[vpFREE] Re: Frank's guest from Australia

 

Nice. When are you posting the video to youtube?

Do you do the Transylvanian Lullaby:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkyLV3ToNGU

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Frank" <frank@...> wrote:
>
> Speaking of fair. Since I ran out of time I didn't get to set up my show close last night. We made that recording of me playing the violin this Wednesday. I have not played professionally in 11 years. And I have not taken my "real" violin out of safe-storage in two years. I practiced for a week to try to get back to up to speed, but it proved to be inadequate. The performance was only fair, but at least I got to play once for everyone on the show. If you hear some high pitched squeaks that was because I needed to re-string the violin as some of the strings had gone false (from stretching). I didn't know this until I got to the studio, but by then it was too late. Sorry. I'm afraid playing violin isn't as easy as playing two machines fast on VP.
>
> I was very disappointed with the performance, but at least you should be able to get a feel for what I was once capable.
>
> ~FK
>
>
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nightoftheiguana2000" <nightoftheiguana2000@> wrote:
> I've heard Frank can do a fair Paul Hogan.
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Re: M update

 

And I agree with you. What we did as part of our training was not close to a scientific experiment. Our goal was to turn out good players, not test a theory with control groups and double blind implementation. The possibility of bias in our training method is unquestionable. Obviously we tried to catch any errors, which is why we used two spotters overlapping.

I would still say, only as an educated opinion, that sufficient accuracy is possible for a select few.

Also, keep in mind that perfect accuracy was not required in the days of 2-4% overlays lying about all over the place. In the early 90's you couldn't swing a dead cat in a casino without hitting a high progressive.

~FK

P.S. Actually, they frowned on swinging dead cats in general.

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rob.singer1111" <rob.singer1111@...> wrote:
>
> I'll input on this Frank since I agree with Mike. I'll start off by explaining why having others "watch" trainees is inconclusive to the point of being irrelevant.
>
> When science is involved to a .1% accuracy, hard clean data is required--something you'll never get in trials with collections of people who sit at video poker machines. In the human factors engineering projects I've been involved in that required six-sigma accuracy rates, pilots in simulators were given very simple repitious tasks to do that went on for 8 hours at a time--and these of course were highly educated and trained figher pilots. Results were compiled electronically--not merely by having others watch them--and after just 1 hour their error rates went up exponentially by the hour the longer the shift went on.
>
> The irrelevancy of having others "watch for accuracy and errors" is simply adding another imperfect parameter to the equation. As such, multiple assumptions and conclusions are arrived at that really have no basis in science. When the subject being watched makes an error, it may not be picked up by the verifier; when the subject does not make an error, it may be picked up as an error by the verifier. And because watching someone play is far more taxing on concentration levels than actually playing, the longer a session goes on the more imperfect it becomes.
>
> Many of your sessions at the progressives go on for many, many hours, as you yourself explained to me. I believe that to be a very inefficient method of playing. There may be one or two "freaks" out there who can beat logic on any given day, but they would never do it on anything even resembling consistency.
>
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Frank" <frank@> wrote> If you'd like some hard numbers, out of 600 trainees we got 14 players that were capable of playing at an error rate of only one small mistake per hour.
> >
> > That translates to 2% of the population being able to attain this level of accuracy and 98% being not up to the task. The "most people" argument wins here. The "Anybody" argument fails, I'm afraid to say.
> >
> > In order to make our A team we required that trainees played 3 hours being watched by 2 supervisors with no more than 1 mistake per hour. We also followed that up with surprise inspections where a manager would sit next to a player and watch them during a long shift when they were fatigued. They still passed.
> >
> > Only 11% of our 600 trainees made the team at all (2-3 mistakes per hour). And only 1 out of 5 of those made the A team...and this was to learn only one strategy.
> >
> > It's fine to say it's hard. But suggesting it's impossible is like saying no one can type at 150 words a minute. At least one person in the world can. In fact the world is filled with people that can do things we can't. I'm curious as to why your post was so strong that you touted playing VP accurately as delusional?
> >
> > Hard...sure! Impossible, no.
> >
> > ~FK
> >
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Re: M update

 

I'll input on this Frank since I agree with Mike. I'll start off by explaining why having others "watch" trainees is inconclusive to the point of being irrelevant.

