Thread Rating:

Poll

5 votes (41.66%)
3 votes (25%)
4 votes (33.33%)

12 members have voted

DRich
DRich
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 11596
Joined: Jul 6, 2012
December 5th, 2020 at 7:36:19 AM permalink
Quote: smoothgrh

Thanks for the info! But don't establishments also pay to lease the machines? I had heard that Debbie Reynolds's casino was losing money every day from leasing slots. Or was that situation different because she was likely on the hook for paying out jackpots?



Casinos can pay to lease machines if they can't afford or don't want to buy them.
At my age, a "Life In Prison" sentence is not much of a deterrent.
billryan
billryan
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 16282
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
December 5th, 2020 at 7:40:28 AM permalink
Quote: DRich

Casinos can pay to lease machines if they can't afford or don't want to buy them.



Aren't some games only available by leasing them?
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
tringlomane
tringlomane
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 6281
Joined: Aug 25, 2012
December 5th, 2020 at 7:44:53 AM permalink
Quote: smoothgrh

Thanks for the info! But don't establishments also pay to lease the machines? I had heard that Debbie Reynolds's casino was losing money every day from leasing slots. Or was that situation different because she was likely on the hook for paying out jackpots?



If the slot route gets 15% of the weekly win, I would hope that would cover everything (maintenance, leasing, etc.) In Illinois that cost is 35% of the net win but certainly covers all those costs. And the state takes 30%, so the establishment only keeps 35% of the net win. And right now they are earning nothing because casinos and bar gaming are shut off statewide again due to Covid-19.
DRich
DRich
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 11596
Joined: Jul 6, 2012
December 5th, 2020 at 8:01:25 AM permalink
Quote: billryan

Aren't some games only available by leasing them?



Most of the "big fancy" games like WAP's and themed games are only available on a participation basis. The manufacturer will place the games for free but take 20% or so of the win and many have a daily minimum that must be paid. For example, a game like Wheel of Fortune would be a participation game where IGT might get 20% of the win with a minimum of $30 a day. So IGT would get about $900 a month even if the game made no money. If the machine had a good month IGT would get 20% of the win.
At my age, a "Life In Prison" sentence is not much of a deterrent.
Mental
Mental
  • Threads: 13
  • Posts: 1240
Joined: Dec 10, 2018
December 5th, 2020 at 8:36:43 AM permalink
Quote: gordonm888


I found this to be a fairly tough calculation. On the Royal Seeker Return Table from the link above, the Wizard also reports the probability of getting all the other various poker hands on the payout table (Jacks or Better up to a straight flush). I can see how to do that, but I must tell you that, in my opinion, the Royal Seeker Return Table was really an impressive combination math calculation by Wizard!



It's not difficult to get the answer. Just set all payoffs to zero except the RF and the calculators will do the work for you.


Hand NamePayoutProbabilityCycleVarianceReturn %
Royal 8000.000043326 23080.7 27.726 3.4661%
Str_Flush 00.000031433 31813.9 0.000 0.0000%
Quads 00.000218609 4574.38 0.000 0.0000%
Full_House 00.001349264 741.144 0.000 0.0000%
Flush 00.004307323 232.162 0.000 0.0000%
Straight 00.004925848 203.010 0.000 0.0000%
Trips 00.020206871 49.4881 0.000 0.0000%
Two_Pair 00.046190698 21.6493 0.000 0.0000%
JOB 00.203925181 4.90376 0.000 0.0000%
Nada 00.718801446 1.39120 0.001 0.0000%
----1.000000000-- 27.728 3.4661%

# HeldProbability% of RFRF Cycle
00.00000020205 0.47% 4949257
10.00000373455 8.62% 267770
20.00001476432 34.08% 67731
30.00001539077 35.52% 64974
40.00000769539 17.76% 129948
50.00000153908 3.55% 649740
Any0.00004332615 100.00% 23081


You can easily confirm this with JB's calculator: https://wizardofodds.com/games/video-poker/analyzer/
This forum is more enjoyable after I learned how to use the 'Block this user' button.
smoothgrh
smoothgrh
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 1251
Joined: Oct 26, 2011
Thanked by
ChallengedMilly
July 27th, 2021 at 11:11:02 AM permalink
So far, 8,200 games and still no royal.

