1.6 percent advantage for the player

Fitzgerald's has a nickel video poker machine with a payback of 101.6 percent. (At least according to www.vpfree2.com; anyone know if this info is up to date?). If I was an executive at Fitzgerald's, I'd shamelessly advertise that my casino was "Home of the Loosest Video Poker Machine in America." Instead, it's a hush hush secret.

Questions:

Aren't nickel machines supposed to have the worst odds?

If this machine is beatable, why does it exist? I'm assuming it still earns a profit for the house because of player error, but then again, the players hogging this machine are precisely the sort of players who have done their homework and know their poker.

It's a nickel machine.

Even if it IS paying 101.6%, and people were playing perfectly, just how much is that machine bleeding? More than what the people that play it (or their spouses) are potentially loosing at other games while there?

It's the very definition of "Loss leader."

Why isn't it advertised? Good question.

Then again, how many of them are in there?

---

But you're right. Typically, the HIGHER the denomination, the looser it is. But if it's paying over 100%, yeah, a nickel machine makes sense - if they advertised it!

I always thought the higher the denom, the better the odds, but that only holds true when the house has an edge. In positive EV Vp, often the best odds are at the 25c level.

Just because it pays back over 100% does not mean everyone who plays it will be a winner. With good counting and strategy blackjack provides about the same 1.5% advantage (I think!) But many good counters have bad sessions.

I read somewhere that a professional poker player can play up to 1,000 hands per hour. Fitzgerald's players card will net you an additional 0.1% in cash back for video poker. So, a perfect player could get 101.7% out of the machine.

Now, I haven't seen these machines, but I will assume its single play vp and the max bet is 0.25$ (in other words, you can't up the denomination and max bet is 5 coins).

At a 1.7% advantage, this machine will earn a perfect player:
0.25 $ * 1.7% * 1,000 hands = 4.25$/hour

Less than minimum wage!

Maybe they have 5X comps days, even then you would only net 5.25$/hour. Nonetheless, I would still play it.

So what does this cost Fitzgerald's? It doesn't seem like much, but if they've got 20 of these machines, they are losing up to $100/hour + the opportunity cost of these machines (ie the space they take up which could be used for games that would net them a better return).

No matter hot you slice it, if it gets them in the door, to Fitzgeralds, they are worth every penny NICKEL.

I don't know how many such machines they have or what techniques they might employ to prevent hogging of them, but I think its a sort of loss-leader or close to it. Casinos in outlying areas offer Bingo Rooms but really only make money on them during the even hours when Bingo players play the slot machines. It just might be the same way. Fitzgeralds gets a guy in there playing VP but meanwhile his wife is playing at an 8percent machine. If ten people show up for the very loose machine but its being hogged, most of those ten will simply play a nearby machine that is not quite so loose. So they won't advertise it but the casino will benefit from it.

If it's one of those games where you have to wait to hit the natural royal to get into positive earnings, then only the most dedicated are going to play it right.

For example, in Full Pay Deuces are Wild, the temptation would be to go for the natural royal when holding maybe 3 cards to that *natural* and a Deuce. Of course you are practically never supposed to discard the deuce, but holding it makes the natural impossible (with 3 to a natural plus a deuce, hold the deuce too for the shot at the wild-card royal is correct). I think there are a few other examples that don't come to me now.

Let's say you know you are going to only play for one weekend a year. If you play it right you have almost no shot at getting ahead without because the natural royal is still what is 'make or break'. Aren't you going to be tempted to take extra chances? If you have a big bankroll and a zillion hours, then you'd have reason to follow perfect strategy if you can, but has been pointed out, your EV is going to net you less than minimum wage. I think the casino can begrudge those few folks that.

I guess my point is that even someone who knows the deal may not elect to play it right, never mind the average Joe who hasn't looked into proper play. And the casinos count on that too. Plus I think errors are really big in keeping a guy from playing actual positive EV.

If you want to check out the above statements that is here.

Initial lack of knowledge, lack of knowledge concerning certain more unusual situations, lack of gumption to follow optimal strategy, fatigue, inebriation ... all these things cut into that statistically attractive starting point.
The entire town is built on illusion and lack of full disclosure.

I wonder if "full pay" will become as popular a term as "loosest slots" ... and just as meaningless.

