[vpFREE] Multiplay Redraw Royals

 

Last year playing triple play I drew two royals out of three when holding RF4. I imagine that's something lots of folks have done if they play a decent amount of 3-play.

Anybody here hit three royals on a redraw of 3, 5, or 10-play? Or hit a crazy outlier on 100-play, like getting 11 royals out of 100?

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

.

__,_._,___

RE: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LVA - 17 FEB 2015

 

AP wrote: Like I said you would only get a W2G if you got multiple hits on a draw
to a Royal. Twelve individual hits at 1k each does not produce a W2G.

Correct. My mistake. Sorry

Bob



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

__._,_.___
Posted by: Bob Dancer <bobdancervp@hotmail.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (7)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: S.C.O.R.E for video poker

 

The part of my post that was supposed to be a table showing the probability of various results of a 5000-hand FPDW play came out a run-on mess when posted. Let me try to post that table one more time:

Here is the range of outcomes for 5000 hands of $10 FPDW: (for $1, divide win/loss by 10, etc)

RESULT PROBABILITY
lose more than 40000, 0%
lose 30000-40000, 0.1%
lose 20000-30000, 5%
lose 10000-20000, 21%
lose up to 10000, 30%
win up to 10000, 21%
win 10000-20000, 10%
win 20000-30000, 6%
win 30000-40000, 4%
win 40000-50000, 2%
win more than 50000, 2%


Hopefully that will work better!


--Dunbar



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

As far as being wary of an "outlier" with a high Nzero...


Consider two scenarios:
1. All your EV comes from plays with the same Nzero as FPDW;
2. The rest of your EV comes from plays with a much lower Nzero than FPDW. (that is, FPDW is an "outlier".)


If all your play has approximately the same hourly EV, you're more likely to be able to justify playing the FPDW game if it IS a high-end outlier than if it isn't. The Nzero for the year will be lower if the rest of your EV comes from lower Nzero play.


In fact, even playing 5000 hands of FPDW at every casino in Las Vegas is unlikely to get you to its Nzero of 445,000 hands. You'd have to play at 90 casinos.


Here is the range of outcomes for 5000 hands of $10 FPDW: (for $1, divide win/loss by 10, etc)


RESULT PROBABILITY lose more than 40000 0% lose 30000-40000 0.1% lose 20000-30000 5% lose 10000-20000 21% lose up to 10000 30% win up to 10000 21% win 10000-20000 10% win 20000-30000 6% win 30000-40000 4% win 40000-50000 2% win more than 50000 2%




As NOTI pointed out, the chance of losing is 55%. But there's no question in my mind that if you had this 5000-hand opportunity on Dec 31, and you were $30K ahead for the year, and your bankroll is at least the Kelly bankroll of $147,000 (for $10 FPDW), then going for that $1900 of EV is the correct decision.


Similarly, if it's the beginning of the year, and you have solid expectation of being able to play enough low Nzero games during the year to put yourself well in the clear of a $30K loss (and you have the Kelly bankroll), then it's correct to go for the 5000-hand FPDW play.


Notice that none of this violates NOTI's absolutely correct admonishment to avoid the tax consequences of a losing year. That's valuable advice that's seldom brought up and too often ignored.


--Dunbar





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

__._,_.___
Posted by: h_dunbar@hotmail.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (15)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: S.C.O.R.E for video poker

 

Shagatola wrote: "I don't think #3 applies."

I now think I have to concede that point.

#3 should be: Do you think you can avoid taking a tax loss? This is important because a tax loss on gambling can not legally be carried forward or backward, meaning it results in a reduction in the edge you thought you had which means you're taking more bankroll risk than you thought you were, possibly even crossing over into actual bankroll loss. The concept of Nzero is one way to address this issue, another would be Dunbar's risk analyzer. It can become very complex.

[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 (14)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: S.C.O.R.E for video poker

 

Dunbar wrote: "In fact, even playing 5000 hands of FPDW at every casino in Las Vegas is unlikely to get you to its Nzero of 445,000 hands. You'd have to play at 90 casinos."

I'm just nitpicking but I thought there was a little over 100 casinos in Las Vegas. Of course few of them actually have FPDW, and probably at least half of them are just grind joints, but that's a seperate issue.

Dunbar wrote: "But there's no question in my mind that if you had this 5000-hand opportunity on Dec 31, and you were $30K ahead for the year, and your bankroll is at least the Kelly bankroll of $147,000 (for $10 FPDW), then going for that $1900 of EV is the correct decision."

