April 4th, 2012 at 2:40:01 PM
permalink
As I am beginning to concentrate my action on single and double deck games, I'd like some feedback from those more familiar with the LV scene than I am. I begin with the assumption that mid-shoe entry is prohibited in these games to prevent Wonging. If my assumption is indeed correct, what, exactly, constitutes mid-shoe entry? Is it after even a single hand has been dealt from the new deck(s). My gut tells me that is what they mean.
Thanks in advance!
Jeff
Thanks in advance!
Jeff
The only thing more pathetic than watching a gambler who's afraid to lose is watching a gambler who is afraid to win. And I've seen plenty of both.
April 4th, 2012 at 2:43:42 PM
permalink
Any luck in New Orleans with Video poker ?
April 4th, 2012 at 2:53:06 PM
permalink
deleted
DUHHIIIIIIIII HEARD THAT!
April 4th, 2012 at 8:36:18 PM
permalink
Thanks for your interest. Actually ended up not going. But I've been playing a Jacks or Better game I downloaded as an Android app. I began with a $1K bankroll and bet max everytime ($5 on a $1 machine, it's the only setting on the hange).
A bit insane perhaps, but I'm at $5300 (no reset button, so $4300 profit) a week after downloading it and playing the Wizard's simple strategy for J B 9/6. But I'm rather skeptical as to how closely the app reflects real time conditions.
A bit insane perhaps, but I'm at $5300 (no reset button, so $4300 profit) a week after downloading it and playing the Wizard's simple strategy for J B 9/6. But I'm rather skeptical as to how closely the app reflects real time conditions.
The only thing more pathetic than watching a gambler who's afraid to lose is watching a gambler who is afraid to win. And I've seen plenty of both.
April 4th, 2012 at 8:39:58 PM
permalink
@Ibeat Thanks, that's what I assumed
The only thing more pathetic than watching a gambler who's afraid to lose is watching a gambler who is afraid to win. And I've seen plenty of both.
April 4th, 2012 at 9:21:15 PM
permalink
General NMDE Rules:
- No new players can join the game after the first round has been dealt.
- An existing player who decides not to play a hand cannot rejoin the game until after the shuffle.
- A player can go from one hand to two+ hands and back as often as he likes in all but the stingiest of casinos.
April 4th, 2012 at 11:58:17 PM
permalink
Quote: PopCan
- A player can go from one hand to two+ hands and back as often as he likes in all but the stingiest of casinos.
Hmmmm, good to know one of my local casinos is pretty stingy then. They nixed me the one time I tried to do this (in a positive count, of course).
"So drink gamble eat f***, because one day you will be dust." -ontariodealer
April 5th, 2012 at 8:48:32 AM
permalink
Did you hit a royal flush? If not, that is way outside the bell curve.Quote: HorseJeffThanks for your interest. Actually ended up not going. But I've been playing a Jacks or Better game I downloaded as an Android app. I began with a $1K bankroll and bet max everytime ($5 on a $1 machine, it's the only setting on the hange).
A bit insane perhaps, but I'm at $5300 (no reset button, so $4300 profit) a week after downloading it and playing the Wizard's simple strategy for J B 9/6. But I'm rather skeptical as to how closely the app reflects real time conditions.
"Dice, verily, are armed with goads and driving-hooks, deceiving and tormenting, causing grievous woe." -Rig Veda 10.34.4
April 5th, 2012 at 6:13:46 PM
permalink
No, teddy, no royal. One straight flush. Even if I did in fact have a royal it would still be an abnormal win rate. I don't know enough about the creation of various cell phone apps vs. true random # generators to make an intelligent comment/surmise about the fault in the game.
The conspiracy theorist in me says that the app was developed by Harrah's to dupe fish into believing that they could make an easy $3K/wk playing VidPok LOL
The conspiracy theorist in me says that the app was developed by Harrah's to dupe fish into believing that they could make an easy $3K/wk playing VidPok LOL
The only thing more pathetic than watching a gambler who's afraid to lose is watching a gambler who is afraid to win. And I've seen plenty of both.