Vulturing 'Ultimate X'

Quote: odiousgambit

I saw a "next game" multiplier ready to go at Horseshoe Baltimore. I didn't play it for a number of reasons


but it was right in the middle of the day guys. What do you make of that?

I make you missed a great opportunity.

Even if you suck horribly at JOB you are still going to be playing at a huge advantage. Now if it were a 10 play and there was only 1 2x on the screen then I can see maybe skipping it but if it were any more than 2x or more than 1, then sad face :-(.

one of my problems is I hate learning curves.

Quote: JB

Can you tell the difference between the following two situations? (ignore the fact that the first one is mid-hand)

If you can't, then vulturing Ultimate X is not for you.

There were multipliers in the next hand position but playing 5 credits erased them. Maybe its a Jersey thing.

Quote: pew

There were multipliers in the next hand position but playing 5 credits erased them

I have no idea what you are talking about. That's some of the learning curve stuff I hate.

Quote: Greasyjohn

And if that true, is paying for future multipliers a +EV?

Yes. Yes. Yes.

Buying future multipliers increases both the return % and the variance.

Playing 10 credits/hand is slightly +EV over playing 5 credits/hand. Playing 5 credits/hand on an Ultimate X machine with active next hand multipliers is significantly +EV vs playing 5 credits/hand on a non-Ultimate X game, or one without active next-hand multipliers.

Quote: odiousgambit

I saw a "next game" multiplier ready to go at Horseshoe Baltimore. I didn't play it for a number of reasons

*I was rushed for time and

*it was JoB, but I havent studied the Wizard's strategy for ult-X JoB. Since he has one, I thought it might matter

*CRZ is supposed to be notorious for bad paystables, and thought that might matter

*I'd want to be sure i wouldn't get a W-2g, havent looked at that, was rushed, and is absolutely out of the question

but it was right in the middle of the day guys. What do you make of that?

In my experience, it takes about 34 seconds, tops. (Most of this is the TITO time and selecting 5 credits bet, once you've identified that there are active multipliers.)

My understanding of the JoB vs UTX-JoB strategy differences are that they're pretty darn minimal. If you used the plain JoB strategy, you would be sacrificing a tiny amount of EV (vs perfect UTX-JoB), but still gaining substantial EV over playing a non-multiplier hand.

The active multiplier that you aren't paying for effectively changes the paytable to 100%+. A 2x multiplier on a 6/5 paytable makes it a 12/10 paytable on that hand.

Playing off 1 hand, It's ludicrously unlikely to get a tax form on 5c, it's extremely unlikely on 25c, and reasonably unlikely on 1$. (It's possible, but it involves things like "royal flush on a multiplier hand", which happen just slightly more often than a dealt royal flush. On the $1, it's easier - a straight flush hitting on a 5x or higher, or a 4oak hitting on a 10x or higher. On the 5c machine, it would mean a dealt royal, or a royal landing on a 6x or higher multiplier.)
($5/credit machines and higher are not generally casually vultured... the $25/line minimum bet is too high of an entry point for many people's casual plays, in my opinion.)

When vulturing, use regular strategy, not UTX strategy.

Quote: RS

When vulturing, use regular strategy, not UTX strategy.

What he said.
The UTX strategy is calculated to include the next hand multipliers. When vulturing, there won't be any next hand mults as you're only playing 5 credits.

Quote: RS

The win is in credits, not dollars.


Proper vulturing is to bet all hands, 5 credits per hand. Betting 10 credits per hand is playing the game normally. Playing less than 5 credits per line should NEVER be done.

I'm almost certain there are Ultimate X machines that only continue to award the bonuses IF one plays 10 credits. I had a friend call me and tell me a machine he found multipliers on was doing that, and since it was his first time attempting to AP Ultimate X he thought he was doing something wrong. He specifically said that when he bet 5, it acted as normal video poker and the bonuses didn't apply, but that when he moved up the leftover bonuses came back.

I guess if that's the case, then it only makes sense to play a multiline like 10 play if there are significant multipliers, since you'd likely be locked in until you whiff every hand.

I came across two machines in Iowa where when you tried to play at 5 credits, it automatically went to 10 when you hit deal, couldn't be vultured. The other utx machines in the same casino did not function in that manner.

Screwed up, reposting...

