Poll

23 votes (85.18%)
1 vote (3.7%)
3 votes (11.11%)

27 members have voted

Martin
Martin
Joined: Nov 20, 2010
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 149
November 28th, 2010 at 6:36:23 AM permalink
Several years ago I was taking a break from my favorite gambling pass time (craps) and sat down at a triple play bonus poker progressive machine (.25). The RSF jackpots weren't that impressive, a few bucks over 1K on each line - top line coming at about 1.2K and if you got them all it was a little over 4K (a separate progressive).

About three or four hands in I was dealt 9, 10, J, Q, K in spades. I sat there for a minute or two and finally took the straight flush to all three lines.

I know that holding the SF was the correct play but to this day I think about it and wonder if I should have thrown out the book and went for a royal.

Hence my question - What would you do in a similar situation?
Nareed
Nareed
Joined: Nov 11, 2009
  • Threads: 373
  • Posts: 11413
November 28th, 2010 at 6:37:51 AM permalink
To quote Timothy Zahn "Half of something is better than twice of nothing."
Donald Trump is a fucking criminal
teddys
teddys
Joined: Nov 14, 2009
  • Threads: 150
  • Posts: 5522
November 28th, 2010 at 7:34:51 AM permalink
Absolutely the straight flush. Think of it this way: you have a ton of opportunities for four to the royal, and will have more in the future. How many times do you get a dealt straight flush?

Especially on a triple play machine. Those dealt hands are golden.
"Dice, verily, are armed with goads and driving-hooks, deceiving and tormenting, causing grievous woe." -Rig Veda 10.34.4
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 206
  • Posts: 10954
November 28th, 2010 at 8:13:21 AM permalink
If you get rid of the 9, you have one chance to get the Royal. But you also have 7 chances for a flush and 6 chances for a straight. (and 12 chances for a pair).

Before answering the question, we'd need to know the payouts of a straight, flush and straight flush.

As a progressive, there are break points where it's more profitable to go for it rather than take the money. However, it's impossible to calculate without those payout details.


Therefore, I refrain from voting.
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ 覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧 Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
Martin
Martin
Joined: Nov 20, 2010
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 149
November 28th, 2010 at 8:49:57 AM permalink
Suffice it to say that they are standard for Bonus VP on an 8/5 machine i.e. 5 and 4 for the flush and straight. The SF paid normal 50 to 1.

The royal payoffs as I said weren't that much more than 1K + chump change except for the top line being 1.2K. If it were a single line machine the top line payoff of 1.2 makes it potentially a reason to go for the RSF.

I'm fairly certain that I made the correct play under the circumstances - my question is would you go for it or not?
JerryLogan
JerryLogan
Joined: Jun 28, 2010
  • Threads: 26
  • Posts: 1344
November 28th, 2010 at 9:16:31 AM permalink
I'd keep the SF, math-right or math-wrong, because it represents a 750 credit win. When you sit down at any vp machine it is rare to see that type of profit. If you're confused just think of what it is that the casino manager would want you to do....and then do the exact opposite.
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
November 28th, 2010 at 10:04:35 AM permalink
Quote: JerryLogan

I'd keep the SF, math-right or math-wrong, because it represents a 750 credit win. When you sit down at any vp machine it is rare to see that type of profit. If you're confused just think of what it is that the casino manager would want you to do....and then do the exact opposite.



Rob Singer would break the SF, because he always goes for the beeeeeg win, no matter how stupid the play is.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
November 28th, 2010 at 10:11:04 AM permalink
Quote: Martin

Several years ago I was taking a break from my favorite gambling pass time (craps) and sat down at a triple play bonus poker progressive machine (.25). The RSF jackpots weren't that impressive, a few bucks over 1K on each line - top line coming at about 1.2K and if you got them all it was a little over 4K (a separate progressive).

About three or four hands in I was dealt 9, 10, J, Q, K in spades. I sat there for a minute or two and finally took the straight flush to all three lines.

I know that holding the SF was the correct play but to this day I think about it and wonder if I should have thrown out the book and went for a royal.

Hence my question - What would you do in a similar situation?



It's pretty simple, actually, and you can cut directly to the chase:

The EV of a one-card draw to 10JQK suited is about 19 bets. This is mostly due to the fact that one in 47 times, you will connect with the royal, but also due to your chances of catching lesser hands, such as straights, flushes, and high pairs. This wouldn't change by very much if the RF wasn't impressive, as you say--it would perhaps boost the EV of the royal draw to 20 or 21 bets. (I'm referring to any one hand here, since triple play strategy shouldn't be any different from single-line strategy.)

However, the EV of simply keeping the SF is 50. This means that by tossing the SF, you would have been destroying three-fifths of the value of the hand. You would have reduced your total expected value from 750 coins to 300 coins.

ALSO: the decision would still have been wrong to break the SF even if you DID hit the royal.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
Martin
Martin
Joined: Nov 20, 2010
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 149
November 28th, 2010 at 10:27:10 AM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

It's pretty simple, actually, and you can cut directly to the chase:

The EV of a one-card draw to 10JQK suited is about 19 bets. This is mostly due to the fact that one in 47 times, you will connect with the royal, but also due to your chances of catching lesser hands, such as straights, flushes, and high pairs. This wouldn't change by very much if the RF wasn't impressive, as you say--it would perhaps boost the EV of the royal draw to 20 or 21 bets. (I'm referring to any one hand here, since triple play strategy shouldn't be any different from single-line strategy.)