Agreed with the above. If you go to the full pay deuces wild machines at Sam's Town or Palms, you don't really see anyone camped out in front of them "working them," even though you could earn close to $10 an hour with perfect, fast play. Nobody (well, almost nobody) wants to put in that kind of work for such little reward. Might as well get a job with health and 401(k) benefits. (Okay, that might be difficult right now :))

Meanwhile, the people that play those machines are amateurs and day-trippers who are not going to play the perfect strategy nor put in enough time to get that edge. Those machines are still a "loss-leader" for the Palms, et al. but only in the sense that they make less money for the casino than other machines. (I would bet those FPDW machines return about 97% for the casino.)

Spent some time a while ago with the wizard's up-to-date Full Pay VP simulator on deuces wild, you can put it on auto-pilot to play perfect at super speed (actually they are cool as hell)

Anyway, the EV would kick in finally most of the time if your bankroll held out. Quite nicely and impressively in fact.

One cautionary example was a case of 38,000 plays and finally the result was busted bankroll. In other words, the very best players could spend untold hours only to go broke after the week(s) it would take to play out that particular sequence of luck. If anyone was crazy enough.

Seems to me if it takes one unlikely event to get the postive EV to work, that is a special case. The Kelly Criterion might address that, too bad it is over my head.

The simulator at vpgenius.com will also give you a good (and faster) simulation.

I think the Kelly bankroll for dollar deuces wild is something close to $14K. So for quarters it is around $3,500. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong.) $1,000 is not nearly enough to play even at the quarter level. Most people like to have more than the Kelly bankroll anyway. It's really just a starting point.

(OG: Are you saying you only busted out once playing $5/hand with the $1,000 starting bankroll on the Wizard's simulator? How many simulations did you run?)

i practice vp and can easily play over 1,000 hands per hour fairly accurately but i know my accuracy suffers the faster i play, and 'fairly' accurate is not good enough. i asked Bob Dancer and he stresses accuracy over speed. every mistake will greatly reduce that 1.6 advantage. i would guess that a true professional vp player would not be playing a nickel game as they would have the bankroll to find something that would be worth more than a 1.6 edge on a nickel machine. a game like this is perfect for the recreational player though. i'll check this out when i'm there! :)

Quote: teddys

(OG: Are you saying you only busted out once playing $5/hand with the $1,000 starting bankroll on the Wizard's simulator? How many simulations did you run?)

no, busted out several times, the one mentioned was the most miserable looking.

I should check it out to be sure, but I think it is $1.25 per hand on his simulator.

I ran about a dozen simulations and almost saved the results but didnt. I'd say with the $1000 bankroll half or more went to ruin.

EDIT: the game uses "units", credits to start are 1000 units, to get best paytable bet 5 units. Be sure to max speed before starting autoplay and I'll tell you it's pretty darn fast. You are correct the bankroll is very small for such a game. I'll check our your suggested site, it would be nice to be able to adjust the bankroll.

EDIT2: at http://www.vpgenius.com/video-poker/deuces-wild.aspx the simulation is sure fast, but unsatisfying somehow.

EDIT3: the 38,000 hand game, and at other instances when eventually there was ruin but a long run, clearly the player at some point could have stopped and been up.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Then again, how many of them are in there?

One little, lonely, upright Loose Deuces machine near what they claim is the sports book. They also have four full pay Double Bonus machines by the upstairs bar. These are actually marked with signs that say "BETTER THAN 100% RETURN with perfect play"

Quote: FleaStiff

I don't know how many such machines they have or what techniques they might employ to prevent hogging of them...

From what I've seen, nothing, and they don't need to, either. People either don't care, or they don't believe it. I generally give the DB machines a go when I'm in there and I'm usually the only one there. I've never seen anyone play the LD machine.

on video poker the denomination has no bearing, only the paytable make it a gd or bad machine to play

The only people who would work the machine at an optimal ten dollars an hour would be retirees not interested in an alternative gainful employment.

The machine would have to be worked all the time and worked well.

So it sort of makes sense that the casino would not publicize this loss leader it would just let it exist and be more of a nominal loss leader than an actual one.

If the machine draws people in, even a dedicated team of players, its still going to be profitable for the casino because of the illusions about theoretical Full Pay versus practical Full Pay.

deleted

youre looking at the wrong paytable.

this is fitzgeralds paytable that returns 101.6%

1-2-2-3-4-10-17-25-500-800