When science is involved to a .1% accuracy, hard clean data is required--something you'll never get in trials with collections of people who sit at video poker machines. In the human factors engineering projects I've been involved in that required six-sigma accuracy rates, pilots in simulators were given very simple repitious tasks to do that went on for 8 hours at a time--and these of course were highly educated and trained figher pilots. Results were compiled electronically--not merely by having others watch them--and after just 1 hour their error rates went up exponentially by the hour the longer the shift went on.

The irrelevancy of having others "watch for accuracy and errors" is simply adding another imperfect parameter to the equation. As such, multiple assumptions and conclusions are arrived at that really have no basis in science. When the subject being watched makes an error, it may not be picked up by the verifier; when the subject does not make an error, it may be picked up as an error by the verifier. And because watching someone play is far more taxing on concentration levels than actually playing, the longer a session goes on the more imperfect it becomes.

Many of your sessions at the progressives go on for many, many hours, as you yourself explained to me. I believe that to be a very inefficient method of playing. There may be one or two "freaks" out there who can beat logic on any given day, but they would never do it on anything even resembling consistency.

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Frank" <frank@...> wrote> If you'd like some hard numbers, out of 600 trainees we got 14 players that were capable of playing at an error rate of only one small mistake per hour.
>
> That translates to 2% of the population being able to attain this level of accuracy and 98% being not up to the task. The "most people" argument wins here. The "Anybody" argument fails, I'm afraid to say.
>
> In order to make our A team we required that trainees played 3 hours being watched by 2 supervisors with no more than 1 mistake per hour. We also followed that up with surprise inspections where a manager would sit next to a player and watch them during a long shift when they were fatigued. They still passed.
>
> Only 11% of our 600 trainees made the team at all (2-3 mistakes per hour). And only 1 out of 5 of those made the A team...and this was to learn only one strategy.
>
> It's fine to say it's hard. But suggesting it's impossible is like saying no one can type at 150 words a minute. At least one person in the world can. In fact the world is filled with people that can do things we can't. I'm curious as to why your post was so strong that you touted playing VP accurately as delusional?
>
> Hard...sure! Impossible, no.
>
> ~FK
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Re: M update

 

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "mike" <melbedewy1226@...> wrote: Anybody under the delusion that they can play rapidly for hour after hour after hour with "computer accuracy" is in serious need of an ego adjustment.

FK Reply:
Here's one of those rare posts where my having managed a VP team makes me uniquely qualified to answer.

If you mean 100% flawless then I would agree with you. If however we adjust this to attaining 99.9% accuracy it is very difficult, but not impossible.

If you'd like some hard numbers, out of 600 trainees we got 14 players that were capable of playing at an error rate of only one small mistake per hour.

That translates to 2% of the population being able to attain this level of accuracy and 98% being not up to the task. The "most people" argument wins here. The "Anybody" argument fails, I'm afraid to say.

In order to make our A team we required that trainees played 3 hours being watched by 2 supervisors with no more than 1 mistake per hour. We also followed that up with surprise inspections where a manager would sit next to a player and watch them during a long shift when they were fatigued. They still passed.

Only 11% of our 600 trainees made the team at all (2-3 mistakes per hour). And only 1 out of 5 of those made the A team...and this was to learn only one strategy.

It's fine to say it's hard. But suggesting it's impossible is like saying no one can type at 150 words a minute. At least one person in the world can. In fact the world is filled with people that can do things we can't. I'm curious as to why your post was so strong that you touted playing VP accurately as delusional?

Hard...sure! Impossible, no.