However, the EV of simply keeping the SF is 50. This means that by tossing the SF, you would have been destroying three-fifths of the value of the hand. You would have reduced your total expected value from 750 coins to 300 coins.

ALSO: the decision would still have been wrong to break the SF even if you DID hit the royal.



Actually I know I was correct "by the book" - I'm looking for the gamblers on this site - the folks who just do it for the fun of doing it - so far I haven't found any.
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
November 28th, 2010 at 10:52:44 AM permalink
Quote: Martin

Actually I know I was correct "by the book" - I'm looking for the gamblers on this site - the folks who just do it for the fun of doing it - so far I haven't found any.



Well, there's a difference between "gambling" and "foolhardy"--even a .25 player would be tossing $112.50 out the window by breaking the SF, which is probably beyond most people's comfort threshold, even JL's, apparently (devoted disciple of Rob Singer though he is).

You might get a different answer if you're talking single-line BP, since the gamble wouldn't be as costly in absolute terms.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
thecesspit
thecesspit
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
November 28th, 2010 at 12:09:35 PM permalink
RS might throw a natural straight for a 4 card royal draw (I forget if that's one of his plays, I think it is), but not a SF.

Remember with this hand, you've only got one draw to the Royal and none to the Straight Flush (as you already have it).

With a 4 card royal and straight, you've got 2 good cards, 7 Flush cards and 3 straight cards (plus the draw to the pairs for a push). If the bonuses are big enough in that case, the single card draw is gamboool but not insanity.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
November 28th, 2010 at 12:19:36 PM permalink
Quote: thecesspit

RS might throw a natural straight for a 4 card royal draw (I forget if that's one of his plays, I think it is), but not a SF.

Remember with this hand, you've only got one draw to the Royal and none to the Straight Flush (as you already have it).

With a 4 card royal and straight, you've got 2 good cards, 7 Flush cards and 3 straight cards (plus the draw to the pairs for a push). If the bonuses are big enough in that case, the single card draw is gamboool but not insanity.



Throwing away a natural straight for a 4 card royal is the right play by a lot. Singer has nothing to do with it. If straights pay 20 for 5 and royals pay 4000 for 5, you're giving up about 77 credits in EV by holding the straight instead of drawing to the royal.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
thecesspit
thecesspit
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
November 28th, 2010 at 12:26:32 PM permalink
Sorry, you are right, I was thinking of this case ::

9s 10s Js Qs Kh, where there's a draw to the straight flush over the natural straight. Mr Singer would draw to the SF on Bonus Poker.

OH=910JQK @ $20.00; SP=910JQ @ $17.13
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
November 28th, 2010 at 12:31:24 PM permalink
Really? Not only is it the wrong play, that seems antithetical to the "win more frequently" strategy he's reported to espouse.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
November 28th, 2010 at 12:36:21 PM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

Really? Not only is it the wrong play, that seems antithetical to the "win more frequently" strategy he's reported to espouse.



But the "big win" is part and parcel of his "strategy". He plays Martingales on bad EV machines, and hopes to negate that--as in, negate in his own mind--by hitting the beeeeeg one.

I don't actually know if tossing a SF is one of his speshul plays, but it's no dumber than some of the ones I HAVE seen.

Also, acccording to the "win more frequently" strategy, he would only make this play if holding the SF wouldn't get him even. So early in the ballgame, he might very well keep the hand. My point was that only a loon like Singer would EVER throw away a SF in Bonus Poker.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
November 28th, 2010 at 12:39:21 PM permalink
Quote: thecesspit

RS might throw a natural straight for a 4 card royal draw (I forget if that's one of his plays, I think it is), but not a SF. .



Any other player with a grain of sense would make the same play. An AP, or any knowledgeable player, would do this because the EV of a 4-card royal is almost five times the EV of a pat straight.

Of course, if the straight would get him ahead by $1, he would keep the straight so he could chalk up another "winning session", since having as many winning sessions as possible trumps actually WINNING in The Singer System.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
rxwine
rxwine
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
  • Threads: 200
  • Posts: 11725
November 28th, 2010 at 2:09:17 PM permalink
Quote: Martin

Actually I know I was correct "by the book" - I'm looking for the gamblers on this site - the folks who just do it for the fun of doing it - so far I haven't found any.



For someone who may only be gambling one of the few times in their life. Sure, that's the play one would make. Like if I came into Vegas to go to friend's wedding, and it's likely I never will come back, that's what I imagine I would do. It's like throwing money into a wishing well (only much more expensive) and probably nothing will happen.
There's no secret. Just know what you're talking about before you open your mouth.
thecesspit
thecesspit
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
November 28th, 2010 at 2:59:04 PM permalink
Quote: mkl654321

Any other player with a grain of sense would make the same play. An AP, or any knowledgeable player, would do this because the EV of a 4-card royal is almost five times the EV of a pat straight.