I agree, you should put a stop loss limit in of $30K, so you don't take your net tax year results below zero.

Dunbar wrote: "Similarly, if it's the beginning of the year, and you have solid expectation of being able to play enough low Nzero games during the year to put yourself well in the clear of a $30K loss (and you have the Kelly bankroll), then it's correct to go for the 5000-hand FPDW play. "

This one is slightly trickier since you don't actually have the $30K tax buffer yet. You might be digging yourself a hole here. You should put some probability number on the chances of clearing at least $30K for the rest of the year and go from there. What if this is the year the casinos all tighten up? What if you suffer some medical emergency and can't commit enough time to gambling this year? What if some hacker hacks into your bank account and steals your gambling bankroll, and so on. Go through the "what-ifs?" You should also consider the psychological consequences, this could be a highly disappointing and demoralizing gambling year if you have to hustle your butt off just to avoid a tax loss.

[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 (13)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LVA - 17 FEB 2015

 

Like I said you would only get a W2G if you got multiple hits on a draw to a Royal. Twelve individual hits at 1k each does not produce a W2G.

A.P.

________________________________
From: "Bob Dancer bobdancervp@hotmail.com [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
To: "vpfree@yahoogroups.com" <vpfree@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 10:03 AM
Subject: RE: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LVA - 17 FEB 2015

I wrote: Perhaps surprisingly, you actually get less in W2Gs in DB than you do in
JoB because of the differences in the royal cycle. In JoB the royal
cycle is 40K hands. In DB, it's 48K hands. Let's take 48K dealt hands
--- which means 480K individual hands because we're talking Ten Play.
During that interval you average 12 JoB royals ($48K) and only 10 DB
royals ($40K). The $8K difference in W2Gs for royals swamps the less
than $2K in W2Gs for dealt aces.

I goofed and would rather correct myself than have others notice it first.

I inadvertently mixed up the stakes a bit here. In 48K dealt hands of quarter Ten Play (480K total hands), the 12 JoB royals return $12K, not $48K. The 10 DB royals return $10K, not $40K. This difference of $2K is slightly more than the W2G for dealt aces (48K/54K * $2K). So while JoB on this game does have more W2Gs, it's pretty close.

For higher stakes DB creates considerably more in W2Gs, but for quarter Ten Play, JoB does.

Bob

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

__._,_.___
Posted by: Albert Pearson <ehpee@rogers.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (6)

.

__,_._,___

RE: XVP Re: [vpFREE] Retirement & its impact

 

Ha...I guess the line between sarcasm and threats is hazy for some. Me knee-capping anyone is about as realistic as me playing FPDW!

Though I'm sure that joke would be lost on many as well.

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

__._,_.___
Posted by: mcuddington@hotmail.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (8)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: S.C.O.R.E for video poker

 

As far as being wary of an "outlier" with a high Nzero...


Consider two scenarios:
1. All your EV comes from plays with the same Nzero as FPDW;
2. The rest of your EV comes from plays with a much lower Nzero than FPDW. (that is, FPDW is an "outlier".)


If all your play has approximately the same hourly EV, you're more likely to be able to justify playing the FPDW game if it IS a high-end outlier than if it isn't. The Nzero for the year will be lower if the rest of your EV comes from lower Nzero play.


In fact, even playing 5000 hands of FPDW at every casino in Las Vegas is unlikely to get you to its Nzero of 445,000 hands. You'd have to play at 90 casinos.


Here is the range of outcomes for 5000 hands of $10 FPDW: (for $1, divide win/loss by 10, etc)


RESULT PROBABILITY lose more than 40000 0% lose 30000-40000 0.1% lose 20000-30000 5% lose 10000-20000 21% lose up to 10000 30% win up to 10000 21% win 10000-20000 10% win 20000-30000 6% win 30000-40000 4% win 40000-50000 2% win more than 50000 2%




As NOTI pointed out, the chance of losing is 55%. But there's no question in my mind that if you had this 5000-hand opportunity on Dec 31, and you were $30K ahead for the year, and your bankroll is at least the Kelly bankroll of $147,000 (for $10 FPDW), then going for that $1900 of EV is the correct decision.


Similarly, if it's the beginning of the year, and you have solid expectation of being able to play enough low Nzero games during the year to put yourself well in the clear of a $30K loss (and you have the Kelly bankroll), then it's correct to go for the 5000-hand FPDW play.


Notice that none of this violates NOTI's absolutely correct admonishment to avoid the tax consequences of a losing year. That's valuable advice that's seldom brought up and too often ignored.