Quote: mcallister3200

I came across two machines in Iowa where when you tried to play at 5 credits, it automatically went to 10 when you hit deal, couldn't be vultured. The other utx machines in the same casino did not function in that manner.

Let me know which store in case I'm ever there.



Those games actually can be vultured (where you have to bet 10 credit/line in order to get the multiplier for that round). Unfortunately you need an average multiplier (per line) a little above 2x, and lines without multipliers are counted as 1x.

If I see a machine with all 12x's, you know damn well you've got an advantage whether you're betting 5 or 10 credits per line.

Quote: Mission146

Screwed up, reposting...

where is it?

If you can get those Iowa multipliers on 1 credit you're still playing at an advantage even with the royal penalty. Let's look at bad case scenarios. Crappy nickel game with 95% payout for 1 credit. It has one 2X multiplier. You are losing money on 9 games (-45%) and gaining money on one game (190%) for a 150% play - on your hefty fifty cent bet, lol. What will you do with your $.25 profit????

Quote: pokerface

where is it?

My Internet went out at work last night and I forgot about it, I don't know if I'll be able to get back to it tonight. If it makes you feel better, I think my approach to how many x's you would need was fundamentally flawed, anyway.

Quote: BTLWI

If you can get those Iowa multipliers on 1 credit you're still playing at an advantage even with the royal penalty. Let's look at bad case scenarios. Crappy nickel game with 95% payout for 1 credit. It has one 2X multiplier. You are losing money on 9 games (-45%) and gaining money on one game (190%) for a 150% play - on your hefty fifty cent bet, lol. What will you do with your $.25 profit????

Where do you get a 150% play?

(9 * .45) + (1 * 1.9) = 5.95

Expected Loss: 4.05, House Edge, 40.5%

Quote: Mission146

Where do you get a 150% play?

(9 * .45) + (1 * 1.9) = 5.95

Expected Loss: 4.05, House Edge, 40.5%

Its a 95% payout not 55% you should have (9*.95)+(1*1.9)=10.45 or a win of .45. For a win of .45 units.

Quote: Twirdman

Its a 95% payout not 55% you should have (9*.95)+(1*1.9)=10.45 or a win of .45. For a win of .45 units.

I see that, now. Sorry about that.

Quote: Twirdman

Its a 95% payout not 55% you should have (9*.95)+(1*1.9)=10.45 or a win of .45. For a win of .45 units.

That's still an expected return of 10.45/10 making it a 104.5% play, not a 150% play, though. I should mention that.

Back to the question of UX when you have to bet ten credits per hand.

I don't want to get into anything too specific, so let's say you had a UX paytable that returns 95% and the base game (without UX) would also pay 95% if you were playing five credits, just as a theoretical.

(Couldn't happen in Nevada as the law says add-ons must increase the return, btw)

Anyhow, the overall return of the 100 credits bet would normally be 95 credits, or 9.5 credits per hand. However, we'll say that one hand has a 2x multiplier, the best way to look at the multiplier is as only affecting your return on the base game, because that's all it does, it doesn't affect your return on the UX portion of the game because current multipliers have nothing to do with future multipliers.

Therefore, of the 100 total credits you are betting, you're actually getting 95% on 95 credits and 190% on 5 credits:

((5*1.9)+(95 * .95))/100 = 0.9975

Okay, so this is enough to tell us that one 2x multiplier should get us close to 100% on virtually any UX paytable, even if we have to bet 100 credits. Because of this, it will definitely put us over 100% on three-play and five-play betting thirty and fifty, respectively, because the multiplier has more power.

((5*1.9)+(45*.95))/50 = 1.045 (Five-Play), which means it will automatically be better for three-play.

Actual Example

Okay, the worst returning UX on Wizard's page is 6/5 Jacks:

https://wizardofodds.com/games/video-poker/tables/ultimate-x/

Which returns .956740 on the UX game.

Now, the base game of 6/5 Jacks or Better returns:

https://wizardofodds.com/games/video-poker/tables/jacks-or-better/

Which returns .949961.

Ignoring for a second the possibility of conflicting strategies that would actually hurt the base return but keep you at Optimum Strategy for UX:

((5*1.899922)+(95*.956740))/100 = 1.0038991

Aside from the possibility of conflicting strategies, we see that even playing UX straight-up, the player is always at an advantage with any multiplier. In this worst-case scenario situation, ten-play, worst possible pay table, one 2x multiplier, the player still slightly has the best of it.