Interestingly, if my notes are correct, I've had 21 "true" four to a royal, i.e. the fifth drawn card could complete a royal. 21/52 = 40% and i'm 8200/23081 or 36% of the expected average hands for a royal.
ChallengedMilly
ChallengedMilly
  • Threads: 23
  • Posts: 259
Joined: Jul 25, 2021
July 27th, 2021 at 11:40:55 AM permalink
Really fun experiment to run. So far I've only had two royals in my life time, one playing a small stakes home game of texas hold'em. Interestingly I kept AQ suited, opponent that took it to the river with me had pocket JJs, he flopped trips, and I had the flush, royal, and straight draw I was priced in. River was the 4th Jack giving him quads, and I finally hit the royal on the river.

Last time was at the casino playing JOB quarters, hit it when I was half my bankroll down for the week. Was a huge shocker and one of the best feelings you can have in a casino imho.
rsactuary
rsactuary
  • Threads: 29
  • Posts: 2315
Joined: Sep 6, 2014
July 27th, 2021 at 3:07:21 PM permalink
Quote: smoothgrh

So far, 8,200 games and still no royal.

Interestingly, if my notes are correct, I've had 21 "true" four to a royal, i.e. the fifth drawn card could complete a royal. 21/52 = 40% and i'm 8200/23081 or 36% of the expected average hands for a royal.



21/47? 5 cards are already removed from the deck.
ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy 
  • Threads: 117
  • Posts: 6219
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
July 27th, 2021 at 4:15:58 PM permalink
Quote: smoothgrh

So far, 8,200 games and still no royal.

Interestingly, if my notes are correct, I've had 21 "true" four to a royal, i.e. the fifth drawn card could complete a royal. 21/52 = 40% and i'm 8200/23081 or 36% of the expected average hands for a royal.


I assume you mean you ended up with 4/Royal 21 times, rather than being dealt 4/Royal, which should happen only about three times in 8200 deals.

I don't think the ratio of Royals to 4/Royals in completed hands is 1/47, although that would be a good question for someone to figure out; of course, it depends on the game and the paytable.
smoothgrh
smoothgrh
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 1251
Joined: Oct 26, 2011
July 27th, 2021 at 6:21:37 PM permalink
Sorry for my wording. No, I wasn't dealt 4 to a royal 21 times. I mean that after I held my cards, the next cards dealt gave me 4 to a royal but the fifth card did not complete the royal — and that has happened 21 times so far.

It was not like the fourth card was an offsuit deuce and the fifth card gave me 4 to a royal. The assumption is that each card is randomly generated after the previous card.
camapl
camapl
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 420
Joined: Jun 22, 2010
July 30th, 2021 at 3:25:37 PM permalink
Quote: smoothgrh

Sorry for my wording. No, I wasn't dealt 4 to a royal 21 times. I mean that after I held my cards, the next cards dealt gave me 4 to a royal but the fifth card did not complete the royal — and that has happened 21 times so far.

It was not like the fourth card was an offsuit deuce and the fifth card gave me 4 to a royal. The assumption is that each card is randomly generated after the previous card.



If I recall correctly, you will see 4 to a Royal in your final hand roughly 83 times as often as a paid Royal. Not sure which game was calculated but guessing JOB 9/6, and it was definitely using optimal strategy. Don’t know if/how your strategy will affect this metric.
Expectation is the root of all heartache.
DRich
DRich
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 11596
Joined: Jul 6, 2012
July 31st, 2021 at 8:38:15 AM permalink
i have never known anyone that plays a real Royal at all cost strategy.
At my age, a "Life In Prison" sentence is not much of a deterrent.
ChallengedMilly
ChallengedMilly
  • Threads: 23
  • Posts: 259
Joined: Jul 25, 2021
July 31st, 2021 at 10:00:59 AM permalink
Curiously if you run this experiment enough and find there is a statistically significant advantage in playing for the royal, does anyone here have the bankroll to actually test it in the real world?
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22272
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
July 31st, 2021 at 11:51:00 AM permalink
I have been in a few rare situations where there was a good reason to play for a Royal and or deuces at all costs.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
DRich
DRich
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 11596
Joined: Jul 6, 2012
July 31st, 2021 at 7:46:29 PM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

