The late Lenny Frome wrote in "America's National Game of Chance", pp 164-165 in an article "The Royal Buster Strategy" that there are a few plays that can be made to increase your frequency of a royal by 25% in return for getting an overall 1/2 a percent lower return (i.e 99% instead of 99%). There are times we would all have preferred to go for it but didn't. I once held 3 to the royal J-Q-K suited and another J and a junk card. Was playing a 4K paycheck promo at the Pioneer where they gave you up to $100 with a 4K coupon -played dollars, I kept the J-J and you all know what 2 cards came up next.
denflo60 <dennis.florence@
wrote:
>
> denflo60 wrote:
> > I know all the Optimum play rules including penalty cards
> > for several games, but but since I never will reach the long
term
> > perfect bell curve shape in my playing lifetime I deviate from
> > optimum play rules because they may not be optimum for me
(relatively
> > few hands of 100 way play at max coin in) and I have I very high
> > risk/reward tolerance. Yes I need some pure luck to win.
>
> Another member notes that short or long-term, optimum strategy is
what
> will yield the highest expected return. I'll add my 2 cents.
>
> I respect the choice of any player to adopt the strategy that they
> prefer. But the belief that one won't "reach the long term" is
> fallacious reasoning and doesn't hold up.
>
> Discussions of the long-term center around the fact that it isn't
> until after a great many hands of play that the return from
> infrequently occurring hands can be looked to fall fairly close to
> expectation. However, the far predominant component of vp play is
> derived from very frequently occurring hands.
>
> To the extent that strategy deviations shift away from these hands
> toward rarer, higher paying hands (and that is almost always the
> case), it is almost a dead certainty that you will suffer a
shortfall
> in overall return related to these hands.
>
> The tradeoff may be that you have a greater probability of hitting
the
> higher paying hands (royals, quad aces, etc.), but the confidence of
> such hits still runs all over the place. In exchange, you can't
avoid
> the fact that on average you can look for an overall reduction in
> return. (And you must still beat the increased expected number of
> hits resultant from the strategy shift to beat the odds.)
>
> Now, tell us that you deviate from optimum strategy because you like
> to take a shot at big hands (grasping the inherent reduced EV) and
> I'll tell you that your play choice entirely makes sense for you.
>
> However, reason that optimum play economics don't make sense for you
> because you won't play out the "long term" and I'll suggest that you
> may be misguided in your strategy choice.
>
> - Harry
>
Harry: I always respect your comments. My variations to general
strategy deals primarily with being deaalt three cards to a Royal.
As you know depending on the game and the three cards, hpolding them
may or may not be the optimal play. I may choose to hold these three
cards even if it isn't correct to do so to try for a bigger score.
When I'm in Vegas my average play for $1.00 100 way is about$300K per
day. Its a lot of money but not a lot of dealt hands. I allow
myself $30K to start a group of sessions of JOB. I just finished up
a session on VPW that bankrupted me at $833K for about a 3.56% loss
on coin in hardly the .54% loss using perfect play. When in Vegas if
I had two of these in a row, which can happen I quit playing for the
trip.
I played another session of DDB on VPW using $50K to start and went
bankupt at $981,500 again for a 5% loss instead of the 1% long term
loss. Again having two sessions in a row like this in a row is not
inconceivable.
Especially in JOB you just cannot put enough money in the machines
allowing for all the W2G machine 2 pair lockup payouts to get to
the long run quickly or in a single trip. You can have them overide
the lock up but I don't like having people standinnf behind me
keeping tally. Its a psychological thing. Last year I played $6M+
total and I still don't feel I got to the long run. Now I know what I
do doesn't make mathematical sense but the thrill of a possible
larger payouts sometime outweighs the slow and steadiness of optimal
play.
We have three Casinos in Detroit which I never visit. The wife and I
love Las Vegas for being Las Vegas. Celine, Bette,Elton etc plus
restaurants like Alex at the Wynn and its 5 star suites make it all
worth it to me. I try to win and I like to win and I love Video
poker as its the only game we play but if I lose I still find Vegas
relaxing and enjoyable and they take good care of you there.
As an aside since my retirement some years back I have been
arbitraging foreign postage stamps and playing the $/euro swings,
albeit over a longer time frame quite successfully. High risk/reward
has been my life. Right or wrong I believe playing against a
random number generator in VP is little different than playing
against International Currency Speculators.
Again, I do repect your comments. Denny
------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