Quote: Mission146

Anyhow, the overall return of the 100 credits bet would normally be 95 credits, or 9.5 credits per hand. However, we'll say that one hand has a 2x multiplier, the best way to look at the multiplier is as only affecting your return on the base game, because that's all it does, it doesn't affect your return on the UX portion of the game because current multipliers have nothing to do with future multipliers.

Therefore, of the 100 total credits you are betting, you're actually getting 95% on 95 credits and 190% on 5 credits:

((5*1.9)+(95 * .95))/100 = 0.9975

50 credits are played at a 0% return. 45 credits are at 95% return. 5 credits at 190% return.

Your return is:

= (50 * 0) + (45 * 0.95) + (5 * 1.9) / 100
= 52.25 / 100
= 52.25%
EV = -47.75%

If EVERY hand had a 2x multiplier, your return would be the same as the base:

50 credits get 0% return
50 credits each get 2x return (95% * 2)

= (50 * 0) + (50 * 1.9) / 100
= 95 / 100
= 95% return
EV = -5%

For the hand to "break even", you would need:

(50 * X * 0.95) / 100 = 1, where X is the average multiplier (non-multiplied hands = 1x)

50 * X * 0.95 = 100
X * 0.95 = 100/50 = 2
X = 2 / 0.95
X = 2.105


If your average multiplier is 2.105, the game is break even. If it's less than 2.105, it's -EV. If it's above 2.105, then it's +EV.

-48% EV?!

wow.. I usually play when there's even a single 2x multiplier.

will stop that now and be more choosy

Quote: 100xOdds

-48% EV?!

wow.. I usually play when there's even a single 2x multiplier.

will stop that now and be more choosy

He's talking about if you have to bet 10 credits and can't truly vulture it.

Quote: RS

50 credits are played at a 0% return. 45 credits are at 95% return. 5 credits at 190% return.

Your return is:

= (50 * 0) + (45 * 0.95) + (5 * 1.9) / 100
= 52.25 / 100
= 52.25%
EV = -47.75%

You may be right, as this is what I was grappling with, but I can't figure out how fifty credits have a return of 0. I can see your methodology in 45 * .95 as a total of fifty credits are subject to the base pay of the game along with any multipliers...but the reason the other 50 credits do not return 0 is because they result on multipliers for the next hand which constitutes part of the return for Ultimate X...the following hand and associated possibilities.

You can't look at it as a hand-by-hand game, otherwise, for someone to just sit down and play without any multipliers would be NUTS on the first play. I'm pretty sure that 95% return is based on a two-hand cycle.

I only vulture when there are multipliers on all lines and I can just bet 5 only each line.
Even under those conditions, I still got 0% return in reality.

Quote: pokerface

I only vulture when there are multipliers on all lines and I can just bet 5 only each line.
Even under those conditions, I still got 0% return in reality.

Wow that's crazy and almost anti AP you cant possibly be finding that many under them circumstances.
If your to risk averse for a UX find, I cannot imagine anything APable enough.

you should Play any and all, its minimal risk. If I could find a way for you to video record each one you found. Id give you 25% of the EV for free.

Quote: AxelWolf

Wow that's crazy and almost anti AP you cant possibly be finding that many under them circumstances.
If your to risk averse for a UX find, I cannot imagine anything APable enough.

I total did twice in Strip casinos. Each time got 0. I am very unlucky on multiline games, I don't play them normally, I only play single line game on slant top.
I am sure even on a 100 line game each with 12x, if I play it, all lines will get nothing. I hate them, they hate me. That's it.

Quote: Mission146

(Couldn't happen in Nevada as the law says add-ons must increase the return, btw)

Not quite. The payback may not decrease with an increased wager. It can be the same.

Quote: RS

50 credits are played at a 0% return. 45 credits are at 95% return. 5 credits at 190% return.

Your return is:

= (50 * 0) + (45 * 0.95) + (5 * 1.9) / 100
= 52.25 / 100
= 52.25%
EV = -47.75%

If EVERY hand had a 2x multiplier, your return would be the same as the base:

50 credits get 0% return
50 credits each get 2x return (95% * 2)

= (50 * 0) + (50 * 1.9) / 100
= 95 / 100
= 95% return
EV = -5%

For the hand to "break even", you would need:

(50 * X * 0.95) / 100 = 1, where X is the average multiplier (non-multiplied hands = 1x)

50 * X * 0.95 = 100
X * 0.95 = 100/50 = 2
X = 2 / 0.95
X = 2.105


If your average multiplier is 2.105, the game is break even. If it's less than 2.105, it's -EV. If it's above 2.105, then it's +EV.