I have been in a few rare situations where there was a good reason to play for a Royal and or deuces at all costs.



Can you elaborate on that? I can't imagine throwing away a dealt four aces to go for a royal if i am betting real money.. Or, throwing away a dealt straight flush with no high cards to go for a royal. tournaments maybe but not when betting real money.
At my age, a "Life In Prison" sentence is not much of a deterrent.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
  • Threads: 1491
  • Posts: 26435
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
Thanked by
DieterTinMan
July 31st, 2021 at 9:23:15 PM permalink
Quote: DRich

Can you elaborate on that? I can't imagine throwing away a dealt four aces to go for a royal if i am betting real money.. Or, throwing away a dealt straight flush with no high cards to go for a royal. tournaments maybe but not when betting real money.



Guaranteed Play often called for throwing Hail Marys on the last hand with a very negative score.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
kewlj
kewlj
  • Threads: 216
  • Posts: 4635
Joined: Apr 17, 2012
July 31st, 2021 at 9:59:28 PM permalink
I was thinking more like a promnotion offering a fairly substantial bonus for Royals. I remember one of the smaller casinos on Boulder highway used to offer that not too long ago. I didn't chase it, but remember the signs. So a bonus big enough would make playing some sort of Royal at all cost strategy make sense no?
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
  • Threads: 167
  • Posts: 5937
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
August 1st, 2021 at 2:26:01 AM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

I have been in a few rare situations where there was a good reason to play for a Royal and or deuces at all costs.



There are several situations.

Perhaps the most common situation is in a video poker tournament.

The second situation is when you're battling for a progressive and the bank of machines is filled. I've actually done this when the progressive was very high. It was the 25-cent progressive and it was close to $4,000. There were six seats. I had one. If there were royal cards they were the only cards I held. In hands without royal cards I played conventional strategy.
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22272
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
August 1st, 2021 at 2:35:16 AM permalink
Quote: DRich

Can you elaborate on that? I can't imagine throwing away a dealt four aces to go for a royal if i am betting real money.. Or, throwing away a dealt straight flush with no high cards to go for a royal. tournaments maybe but not when betting real money.

You don't want hopper fills and you are only going for hand pays.

I have even been in the opposite situation where I tossed out 4 cards to the royal for 40k (tossed out one of the cards) because I wanted to avoid hitting a royal as much as possible(within reason) as that would probably end the play. Unfortunately, that's exactly what happened, I guess you would call it a bitter-sweet moment.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy 
  • Threads: 117
  • Posts: 6219
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
August 1st, 2021 at 2:54:50 PM permalink
Quote: camapl

If I recall correctly, you will see 4 to a Royal in your final hand roughly 83 times as often as a paid Royal. Not sure which game was calculated but guessing JOB 9/6, and it was definitely using optimal strategy. Don’t know if/how your strategy will affect this metric.


In my simulator, I get 90 4 to a Royals for every Royal in 9/6 Jacks or Better with optimal strategy, and 100 with "Royal or nothing" strategy. I assume that the main difference is the number of 4/Royals you would get when trying to fill a (non-Royal) flush.
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
  • Threads: 167
  • Posts: 5937
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
August 1st, 2021 at 3:15:54 PM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

You don't want hopper fills and you are only going for hand pays.

I have even been in the opposite situation where I tossed out 4 cards to the royal for 40k (tossed out one of the cards) because I wanted to avoid hitting a royal as much as possible(within reason) as that would probably end the play. Unfortunately, that's exactly what happened, I guess you would call it a bitter-sweet moment.



