[vpFREE] Jean Scott's Frugal Vegas LVA BLOG - 20 JAN 2015

 

Jean Scott's Frugal Vegas LVA BLOG - 20 JAN 2015

BOOK and TAX TALK

http://jscott.lvablog.com/?p=3764

*************************************************
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.
*************************************************

__._,_.___
Posted by: vpFREE3355 <vpfree3355@gmail.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1)

.

__,_._,___

RE: [vpFREE] Re: Scot Krause's Real Deals - 20 JAN 2015

 

Changes went into effect after the column was written, but thanks for informing all. :)

Scot

From: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vpFREE@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 5:52 PM
To: vpfree@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Scot Krause's Real Deals - 20 JAN 2015

http://gamingtoday.com/articles/article/51561-Stations_MyGeneration_gives_new_deals_to_seniors#.VL5220fF98E

The Stations Wednesday Senior benefits shown in the above article have been changed for the last two Wednesdays of this month. They have reinstated 2 for 1's at all restaurants instead of just the steakhouses and cafes. They have also added 6x points for VP.

See the complete list of senior benefits on their website:
https://www.sclv.com/Gaming/MyGeneration.aspx

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: "Scot Krause" <krauseinvegas@cox.net>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (3)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: Bankroll question

 

I believe too much overly deep thought is getting involved here. I don't understand Kelly or why that's even important. Casinos that don't like those who play progressives? Don't use a card when playing progressives? I don't get it. Casinos have had progressives for as long as I can remember, so it stands to reason that they make a tidy profit off of them. I doubt very much if they care who plays them or how they go about it. Relax and enjoy the ride as a player. That's what I do.

----- Reply message -----
From: "Nordo123@aol.com [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
To: "vpFREE@yahoogroups.com" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Bankroll question
Date: Tue, Jan 20, 2015 7:34 PM

I know it is true that some casinos do not like players that play progressives or players that hit progressives, that attitude is illogical. hey casinos out there this may come as a shock to you but guess what, somebody is going to hit the progressive!! Not only that but that player has a negative expectancy against you (the casino), he only has a positive expectancy overall because of player banked money building that progressive that somebody is going to hit. I've had this discussion a few times with my friends - it is amazing how stupid some casinos are, they are willing to lose thousands of dollars of revenue to stop someone from making a few pennies in comparison. I know for a fact that this has happened. A few things for you to think about clementiyn - NOTI suggested that you might not want to use your card when playing progressives in a casino that doesn't "like" progressive players and your rating there is good. I suggest that you don't play at all. My reasoning is that you are in a lose-lose situation, if you don't hit the progressive you lose (depending on the game at least 3%) and if you do hit the progressive you lose your good standing in this casino when they cross reference your W2G with their player data base.

Sent from my iPhone

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: "=?utf-8?B?dnRyb3kyMTZAeWFob28uY29t?=" <vtroy216@yahoo.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1)

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Re: Bankroll question

 

I know it is true that some casinos do not like players that play progressives or players that hit progressives, that attitude is illogical. hey casinos out there this may come as a shock to you but guess what, somebody is going to hit the progressive!! Not only that but that player has a negative expectancy against you (the casino), he only has a positive expectancy overall because of player banked money building that progressive that somebody is going to hit. I've had this discussion a few times with my friends - it is amazing how stupid some casinos are, they are willing to lose thousands of dollars of revenue to stop someone from making a few pennies in comparison. I know for a fact that this has happened. A few things for you to think about clementiyn - NOTI suggested that you might not want to use your card when playing progressives in a casino that doesn't "like" progressive players and your rating there is good. I suggest that you don't play at all. My reasoning is that you are in a lose-lose situation, if you don't hit the progressive you lose (depending on the game at least 3%) and if you do hit the progressive you lose your good standing in this casino when they cross reference your W2G with their player data base.

Sent from my iPhone

__._,_.___
Posted by: nordo123@aol.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (5)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: Bankroll question

 


Just to clarify noti's excellent feedback, a kelly bankroll defines a minimum bankroll threshold. Many agree that 2 x kelly represents an "adequate" bankroll ($17k in this instance).

---In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <clementiyn@...> wrote :

Thanks for the detailed answer. My bankroll would be more than adequate, but that of the friend I would have passed it along to might not.