--Dunbar




---In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <nightoftheiguana2000@...> wrote :

Shagatola wrote: "The thing is -- you don't just have one play for the year. You probably have a whole bunch of stuff you play. It all
works together."

OK, if everything you're playing in a tax year has similar Nzero numbers and betsizes, and the total together puts you over Nzero for the tax year, you're good. 5000 hands of FPDW at one casino would be no good, however 5000 hands of FPDW at every casino in Vegas at the same betsize would be good. However, if your play includes a game with an unusually high Nzero or betsize compared to the rest, then you have a problem, you can't just count up all your play. The high Nzero or betsize play is an outlier and if you're not playing enough hands of it you're likely taking a loss on that play, which is fine if you have offsetting wins from your other plays, but if it forces you to take a net loss for the tax year, your EV is no longer what you thought it was since you don't get a corresponding tax credit for a gambling loss. Lower EV means more bankroll risk and even longer Nzero numbers and if it goes negative, well ...

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



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

__._,_.___
Posted by: h_dunbar@hotmail.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (12)

.

__,_._,___

RE: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LVA - 17 FEB 2015

 

I wrote: Perhaps surprisingly, you actually get less in W2Gs in DB than you do in
JoB because of the differences in the royal cycle. In JoB the royal
cycle is 40K hands. In DB, it's 48K hands. Let's take 48K dealt hands
--- which means 480K individual hands because we're talking Ten Play.
During that interval you average 12 JoB royals ($48K) and only 10 DB
royals ($40K). The $8K difference in W2Gs for royals swamps the less
than $2K in W2Gs for dealt aces.

I goofed and would rather correct myself than have others notice it first.

I inadvertently mixed up the stakes a bit here. In 48K dealt hands of quarter Ten Play (480K total hands), the 12 JoB royals return $12K, not $48K. The 10 DB royals return $10K, not $40K. This difference of $2K is slightly more than the W2G for dealt aces (48K/54K * $2K). So while JoB on this game does have more W2Gs, it's pretty close.

For higher stakes DB creates considerably more in W2Gs, but for quarter Ten Play, JoB does.

Bob


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

__._,_.___
Posted by: Bob Dancer <bobdancervp@hotmail.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (5)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LVA - 17 FEB 2015

 

Re W2G's for Royals, Bob has forgotten that he was using 25 Cent 10 play not dollar 10 play in his example, and W2G's would only be issued on multiple hits which are on the rare side, and if you were analyzing dollars you'd have to allow for multiple hits on dollar quads as well.

A.P.

________________________________
From: "Bob Dancer bobdancervp@hotmail.com [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
To: "vpfree@yahoogroups.com" <vpfree@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 2:51 AM
Subject: RE: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LVA - 17 FEB 2015

Nordo wrote: Nice article Bob. I can think of 3 reasons "George" should play 9/6 JOB
over 9/7 DB: 1) you pointed out the obvious reason - he loses less
money. 2) you suspect he is a poor player that makes mistakes - surely
the cost of his errors is much more in DB than in the super simple JOB.
3) depending on his age every W2G is a killer (Medicare and Social
Security). You are dealt 4 Aces every 54,145 original hands. In DB he
would get a $2,000 W2G. In JOB no W2G.

Thank you.

Insofar as George's skill level, he's actually a synthesis of three different players so it's hard to come up with one "on a scale of 1 to 10, how good is he" kind of score. I think what I said is that when he gets tired or is losing, his skill level probably suffers. I think that is true for many players, and it isn't often addressed. All of us play better when we are fresh and alert. Being successful often depends on how good we are when we're not so fresh and alert. And keeping our skill level up no matter if we're ahead or behind.

Perhaps surprisingly, you actually get less in W2Gs in DB than you do in JoB because of the differences in the royal cycle. In JoB the royal cycle is 40K hands. In DB, it's 48K hands. Let's take 48K dealt hands --- which means 480K individual hands because we're talking Ten Play. During that interval you average 12 JoB royals ($48K) and only 10 DB royals ($40K). The $8K difference in W2Gs for royals swamps the less than $2K in W2Gs for dealt aces.

Bob

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

__._,_.___
Posted by: Albert Pearson <ehpee@rogers.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (4)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Would you play FPDW if you could only play 5,000 hands?

 

lulz "5000 hands of FPDW in isolation doesn't really interest me,
you lose about 55% of the time."

__._,_.___
Posted by: b p <powe0147@yahoo.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (11)

.

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