~FK

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Main Street Station Host

 

We visit Vegas 3-4 times a year for 2-4 weeks each time. Our main stays for a lot of years at non-closed casinos have been Boyd casinos (many) & Four Queens. I agree Four Queens offers are better but Boyd is also great! From friends & my play, it seems that $5000-$7000 will giver you free rooms & some freeplay or food credits. With such offers, I've also received extra free buffets from the slot desk (including seafood buffet for 2) & comped nights beyond my offer which I had originally booked at Emerald rate (from a host). After playing at Gold Coast when not staying there, I now receive free room offers. I would feel very comfortable booking week-night rooms at any Boyd casino, particularly at casino rate, & believing that I could either get my nights comped from a host &/or that I would later receive free room offers. If your play is higher, week-end nights might be comped the first time. At $5000 -$7000, we receive offers for any day o0f the week. We even continue to receive offers from Blue Chip where we only stayed once on a drive to our son's in Ottawa.
We've never used a host. On one trip, we arrived a day earlier than expected and Main Street was totally booked. The slot club called a host who phoned around and gave us a comped room at Fremont.

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Scot Krause's LVA Players Club Bonus Points Update - 29 JUL 2011

 

Scot Krause's LVA Players Club Bonus Points Update - 29 JUL 2011

http://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/greatdeals-slotpromotions.cfm

<a href="http://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/greatdeals-slotpromotions.cfm">
http://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/greatdeals-slotpromotions.cfm</a>

*************************************************
This link is posted for informational purposes
and doesn't constitute an endorsement or approval
of the linked article's content by vpFREE. Any
discussion of the article must be done in
accordance with vpFREE's rules and policies.
*************************************************

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Re: M update

 

Anybody under the delusion that they can play rapidly for hour after hour after hour with "computer accuracy" is in serious need of an ego adjustment.

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rob.singer1111" <rob.singer1111@...> wrote:
>
> I learned expert play on the games I play by practicing on my home computer also. But it is quite different than playing on and on for hours in a distraction-filled casino while risking money. It's like the difference between being a passenger in a car vs. being the driver on a 5-hour trip.
>
> I'm aware of some mistakes and I know I'm not aware of others. I train lots of people and see it all the time, and they've even caught ME messing up when I just didn't see it. No one is immune. And it just makes sense that sensory distractions together with the onset of fatigue cuts into sharpness.
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Re: Frank's guest from Australia

 

Speaking of fair. Since I ran out of time I didn't get to set up my show close last night. We made that recording of me playing the violin this Wednesday. I have not played professionally in 11 years. And I have not taken my "real" violin out of safe-storage in two years. I practiced for a week to try to get back to up to speed, but it proved to be inadequate. The performance was only fair, but at least I got to play once for everyone on the show. If you hear some high pitched squeaks that was because I needed to re-string the violin as some of the strings had gone false (from stretching). I didn't know this until I got to the studio, but by then it was too late. Sorry. I'm afraid playing violin isn't as easy as playing two machines fast on VP.

I was very disappointed with the performance, but at least you should be able to get a feel for what I was once capable.

~FK

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nightoftheiguana2000" <nightoftheiguana2000@...> wrote:
I've heard Frank can do a fair Paul Hogan.

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Re: Frank's guest from Australia

 

I've heard Frank can do a fair Paul Hogan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xn_CPrCS8gs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01NHcTM5IA4

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Bartop" <bobbartop@...> wrote:
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nightoftheiguana2000" <nightoftheiguana2000@> wrote:
> >
> > Maybe explains why Frank is really leaving Vegas, he's going to Australia where gambling wins are tax free and you can play poker for money over the internet in your skivvies.
> >
> > http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/australian.html
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Australian_Poker_Championship
> >
>
>
> I'm pretty sure, though, that Frank's "jolly good" and "bloody hell" stuff won't fly down there. Ain't that what the Brits say? lol
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Re: M update

 

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rob.singer1111" <rob.singer1111@...> wrote:
>
> You also asked about vp machines in Australia and I mentioned that there's a good lot of IGT machines available. There's also other brands and types--some of which Im not familiar with. As far as playing in Asia, that would be a viable alternative for them these days with all the big resort hotel/casinos popping up in Macau, Singapore, etc.
>

Thank you.

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Re: Frank's guest from Australia

 

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nightoftheiguana2000" <nightoftheiguana2000@...> wrote:
>
>
> How to make educated guesses:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_inference
>
>

Holy crap, I hope you weren't furnishing that link for MY benefit. It made my head hurt.