It's a Deuces Joker machine, and though I've seen the five wild paying over $5000 a few times before, I hadn't seen it do so when the natural royal was also over $2000 as it was on Sunday. It's not a game I "enjoy", and I still have a comfortable day job. So I'll stick to games I do, for now. :)

> On Jan 20, 2015, at 12:41 PM, "nightoftheiguana2000@... mailto:nightoftheiguana2000@... [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com mailto:vpFREE@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
> Kelly bankroll would be over approximately $1.25 x 233.05 / .0342 = $8,518. If your bankroll was less or became less after some play you would have to stop and find another more suitable play for your bankroll. Don't forget to include your play error rate in your edge calculation, the computer perfect edge calculated by the software programs is unrealistic, even Bob Dancer has admitted to making play mistakes in the highly distracting casino environment. Unless you think it is likely you will be playing this progressive on a regular basis, the min-cost-royal approach is probably a more realistic way to go at it in the short term. That includes min-cost-royal strategy and the cost of the royal gives you a sense of the average bankroll required for one royal cycle. You have to know the full paytable to derive both. You also have to decide whether or not you want to use a player tracking card. Sure, there might be some benefit to using a tracking card, though the trend seems to be less and less, but there is definitely a serious downside to using one, and casinos in general do not like progressive players. If you have a good rating already at a casino, you could ruin it with just one play on a progressive machine, even if you lost and never hit a progressive. It's short sighted, eventually some casino will put in a ton of progressives and make a killing, but in general casinos do not like progressives because it means somebody is going to get lucky and win and casinos do not like winners, not even one. As long as the base game plus the meter movement is less than 100%, the casino always makes money, especially when the progressives go on a runner to really high levels (which means the progressive hasn't been hit in a while). Many of the slot progressives are payed by IGT now, IGT knows progressives, casinos hate them even though they could make money from them. And one more note, if you really plan on seriously playing progressives, buy Frank's book on the subject at:
>
> progressivevp.com
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: harry.porter@verizon.net
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (4)

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Re: Scot Krause's Real Deals - 20 JAN 2015

 

http://gamingtoday.com/articles/article/51561-Stations_MyGeneration_gives_new_deals_to_seniors#.VL5220fF98E

The Stations Wednesday Senior benefits shown in the above article have been changed for the last two Wednesdays of this month. They have reinstated 2 for 1's at all restaurants instead of just the steakhouses and cafes. They have also added 6x points for VP.

See the complete list of senior benefits on their website:
https://www.sclv.com/Gaming/MyGeneration.aspx

__._,_.___
Posted by: savorvpx <savorvpx@yahoo.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (2)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: Bankroll question

 

Thanks for the detailed answer. My bankroll would be more than adequate, but that of the friend I would have passed it along to might not.

It's a Deuces Joker machine, and though I've seen the five wild paying over $5000 a few times before, I hadn't seen it do so when the natural royal was also over $2000 as it was on Sunday. It's not a game I "enjoy", and I still have a comfortable day job. So I'll stick to games I do, for now. :)

> On Jan 20, 2015, at 12:41 PM, "nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
> Kelly bankroll would be over approximately $1.25 x 233.05 / .0342 = $8,518. If your bankroll was less or became less after some play you would have to stop and find another more suitable play for your bankroll. Don't forget to include your play error rate in your edge calculation, the computer perfect edge calculated by the software programs is unrealistic, even Bob Dancer has admitted to making play mistakes in the highly distracting casino environment. Unless you think it is likely you will be playing this progressive on a regular basis, the min-cost-royal approach is probably a more realistic way to go at it in the short term. That includes min-cost-royal strategy and the cost of the royal gives you a sense of the average bankroll required for one royal cycle. You have to know the full paytable to derive both. You also have to decide whether or not you want to use a player tracking card. Sure, there might be some benefit to using a tracking card, though the trend seems to be less and less, but there is definitely a serious downside to using one, and casinos in general do not like progressive players. If you have a good rating already at a casino, you could ruin it with just one play on a progressive machine, even if you lost and never hit a progressive. It's short sighted, eventually some casino will put in a ton of progressives and make a killing, but in general casinos do not like progressives because it means somebody is going to get lucky and win and casinos do not like winners, not even one. As long as the base game plus the meter movement is less than 100%, the casino always makes money, especially when the progressives go on a runner to really high levels (which means the progressive hasn't been hit in a while). Many of the slot progressives are payed by IGT now, IGT knows progressives, casinos hate them even though they could make money from them. And one more note, if you really plan on seriously playing progressives, buy Frank's book on the subject at:
>
> progressivevp.com
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: C <clementiyn@yahoo.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (3)

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Re: Bankroll question

 

Kelly bankroll would be over approximately $1.25 x 233.05 / .0342 = $8,518. If your bankroll was less or became less after some play you would have to stop and find another more suitable play for your bankroll. Don't forget to include your play error rate in your edge calculation, the computer perfect edge calculated by the software programs is unrealistic, even Bob Dancer has admitted to making play mistakes in the highly distracting casino environment. Unless you think it is likely you will be playing this progressive on a regular basis, the min-cost-royal approach is probably a more realistic way to go at it in the short term. That includes min-cost-royal strategy and the cost of the royal gives you a sense of the average bankroll required for one royal cycle. You have to know the full paytable to derive both. You also have to decide whether or not you want to use a player tracking card. Sure, there might be some benefit to using a tracking card, though the trend seems to be less and less, but there is definitely a serious downside to using one, and casinos in general do not like progressive players. If you have a good rating already at a casino, you could ruin it with just one play on a progressive machine, even if you lost and never hit a progressive. It's short sighted, eventually some casino will put in a ton of progressives and make a killing, but in general casinos do not like progressives because it means somebody is going to get lucky and win and casinos do not like winners, not even one. As long as the base game plus the meter movement is less than 100%, the casino always makes money, especially when the progressives go on a runner to really high levels (which means the progressive hasn't been hit in a while). Many of the slot progressives are payed by IGT now, IGT knows progressives, casinos hate them even though they could make money from them. And one more note, if you really plan on seriously playing progressives, buy Frank's book on the subject at:

