it’s not easy going. I felt the struggle was worth it. If you don’t want to take the time to read it, a good hour-long interview may be found at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARUntx62Lqk

Most people know who the typical mark is: “You can’t cheat an honest man” or “To be conned you need to be greedy.” According to Konnikova, these descriptions are totally false. The biggest predictor to who can be conned is: “Were you conned before?”

That makes me a good candidate to be conned again — a statistic that doesn’t set well with me at all. Many people, it seems, can readily pick out the foolishness that makes other people good marks, but if the con is chosen perfectly can be victimized themselves.

There are lists of people who have been conned that circulate, for high prices, among the con artists. (Creating such a list out of whole cloth sounds like it would make for a perfect con — but I digress.)

Apparently emotional, vulnerable people are among those easily conned — those who have lost a loved one or a job or are in some sort of transition in their lives. The actual cons described in the book largely came before the era of social media — but now it’s a lot easier.

People regularly post on Facebook and elsewhere everything that would make them a good mark. Many con artists befriend their marks on Facebook under a different name and learn a lot of interesting things that make their job easier and more successful.

I’ve been off Facebook for some time now over the reported risks. This book makes me even more wary of going back. It’s hard for me to know if that makes we wisely sensible or just an old fuddy-duddy. I suspect there would be votes on both sides of this.

The book goes through the anatomy of a con. How you identify a mark — or a grifter. The set up. The play. The disappearance. Now I know how to pull off a con, but I’m not sure I’m any more prepared to do it. A con artist is indeed an “artist.” Someone who is polished at what he does.

One thing that really hit me is that many victims really think they are special. Yes, they know that others have been conned — but this time it’s the real deal. Yes, they know that most psychics are fake — but believe they can tell the difference and this remarkable person is special.

Apparently, most of us think we are better looking than average. Smarter than average. Drive better than average. You know — special. It’s statistically impossible, of course, for most of us to be smarter than average. I certainly feel I’m extraordinary in a number of ways. Don’t you feel that way about yourself?

If you feel that way about yourself, then it’s not too far a reach for you to believe that you deserve good things. And if something is too good to be true for most people, well, if I’m special, then it might not be too good for me. Someone with that mindset is ripe to be conned.

Several interviewers of Konnikova can’t resist asking her if Donald Trump is a con artist? Whether you like that kind of question probably depends on whether you’re a Trump hater or a Trump supporter. I never heard Konnikova give a definite “yes or no” answer to the question, but she clearly agrees that much of what he says and does is very similar to what con artists say and do.