Video Poker Progressives for the Patient Player

Suppose you put no value on your time and can sit on a video poker machine until it hits a royal.

Let's assume there is an 8/5 Bonus Poker game with a 0.5% meter rise. What is the least jackpot (for a royal) you should play at?

It is easy to say the game is immediately positive with a jackpot of 1135.56 units. However, I argue it's still a positive play under that under the conditions stated above. Why? Because you'll be increasing the jackpot as you play and will eventually recoup that money when the royal hits.

Here are some figures which may help in your calculations.

Return from all fixed pays = 0.971776
Probability of jackpot = 1 in 40,233.

My figure is 934.39 units, but I welcome challenges to it.

I'm sure somebody would otherwise chime in that the strategy changes as the jackpot grows to increase the probability, but let's not muddy the waters with that.

The question for the poll is what is your favorite of the December holidays?

The way I see it, the expected number of plays is 40,233, and you are expected to lose 0.028224 per play, but you will gain back 0.005 per play when you hit the jackpot, so the expected loss per play is now 0.23224, which means it becomes an AP if the jackpoot > 40,233 x 0.023224 = about 934.37.

However, this assumes the jackpot pays off in full on a 1-unit bet.

Also, this takes future bets into account when calculating the HE. Isn't this the "flaw" we point out in the "a 7-step martingale at double-zero roulette only really has a HE of 0.34% because you are actually betting 127 against the casino's 1?

Quote: ThatDonGuy

The way I see it, the expected number of plays is 40,233, and you are expected to lose 0.028224 per play, but you will gain back 0.005 per play when you hit the jackpot, so the expected loss per play is now 0.23224, which means it becomes an AP if the jackpoot > 40,233 x 0.023224 = about 934.37.

Glad to hear we get the same number.

Quote:

However, this assumes the jackpot pays off in full on a 1-unit bet.

Also, this takes future bets into account when calculating the HE. Isn't this the "flaw" we point out in the "a 7-step martingale at double-zero roulette only really has a HE of 0.34% because you are actually betting 127 against the casino's 1?
link to original post

I'm not sure I see your points here.

So one unit at a quarter VP machine is $1.25 if playing 5 coins for the progressive JP.
934.37 units X $1.25 = $1,167.99
1135.56 units X $1.25 = $1,419.25

I personally would play the machine up to a JP of $1,199 so there's no tax. How much tax is there on the $1,419.25 hand pay? I don't know. The rules have changed since decades ago. But if I play 12,000 hands and lose about 10 cents a hand, I'll be in the losing column even if the Royal Flush appears after that, unless there's two of them.

What are the chances that a player values their time at precisely zero? I submit that this is infinitely unlikely versus any other number in the set of real numbers.

Yes, you count the full meter contribution if you have infinite time. Don't we all? The problem becomes more interesting in the presence of competition.

Quote: Wizard

<snip>p.s. That should be "aire" not "air."
link to original post

Wiz,

No... "air" as a verb means to express one's opinion, so you used the correct homophone.

Dog Hand

Quote: Wizard

Quote: ThatDonGuy

However, this assumes the jackpot pays off in full on a 1-unit bet.

Also, this takes future bets into account when calculating the HE. Isn't this the "flaw" we point out in the "a 7-step martingale at double-zero roulette only really has a HE of 0.34% because you are actually betting 127 against the casino's 1?
link to original post

I'm not sure I see your points here.
link to original post

The first one refers to the fact that you usually have to bet 5 units in order to win the maximum/progressive on a Royal in VP.

The second refers to the on-and-off-going discussion the forum seems to have about how, if you treat, say, a 7-step Martingale as a single bet that pays 1-127. That reasoning applies only if you are committed to making the full set of 7 bets every time. Similarly, the VP progressive becomes an AP at 934.4 is true only if you are committed to playing until you get a Royal.

Quote: DogHand

No... "air" as a verb means to express one's opinion, so you used the correct homophone.
link to original post

Thank you!

Quote: ThatDonGuy

The second refers to the on-and-off-going discussion the forum seems to have about how, if you treat, say, a 7-step Martingale as a single bet that pays 1-127.

That reasoning applies only if you are committed to making the full set of 7 bets every time. Similarly, the VP progressive becomes an AP at 934.4 is true only if you are committed to playing until you get a Royal.
link to original post

7-step Martingale?
In all the years of gambling, i've never heard of this Martingale strategy but google says it's been around this forum since 2012:
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambling/betting-systems/11144-how-did-my-baccarat-system-survive-100-shoes/

Questions:
- Why stop at 7?
- If you don't hit on the 7th try, you eat the loss and start the count over again?
- how do you get a he=.34% if you win? 1/127 = .79%

I can see this in european Roulette (black/red) or ez-Bacc.
Can this system be used in games where there's player decisions?
ie: Blackjack or ultimate texas holdem? (I have lost 7 in a row a few times in a day in both these games)

edit:
Veronica rhymes with hanakah.
Merry xmas to all the followers of the Flying Spaghetti monster. Hail noodleheads

Quote: 100xOdds

Questions:
- Why stop at 7?

link to original post

(snip)

Is losing 255 units to win 1 not enough spread for you?