Could you elaborate on this please?

The way I read it, it seems to be saying you had some kind of AP play going on a video poker game that was worth more than a $40k jackpot?

Is that correct?
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22272
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
August 2nd, 2021 at 7:33:38 AM permalink
Quote: AlanMendelson

Could you elaborate on this please?

The way I read it, it seems to be saying you had some kind of AP play going on a video poker game that was worth more than a $40k jackpot?

Is that correct?

In theory, that is correct, but you are not giving up anywhere near 40k in value by tossing out a 4 to the royal. And no, if it were possible to toss out a dealt Royal for 40k that wouldn't be smart since you have no clue how long a play will last.

I really don't want to elaborate too much. I probably said too much as it is. I will just say the play was on a 9/6 $10 video poker game where I was getting equivalent to double four of a kind and straight flushes, cashback, mail(I ended up getting no mailed), and comps that could be turned into cash via high-end watches or whatever. The play was worth over 6% with little variance(at least from an AP's perspective) it's hard to say exactly what it was worth per hour since you are tipping well. I'm not sure exactly how many hands per hour I was getting out, because hand-pays would be coming up just over 400 hands-on on average and I was running above average. So, perhaps 800 hands per hour at $50 a wack times 6%.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy 
  • Threads: 117
  • Posts: 6219
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
Thanked by
camapl
August 3rd, 2021 at 10:54:33 AM permalink
Quote: ThatDonGuy

In my simulator, I get 90 4 to a Royals for every Royal in 9/6 Jacks or Better with optimal strategy, and 100 with "Royal or nothing" strategy. I assume that the main difference is the number of 4/Royals you would get when trying to fill a (non-Royal) flush.


After some serious computing, I get 92.02 Fours to a Royal for every Royal using perfect strategy in 9/6 Jacks or Better, and 104.54 for a "Royal or Nothing" strategy.
gordonm888
Administrator
gordonm888
  • Threads: 60
  • Posts: 5005
Joined: Feb 18, 2015
August 3rd, 2021 at 5:40:43 PM permalink
Quote: ThatDonGuy

After some serious computing, I get 92.02 Fours to a Royal for every Royal using perfect strategy in 9/6 Jacks or Better, and 104.54 for a "Royal or Nothing" strategy.



So, with a "Royal or Nothing" strategy you get Royals more frequently than conventional strategy but the frequency of "Four to a Royal" is increased by an even greater factor?

And, I must admit that breaking up a dealt 4oaK, Full House, Flush (including Straight Flush), Straight or Trips to draw to one (or zero) Royal Card is idiocy. If we modified the "Royal or Nothing" strategy to allow standing to those hands (and drawing to Trips in the Trips case) how much would the Royal Frequency be hurt, and how much would the overall EV of the strategy be increased?
So many better men, a few of them friends, are dead. And a thousand thousand slimy things live on, and so do I.
smoothgrh
smoothgrh
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 1251
Joined: Oct 26, 2011
August 3rd, 2021 at 7:10:18 PM permalink
Quote: gordonm888

So, with a "Royal or Nothing" strategy you get Royals more frequently than conventional strategy but the frequency of "Four to a Royal" is increased by an even greater factor?

And, I must admit that breaking up a dealt 4oaK, Full House, Flush (including Straight Flush), Straight or Trips to draw to one (or zero) Royal Card is idiocy. If we modified the "Royal or Nothing" strategy to allow standing to those hands (and drawing to Trips in the Trips case) how much would the Royal Frequency be hurt, and how much would the overall EV of the strategy be increased?