This seems like it would be true if you find a game with multipliers play it once at 10 credits per line and then immediately leave regardless of the multipliers you gained since then the 5 credits per line you paid for multipliers have no value but if you play as long as a multiplier exist I feel that Missions numbers are more right and because of that I think Missions are the number we use because if we are already vulturing I hardly see why we would stop because we were the one to get the multiplier rather then someone else. I mean would you really leave a board full of time 12 if you got dealt full house just because you were the one who got dealt the full house.

Quote: pokerface

I total did twice in Strip casinos. Each time got 0. I am very unlucky on multiline games, I don't play them normally, I only play single line game on slant top.
I am sure even on a 100 line game each with 12x, if I play it, all lines will get nothing. I hate them, they hate me. That's it.

Much of your positive UX returns, at least in frequency (and especially ten-play) will come from the occasions that you get dealt a winning hand or draw to an already winning hand.

Quote: pokerface

I total did twice in Strip casinos. Each time got 0. I am very unlucky on multiline games, I don't play them normally, I only play single line game on slant top.
I am sure even on a 100 line game each with 12x, if I play it, all lines will get nothing. I hate them, they hate me. That's it.

lol.. twice?
I must have put thru a couple of hundred (freeplay) $ before I finally broke even.

and I still would be around breakeven if it weren't for that 1 big hit.
pair turned into quads with 4x multiplier on a $1 machine -> $500

and breakeven isn't bad for freeplay anyway since I HAVE to gamble it thru a machine.

Quote: DRich

Not quite. The payback may not decrease with an increased wager. It can be the same.

The Wheel Poker versions of Deuces Wild and Bonus Deuces Wild have lower returns when betting 6 coins than when betting 5.

Quote: JB

The Wheel Poker versions of Deuces Wild and Bonus Deuces Wild have lower returns when betting 6 coins than when betting 5.

Do you know what the paytables are and where in Nevada they were or are still at? I'm surprised that got through Nevada Gaming because that is specifically one of the things on their checklist.

I should have worded my post differently. What I meant to say was that on Wheel Poker machines, the 6-credit returns for Deuces Wild and Bonus Deuces Wild are lower than the 5-credit returns for the standard game with the same paytable.

The Wheel Poker machines could still be compliant by paying 1250 credits for a Royal Flush when betting 5 credits, and only paying 4000 credits for a Royal Flush when betting 6 credits.

You can find Wheel Poker machines here.

If you were required to bet 10 credits per line (10 lines), there would be no reason to play a UX that has 5 lines of nothing and 5 lines of 2x.

The way I did it is the proper way, because you're only going to play it if it has +EV on this hand.

If you're playing it the way (JB?) described, that's the regular way to play UX, where you keep playing 10 credits. Also, you'd be using UX strategy, too.

Still have no idea how you multiply 95 credits by something then 5 credits by 1.9....???

Quote: RS

If you're playing it the way (JB?) described, that's the regular way to play UX, where you keep playing 10 credits.

I think you might have me confused with someone else (Mission?).

Quote: JB

I think you might have me confused with someone else (Mission?).

Ah yes, Mission. The green guys throw me off.

Because the five credits are getting 190% return, it's the base paytable * 2.

Quote: pokerface

I total did twice in Strip casinos. Each time got 0. I am very unlucky on multiline games, I don't play them normally, I only play single line game on slant top.
I am sure even on a 100 line game each with 12x, if I play it, all lines will get nothing. I hate them, they hate me. That's it.

I to have done 100x better on single line and dislike multiline. But I won't pass up an opportunity.

If I have a choice of a low2 denomination ML VP or a higher SL VP that return the same % and hourly, Ill take SL anyday.

Oftentimes the ML is the better choice.

Quote: Mission146

Because the five credits are getting 190% return, it's the base paytable * 2.

But only 50 credits get paid. I get why 5 gets 190%. I don't get why 95 credits get 95%. I get why 45 credits get 95% and 50 credits get 0%.

Quote: RS

But only 50 credits get paid. I get why 5 gets 190%. I don't get why 95 credits get 95%. I get why 45 credits get 95% and 50 credits get 0%.