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Re: Frank's guest from Australia

 

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nightoftheiguana2000" <nightoftheiguana2000@...> wrote:
>
> Maybe explains why Frank is really leaving Vegas, he's going to Australia where gambling wins are tax free and you can play poker for money over the internet in your skivvies.
>
> http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/australian.html
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_Australian_Poker_Championship
>

I'm pretty sure, though, that Frank's "jolly good" and "bloody hell" stuff won't fly down there. Ain't that what the Brits say? lol

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Re: Graduating Paybacks on Slots

 

As far as I know a machine can pay whatever the casino wants it to in expectation baed on bet size as long as it meets gaming requirements (someone told me around 85%). There are a lot of machines that do this, for example rescue spin machines by Aruze give you an extra bonus game if you are max betting which obviously adds value since you dont have to bet for the bonus games.

Casinos should make slots play this way, if they are holding 4% on a dollar bet then a 2 dollar bet should be a hold of 2%, otherwise, players would have less incentive to play bigger, as all they gain is extra variance.

And also I'd like to point out that playing 98% games over 99-101% games just because you havnt hit a royal yet isnt the smartest thing to do, but if you just want entertainment then yeah flashy light are I guess better than a repetitive deck of cads. GL

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "George" <wxmen@...> wrote:
>
> Yes, I realize that the RF and progressives require a higher bet but these are spelled out in plain view for anyone who cares to look. I was talking about a slot game where you may select 1X, 2X, 5X, or 10X the line bet for example. I thought that the payback% had to be identical for all multipliers of the line bet.
>
> George
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "pyiddy" <pyiddy@> wrote:
> >
> > Been a standard feature on most slot machines for a very long time!
> >
> > Think about the Royal Flush payback on video poker which basically was
> > "borrowed" from the slot machine practice of paying a bigger multiple on a
> > max coin bet.
> >
> > Many video slots now have bonus progressives that can only be won by playing
> > max bet while playing for lesser bets causes bonus bets to be paid at fixed
> > multiples.
> >
> > Also so called "buy a pay" slots may have a much greater shortfall when you
> > play less than max. A modern example is the original Wheel of Fortune slot
> > where if you played 1 or 2 coins, the "Spin" symbol on the 3rd reel would
> > win only 5 times your bet instead of the wheel spin which averaged 26 times
> > your bet.
> >
> >
> >
> > From: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vpFREE@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
> > mleist
> > Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2011 12:46 AM
> > To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Graduating Paybacks on Slots
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Comments please."
> >
> > If you feel that a 98% (doubtful, but sure possible) slot machine is better
> > than a 99.54% (or greater) VP machine I'm not sure what other comment would
> > be helpful.
> >
> > People play for different reasons... what's yours? Do what makes you happy,
> > seriously, but just don't expect logic to back it up. :)
> >
> > --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vpFREE%40yahoogroups.com> , "George"
> > <wxmen@> wrote:
> > >
> > > After 2 1/2 years of bad luck playing VP, I decided to try the slots. I
> > recently came upon a new IGT penny machine at the Reno Peppermill. What
> > caught my eye was signage that said something to the effect that higher bets
> > have higher payback percentages. There are 5 buttons, allowing for 50, 100,
> > 150, 200, and 250 credit bets. The 100, 150, and 200 buttons say "higher
> > payback" and the 250 says "highest payback." I thought it was illegal (at
> > leaast in NV) to change the payback for different bet amounts but apparently
> > not. I'm wondering if anyone has heard of graduating paybacks and what the
> > range might be from lowest to highest. The IGT web site says that this game
> > has paybacks from 85% to 98% but is that the range from the 50 credit bet to
> > the 250 credit bet? I don't see how this machine could advertise a specific
> > payback percentage since they don't know what the average size bet would be.
> > BTW, the machine was "The Little Shop of Horrors" and I won $630 on a $2.50
> > bet, more than I've won with larger bets on VP in 2 1/2 years. It took 20
> > minutes for the bonus to playout. Needless to say, I'm even less inclined to
> > play VP now.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > George
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

.

__,_._,___
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)