progressivevp.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (2)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] math/tax opinion on 50¢ RF wanted

 

Note: W2G occurs at $1200 not $2000. In some cases it will make it tough to play more than quarters. If you are a consistent winner (year in and year out) then in theory you will always have the tax liability just like if you work a normal job (except no Social Security). Up to you.

I have told this story before:
playing 3 line quarter Super Times Pay 9-6 jacks my mom gets dealt AKT4 of clubs and the 4 of spades. Normally you hold AKT if the fifth card is not a penalty to the RF. (The 4s is not.) My mom does not have enough income to generate Federal Tax but this was in IN where a state tax of 3.4% is withheld. I told my mom to draw to the 3RF not thinking about the 3x multiplier up which reduces the value of the RF enough to swing the play. Note: My mom gladly had the $102 withheld from her $3000 hit!

On Tuesday, January 20, 2015 11:22 AM, "m h kickboyface@yahoo.com [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


hi there,

I've rolled around an idea for some time now and would be interested in hearing any informed opinion...

if you play a 25¢ VP game, the standard royal flush payout is $1,000 which is all well and good. and although this should be reported as income, it doesn't generate you a W-2G by default.

if you play a 50¢ game, the RF will earn you $2,000 AND a W2-G (for crossing that magic $1999 line).

I'm not sure what the exact math numbers are in this situation, but it seems like if you're playing something like FPDW or 10/7 DB, the tax burden generated by playing that extra quarter credit may be enough to negate the miniscule positive edge you have in those games ... if true, it seems like you're mathematically better off (at least from an expectation point-of-view) to stick with the quarters and not play the Kennedy halves...

or is there another nuance here that I'm missing?
m.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: Howard Stern <pyiddy@att.net>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (3)

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Bob Dancer's LVA - 20 JAN 2015

 

Bob Dancer's LVA - 20 JAN 2015

What She Thinks Makes Sense

http://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/bob_dancer/2015/0120.cfm

*************************************************
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.
*************************************************

__._,_.___
Posted by: vpFREE3355 <vpfree3355@gmail.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1)

.

__,_._,___

tiny correction Re: [vpFREE] math/tax opinion on 50¢ RF wanted

 

(meant to say $1199 line ... doubled the wrong digit.)

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: m h <kickboyface@yahoo.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (2)

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] math/tax opinion on 50¢ RF wanted

 

hi there,

I've rolled around an idea for some time now and would be interested in hearing any informed opinion...

if you play a 25¢ VP game, the standard royal flush payout is $1,000 which is all well and good.  and although this should be reported as income, it doesn't generate you a W-2G by default.

if you play a 50¢ game, the RF will earn you $2,000 AND a W2-G (for crossing that magic $1999 line).

I'm not sure what the exact math numbers are in this situation, but it seems like if you're playing something like FPDW or 10/7 DB, the tax burden generated by playing that extra quarter credit may be enough to negate the miniscule positive edge you have in those games ... if true, it seems like you're mathematically better off (at least from an expectation point-of-view) to stick with the quarters and not play the Kennedy halves...

or is there another nuance here that I'm missing?
m.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: m h <kickboyface@yahoo.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1)

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] vpFREE Exchange - 20 JAN 2015

 

vpFREE Exchange - 20 JAN 2015

Listings now include:

- Casino-Related Items Store

- Custom Embroidery

- Enrolled Agents for tax assistance

- Professional Sports Jerseys

- Senior-level Freelance Technical Writer

- Vacation Rentals

- Vegas Job Links

The vpFREE Exchange is accessible via vpFREE Links"
or directly at:

http://www.west-point.org/users/usma1955/20228/V/Links_CX.htm

Any member who would like to have a listing in the vpFREE
Exchange should send me a private email with a short blurb
and contact information.

The vpFREE Exchange will be publicized by periodic posts
to vpFREE.

vpFREE Administrator

******************************************

DISCLAIMER

vpFREE is, and will always remain, a non-profit operation. Neither
vpFREE nor the vpFREE Administrator has any financial interest, direct
or indirect, in any commercial video poker related product or endeavor.

******************************************

__._,_.___
Posted by: vpFREE3355 <vpfree3355@gmail.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1)

.

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