Because the multipliers you will potentially earn will potentially be worth something on the following hand. You don't get the part of the return that comes from the Bonus on the hand you are playing, you get it (possibly) on the hand after that.

Otherwise, all fifty of those credits would always be worth zero, but they're not, because of the potential for multipliers.

Notice how the Optimum Strategy for Ultimate X (in cases where you can bet five credits and still use your multipliers earned the previous hand) never includes playing off your multipliers at 5 credits and then going back to playing ten credits the following hand:

https://wizardofodds.com/games/video-poker/tables/ultimate-x/

Quote:

To make a comparison, imagine a coffee shop sells a cup of coffee for $1. If you buy the $1 for a cup immediately, they will also sell you a voucher for a cup tomorrow for 50 cents. If you planned to buy a cup for 2 or more consecutive days, you should pay for the voucher every day, except the last one.

Now, why is it only except the last one? If the fifty credits actually had an ER of 0%, then you should always just play five credits per hand and poach your multipliers whenever you have the chance. Why would you want an expected return of 0 credits per fifty credits bet?

The reason why is because those fifty credits do not have a return of 0%, they comprise the majority of the return of the (100 credit) game, which is why UX pays better (percentage-wise) on a ten-credit bet than the base game does at a five-credit bet.

No 50 credits = No Multipliers. You have to add the two hands together.

Why would you keep, on 8/6 Jacks UX, three to a flush with no high cards, SF possibility or straight possibility? That's not a play on the base game 8/6 Jacks...it makes your return worse to do that on 8/6 Jacks...The answer is that the multiplier you get for the Flush gives you a better expected return than tossing all five cards. The expected return comes entirely from the POTENTIAL of getting this (or a 3OaK or Two Pair or running cards for JoB) multiplier.

However, you don't get the multiplier unless you bet those fifty credits. That means that you don't REALIZE the expected value of the multiplier until the following hand, so, the return is based on a two-hand cycle with the second hand of the first cycle acting simultaneously as the first hand of the next cycle.

Simply put, the 50 units is what you are playing for multipliers, multipliers increase the base pays, which give you a better ER on the fifty credits on the next hand that you are betting TOWARDS THE BASE PAYS...the ER on the BONUS part of the bet remains unchanged, it never changes, but nor is it zero...In fact, the ER on those fifty credits is GREATER than the ER on the fifty that go to the base game (absent multipliers) or UX would not have a higher return percentage than the base game alone.

Finally, look at this, we'll say the UX and base game both return exactly 96%.

(50*0) + ((45*.96)+(5*1.92))/100 = .528 * 100 = 52.8

((45 * .96)+(5*1.92))/50= 1.056 * 50 = 52.8

So, you're telling me that betting 100 credits in UX has the same return (in units AND EV) with the multiplier as betting 50? That's incorrect, because I can't get multipliers for the NEXT hand if I am betting fifty.

You are right, that the unit return is 52.8 in both situations, but let's say you get a dealt Two Jacks on JoB and don't convert any of the hands to something better:

The unit return is 55 units, in both cases: (9*5) + (1 * 10) = 55

However, let's look at the base return for the NEXT hand you play:

(50 * .96) = 48 Units

(50 * 1.92) = 96 Units

That's just on the BASE game, what you're wanting is to put the 50 unit base bet to put you over 100 units ER because you are considering the possibility of getting multipliers for the next hand worthless...and it is not worthless...it's kind of the entire angle of the game.

Thus, every hand you play on UX, (barring potential strategy exceptions on low paytables that hurt the base expected return but help the UX expected return) with any multiplier whatsoever, you are playing at an advantage. The House Edge of the game is derived from the hands that you must play without multipliers, which hurt the base pay on the base fifty credits, not the return from the BONUS part...the house hold comes from that and the fact that very few players play with Optimal Strategy.

Oh, I think I get what you're saying.

You're saying because the multiplier (being an addon) has to have a higher return than the base paytable (NV law). This means the return on the extra 50 credits has to be at or above 95%, which is why you're counting those 50 credits as having a 95% return. I didn't know the return on the multiplier was the same/higher as base paytable. (Well, I knew it did, but in a different context I guess.)

In my mind, I was just thinking about the return on 'this' hand, not the following hand (although I def would play the following hand if it was +EV).

I assume this means you would have to use proper UX strategy (like 3-to-flush, inside straight, etc.) in order to get that 100.xx% return? If you use normal non-UX JOB strategy, how much does that hurt you? I'd think playing regular JOB strategy if you have a bunch of 12x's wouldn't hurt you as bad as using JOB strategy when you only have 1 or 2 multipliers. How big is the difference in EV when making such an error at the lowest end (one 2x multiplier) vs the highest end (all 12x multipliers)?

I agree with your math, although I think you should have differentiated the return on the first 50 credits (paid on paytable) and return on the second 50 credits (earn multipliers) in the return formula, like:

MULT_CREDITS_RETURN + NON_MULT_CREDITS_RETURN + NEXT_HAND_MULTIPLIER_RETURN
(5*1.9) + (45 * 0.95) + (50 * 0.95)



as opposed to

MULT_CREDITS_RETURN + NON_MULT_CREDITS_AND_NEXT_HAND_MULT_RETURN
(5 * 1.9) + (95 * 0.95)

Quote: RS

Oh, I think I get what you're saying.

You're saying because the multiplier (being an addon) has to have a higher return than the base paytable (NV law). This means the return on the extra 50 credits has to be at or above 95%, which is why you're counting those 50 credits as having a 95% return. I didn't know the return on the multiplier was the same/higher as base paytable. (Well, I knew it did, but in a different context I guess.)

The total paytable has to be the same, or better, as someone was kind enough to correct for me.

Right, though, for one example, 6/5 JoB returns: 0.949961 and 6/5 JoB UX returns 0.956740 on ten-play. This isn't going to be exactly right because it doesn't account for strategy changes, but if we take the difference between the two, multiply by two and at that result to the former:

((.956740-.949961)*2) + .949961 = 0.963519

That is the return from the multipliers for this game (.963519+.949961)/2 = 0.95674

And, actually, the return from the multiplier is a little higher than that and the return from the Base Pays is a little lower than that because you make certain playing decisions that make sense for UX but are wrong if playing the base game alone.

Okay, so now that we have these new numbers, let's do it with one 2x multiplier:

(45 * .949961) + (5 * 1.899922) + (50 * .963519) = 100.423805

(95 * .956740) + (5 * 1.899922) = 100.38991

Either way, you have an advantage, but the top number is probably the most accurate. Both are WRONG, slightly, but I would have to know what every individual UX-Benefitting and Base Table Detrimental strategy change does to get more accurate return percentages for each part of the bet.

....And, that's WAY outside of my skill level.

Quote:

In my mind, I was just thinking about the return on 'this' hand, not the following hand (although I def would play the following hand if it was +EV).

I don't know how the individual strategy changes end up breaking it down, I mean, I could understand wanting to have two 2x multipliers or one 3x multiplier just to be secure that you are at an advantage, at least, on the worst paytables. On decent paytables, you're at an advantage with one 2x, and it's not close.

Quote:

I assume this means you would have to use proper UX strategy (like 3-to-flush, inside straight, etc.) in order to get that 100.xx% return? If you use normal non-UX JOB strategy, how much does that hurt you? I'd think playing regular JOB strategy if you have a bunch of 12x's wouldn't hurt you as bad as using JOB strategy when you only have 1 or 2 multipliers. How big is the difference in EV when making such an error at the lowest end (one 2x multiplier) vs the highest end (all 12x multipliers)?

Yeah, you'd only revert to the normal strategy in situations in which you could bet five credits. You're basically just sitting down and playing UX in this scenario, it just happens that you're starting at a better point than someone who sits down with no multipliers.

To your question of badly does normal strategy hurt you...I have absolutely no idea. I could use the Wizard's hand analyzers to probably tell you how much each specific decision hurts your EV on that hand, but then I'd still need to figure out hand frequencies.

I do agree that reverting to basic strategy on the base game when you have a greater sum of multipliers would hurt your return less, and sometimes be the right decision, Wizard says so:

https://wizardofodds.com/games/video-poker/strategy/ultimate-x/jacks-or-better/

Quote:

With perfect play, which requires knowing more than one correct play for many hands based on the average multiplier, the expected return of this game is 99.42%

Some examples are listed at the bottom of the page where you hold certain four-to-a-flushes if the average multiplier is not high enough, if it is, you hold something else.