Of course, if the straight would get him ahead by $1, he would keep the straight so he could chalk up another "winning session", since having as many winning sessions as possible trumps actually WINNING in The Singer System.



As I stated, Mr Singer does NOT suggest tossing the Straight Flush. I was wrong. I apologize for the confusion.

Characterizing hims as someone who would is not only incorrect, it weakens your statements.

I also have not seen a case where he keeps the Straight to get ahead by $1. Your characterization of his session goals is also incorrect.

Finally, the biggest mystery to me is how he decides between a high risk play and a more winners play. It differs from hand to hand, AS FAR AS I CAN TELL. But I am guessing as to his motivation behind each play, so it's unfair to guess, then attack that guess.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
mkl654321
mkl654321
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3412
November 28th, 2010 at 5:49:06 PM permalink
Quote: thecesspit

As I stated, Mr Singer does NOT suggest tossing the Straight Flush. I was wrong. I apologize for the confusion.

Characterizing hims as someone who would is not only incorrect, it weakens your statements.

I also have not seen a case where he keeps the Straight to get ahead by $1. Your characterization of his session goals is also incorrect.

Finally, the biggest mystery to me is how he decides between a high risk play and a more winners play. It differs from hand to hand, AS FAR AS I CAN TELL. But I am guessing as to his motivation behind each play, so it's unfair to guess, then attack that guess.



I reiterate that for him, a "winning session" trumps ALL OTHER CONSIDERATIONS. He states this over and over and over and over. He also crows about his high winning percentage, so logically, giving up, say, $80 in EV would be more than worth it to him if doing so would give him another illusory "winning session". His motivation is crystal-clear, and he does state that motivation unequivocally--winning sessions at all costs.

How extreme he gets with this is hard to tell. In any event, the difference between a "high-risk" play that lowers the expectation on that play, and a truly stupid play that does so even more, is only a matter of degree. The wrong play is the wrong play, whether it's keeping just the Ace from AQJ32, or keeping just the Ace from an Ace-high pat flush. The logic is faulty in either case.

I realize that you went to a great deal of trouble to test the provenance of Singer's "system". However, you didn't really need to do that--you just needed to look at his method enough to realize that he ALWAYS plays at -EV, and as we all have known for centuries, you can't combine -EV to get +EV, any more than you can add up negative numbers to get a positive sum.

Testing Singer's system is like testing a method that purports to turn lead into gold by dancing on it. You can disprove it the hard way--by testing it--or the easy way, by referring to your knowledge that it CAN'T work.
The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality.---George Bernard Shaw
thecesspit
thecesspit
Joined: Apr 19, 2010
  • Threads: 53
  • Posts: 5936
November 28th, 2010 at 10:57:34 PM permalink
I do it merely for the intellectual exercise in which I may learn something useful.

Which I have... about coding, about random number generators, about Video Poker pay tables, about the "feel" of gambling, about emotional gambling, about thinking versus feeling on making logical decisions and many other things.

Just because the outcome is not in question for many, it doesn't mean that the journey for some isn't worth it.

"I reiterate that for him, a "winning session" trumps ALL OTHER CONSIDERATIONS"

I also reiterate that you are wrong in this statement. But that's just she said/he said bullshit. The point is done with.
"Then you can admire the real gambler, who has neither eaten, slept, thought nor lived, he has so smarted under the scourge of his martingale, so suffered on the rack of his desire for a coup at trente-et-quarante" - Honore de Balzac, 1829
TIMSPEED
TIMSPEED
Joined: Aug 11, 2010
  • Threads: 89
  • Posts: 1246
November 29th, 2010 at 3:22:26 PM permalink
Well, have a look here...

Obviously, I took the win..however think of it this way..
The reset is $200, the progressive was at $357; extrapolated this would be the same as a $1000 reset/$1785, or $4000/$7140
Obviously the wins would also go up...250 nickles, 250 quarters, 250 dollars...
I think perhaps if I were playing for dollars I might shoot for it...
Gambling calls to me...like this ~> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Nap37mNSmQ
Asswhoopermcdaddy
Asswhoopermcdaddy
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
  • Threads: 87
  • Posts: 561
November 30th, 2010 at 5:33:09 AM permalink
Keep the money and be happy. The odds are not in your favor for getting the Royal. A win is a win and the Video Poker gods have smiled on you. Muck your hand and be greedy, and they'd be laughing at you instead.
ItsCalledSoccer
ItsCalledSoccer
Joined: Aug 30, 2010
  • Threads: 42
  • Posts: 735
November 30th, 2010 at 8:39:03 AM permalink
Yeah, I think I would take the money and run. I can see mucking a non-sequential flush for the royal, but I think in this case, taking the money is the way to go.

But, if it was the last video poker hand you would ever play on your last trip to a casino ever, then maybe I'd go for it!
slyther
slyther
Joined: Feb 1, 2010
  • Threads: 13
  • Posts: 691
November 30th, 2010 at 12:00:31 PM permalink
Gimme a SF over a 1-outer anyday.

  • Jump to: