I like the idea of adding a, "how you got it" function to the utility.
Then, after the fact you could record if you hit a 4K on a 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 card draw.
I believe I will try to incorporate this, if I figure out what to do with the data once it's collected, thanks for the idea.
~FK
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, peter boyd <boyd_peter@...> wrote:
>
>
> I'm glad Frank brought this topic up as it has really taken off and threads like this are far more interesting than most (at least in my opinion!). I've gambled for about ten years, have kept stats, but never, really good ones. Or, ones that I really looked at later or studied. Since my move to Reno, that part (the studying) has become almost as fun at the actual playing. Maybe I am different in that regard, but I guess I have always been like that. To be honest, I would rather listen to sports talk radio than watch the various games. The analysis and the breaking down the of plays, the momentum swings and the analysis always seemed more interesting to me than the actual playing of the game. Am I unique in this aspect of things?
>
> For most, they could care less with this, but these are my numbers so far this year (I would much rather see information like this that is factual in nature)! So, no need to read further if you are not interested. . .
>
> I've played 16,591 hands in a little over 34 hours for an average of about 484 hands an hour. I have had 11 winning sessions and 8 losing sessions and am up a little over $500 for the year. I have hit one royal (ave 40,782), so I am definitely running ahead on that one. Straight flushes have come up roses four times already this year (ave hit 9,124) so I should have a little under two. I have been playing DDB (10/6), so with the flush only worth 500 (same as a quad), it really isn't that big of a deal. Four aces with the kicker has really saved me so far this year. I have hit four of those (ave hit 16,236), so I have hit three more than could be expected. The last one was dealt (so I can't comment on hitting from three of a kind!). The four 2's, 3's and 4's with a kicker I have only hit twice (ave hit 6,983), so I am a little under in this category. Four aces without the kicker I have hit twice so far (ave hit 5,761), so I am about one hit short on quad aces. The 2's, 3's and 4's without the kicker is where I have really been light. I have only hit three of these and the average hit is every 2,601 hits. So, I am way short in this category. As for regular quads (5-K's), I am at 30 for the year. With the average hit being at every 613, I am about three over the average. With that information in mind, I think the machine (all on one machine) that I have been playing is fairly standard. Some categories above, others below.
>
> The thing that is interesting is that I have also started to document how I reach the quads (I only save or document quads or above hands) as it seemed to me that I hardly ever reached them from having three of a kind. I think, what happens, for the most part is that we have pairs so many more times that we are bound to reach quads to a greater degree than off of threes (math, anyone?). Of my last 22 quads, one was from a lone high card, 14 were from a pair, six were from a three of a kind and one was dealt.
>
> And, I am going this Sunday and all this information will need to be changed. . .
>
> Have a good weekend everyone. And, thank you to Bob Dancer for the software to analyze this game!
>
> Until next time,
> Peter Boyd.
>
> To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
> From: frank@...
> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 21:55:15 +0000
> Subject: [vpFREE] Re: What Would It Take???
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Cohen <brucedcohen2002@> wrote: I like it.
>
> It would be fun to use it on Paymar's or other's VP software, too.
>
>
>
> You reminded me, when you used the word, "fun", what inspired me to work on this little project. I met two nice retired couples from Canada a few weeks ago that were keeping hyper accurate tallies of all their made hands, SF on up to RF, and of all the 1 cards draws they made. My first thought was that they were wasting their time. I asked one them if he was doing it because he doubted the honesty of machines and he told me "no", it was just fun. It added a level of competitiveness (albeit random) to their play. They'd play next to each other and bet (a quarter) on who could get the most of a particular hand that day, and they got all excited when one of them would pull into the lead on let's say, "dirty royals" for the night.
>
>
>
> It really seemed to add a level of fun and entertainment for them and I would imagine they aren't alone.
>
>
>
> I asked him if he used the data to check for anything and he admitted that no he hadn't bothered. I guess he had originally intended to use it for checking, but had run so good on Royals, he never got around to it.
>
>
>
> Anyway, I have it on the best of authority that recorded keeping like this can add fun and excitement to VP play for some people and anything that can make the same activity more fun seems like it's worth spending the time on.
>
>
>
> To increase people's fun is therefore my ulterior motive for working on this utility. I hope it does exactly that. ~FK
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