Just for the heck of it, I went to WoO and popped 2c 5c 9c 7d 3h into the hand analyzer and got an expected return of .359926 to toss everything and .346901 to keep the 2dc 5c and 9c...which is the UX hold.

Okay, if you are betting 100 and we'll say you had an entire screen of 12x multipliers, then (.359926-.346901) * 120 = 1.563

That means the difference (on the non-multiplier part) is 1.563 units on the 10 unit part of a 20 unit bet.

That's a pretty big difference, is it enough to make the regular base game play of tossing everything? I don't know and I am probably BARELY capable of figuring it out, but it would take forever, and I don't want to do it...lol

Quote:

I agree with your math, although I think you should have differentiated the return on the first 50 credits (paid on paytable) and return on the second 50 credits (earn multipliers) in the return formula, like:

I probably could have initially done a better job expressing it, I agree.

Bank of 4 open UX machines. You walk up and another AP (not an associate but you've seen him vulture multipliers many times) is at machine #1. Do you let him have all 4?

Quote: BTLWI

Bank of 4 open UX machines. You walk up and another AP (not an associate but you've seen him vulture multipliers many times) is at machine #1. Do you let him have all 4?

I won't shove anyone off a machine, but don't have a problem checking 1 or more machines before someone else walks in front of it.

Chances are, if the guys is already half done and is fast, I wouldn't even bother with those 4 at all, although might check out the other side if there is one.

Quote: BTLWI

Bank of 4 open UX machines. You walk up and another AP (not an associate but you've seen him vulture multipliers many times) is at machine #1. Do you let him have all 4?

hell no. I saw a guy looking at machine 1 once, I noticed the other 3 were not checked yet. I sat at machine 3 and stuck my card in 3 and 4 and inserted money into both. He was lucky I didn't put money into #2 as well.

Got schooled by some little old lady.

I noticed In some of the Indian casino's there seems to be quite a few unlikely UX snipers. Well dressed, nice jewelry, possibly upper middle class( 50 to 60'ish.)

Normally I don't look to hard for UX opportunities. However I was playing at a bar and noticed a couple next to me who had left a bunch of multipliers, but they were still chilling at the machines.

I was checking an open spot next to them, when some older lady said,"I already checked." I said, oh thanks.

The machines that had loaded multipliers opend up. And I scooted over to check. The older lady motioned to the other machine in a, *do you mind if I get this one sort of way. I gave her a nod she found a juicy one on .25 10 play. She commented, " Oh boy not this agian I never get anything, I'll. Probably lose .

As a joke I said ill take it or split with you. She said, sure I'll split with you. I said, we can split both machines if you wish.

As most of you know you can use the buttons to quickly scan though all the games to check or you can use the touch screen, thats slower and more obvious. Since I dont check that often I use the touch screen.

While I was.checking my machine, the lady said , " I need to teach you how to do that better someday.

We made about $60, split the profits went on our way.
Latter on she seen me agian and asked if I wanted to split another one she found. I said, sure. That one was a dud.

Cool story!

It'd be nice to meet a fellow vulture (at random) who's not an @$$hole. I was at a casino hitting the very last machine one day, and some older guy comes up and goes through three or four games on the machine I had just left. "Sorry," I said, "Already checked them, and all the other ones here, for that matter.

He offers the courteous reply of, "f7%#% off, you probably just started, I INVENTED doing this."

I had a good chuckle about that, and went back to my machine. After I was done, I saw him at the All-Star bank, "I was just trying to save you time, buddy, but you can keep looking if you want. See how those two paid out the same amount? That's because there were no plays on that one."

He responded, "I don't need you to tell me young'un, I was the first person to ever do this!!!"

At that point, I decided just to smile, and slowly back away from the crazy guy.

Quote: Mission146

He responded, "I don't need you to tell me young'un, I was the first person to ever do this!!!"

It seems to be true that for the gamblers who dally in fallacy, one of their big shortcomings is that they can't see that every single possible scheme to winning over the house has indeed already been thought of by somebody, everybody even, maybe centuries ago. There's clearly a large percentage of players wracking their brains over it every waking hour. Yet these same guys might think something as stupid as 'I bet nobody ever thought of that'.

There's a few curmudgeonly type guy(s) on here who are like that. I even think I remember someone saying something about the fact they have been gambling in Vegas since ....bla bla bla. Another ageist statement from me..... Old timers who gamble can't stand anyone who might know something they don't.