Remember, I'm doing a "royal at all costs" strategy on my home machine for fun with statistics. It costs me nothing to throw away a 4oaK — I don't advise that when actual cash is wagered.
ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy 
  • Threads: 117
  • Posts: 6219
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
Thanked by
camapl
August 4th, 2021 at 12:01:30 PM permalink
Here is a comparison of four games:
Game (ER)Hands per 4/RoyalHands per RoyalRatio
9/6 Jacks Or Better (99.5439)45041,37690
8/5 Jacks Or Better (97.2984)45141,14489
10/7 Bonus Poker (100.1725)50549,44896
9/6/4 Double Double Bonus (98.9808)44841,80491
smoothgrh
smoothgrh
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 1251
Joined: Oct 26, 2011
July 2nd, 2022 at 10:35:26 PM permalink
I'm sorry to let the Forum down — if anyone actually did care — but I abandoned my quest to get a royal flush with 9-6 JoB using the "Royal at All Costs" strategy on my garage Game King. It was just too boring and depressing.

And at the end, I tried to get the infamous video poker bug to work on a three of a kind (it's supposed to work no matter what winning hand you have — I just wanted to do it with style), but I couldn't get it to work.

I played 8,300 hands, or about 35.96% of the hands that a royal, on average, will occur (23,081) using this strategy. I had 2,526 winning hands out of 8,300, or 30.4% of plays. (I noticed that the 30.4 winning percentage was also true at 4,900 plays.)

Here's the final accounting — I played 5x$0.10/hand, but I screwed up for about 100 hands and was playing 5x$0.20/hand. A 45.39% payback percentage!

Last edited by: smoothgrh on Jul 3, 2022
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22272
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
Thanked by
Dieter
July 3rd, 2022 at 12:41:56 AM permalink
Quote: smoothgrh

I'm sorry to let the Forum down — if anyone actually did care — but I abandoned my quest to get a royal flush with 9-6 JoB using the "Royal or Nothing" strategy on my garage Game King. It was just too boring and depressing.

And at the end, I tried to get the infamous video poker bug to work on a three of a kind (it's supposed to work no matter what winning hand you have — I just wanted to do it with style), but I couldn't get it to work.

I played 8,300 hands, or about 35.96% of the hands that a royal, on average, will occur (23,081) using this strategy. I had 2,526 winning hands out of 8,300, or 30.4% of plays. (I noticed that the 30.4 winning percentage was also true at 4,900 plays.)

Here's the final accounting — I played 5x$0.10/hand, but I screwed up for about 100 hands and was playing 5x$0.20/hand. A 45.39% payback percentage!


link to original post

Do you know for a fact that your machine has the bug? Are you sure you know the steps to get it to work? Does your machine allow you to set the denominations, hand-pay requirements, etc? I think a vast majority of us would be very interested in seeing this in action and finally put to rest the question if one actually needs a hand pay or not.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
ChumpChange
ChumpChange 
  • Threads: 111
  • Posts: 4738
Joined: Jun 15, 2018
July 3rd, 2022 at 3:53:50 AM permalink
I'm starting to get $10 free plays for the first time in my life. Yay upgrading my card on Video Black Jack! Well, I'm getting my free play at the kiosk, then I go to the video poker machine, and use my PIN on the Player's Club card to withdraw the free play onto the machine. So I get 40 credits to start. Since Jacks or Better pays 2 credits for 2 pair, I'm gonna start with that. It's an 8/5 machine, 1 coin at a time. I'll play until I get Quads or Bust! If my quads takes me to less than 40 credits, I'll keep playing until a Full House or something puts me over, or until I have 0 credits. I'm gonna add all these little $10 wins to my VP bankroll, lol.
smoothgrh
smoothgrh
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 1251
Joined: Oct 26, 2011
July 3rd, 2022 at 9:48:27 AM permalink
My software was among the affected chips that IGT listed in its "Mandatory Notice" for compromised programs.
I could set the denominations and turned on the Double Up feature. I'm not sure if the hand-pay setting affects the bug — all my cash outs must be hand paid because my machine doesn't have a hopper or TITO.
I also would like to see a video of the bug!
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22272
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
July 3rd, 2022 at 6:58:54 PM permalink
Quote: smoothgrh

My software was among the affected chips that IGT listed in its "Mandatory Notice" for compromised programs.
I could set the denominations and turned on the Double Up feature. I'm not sure if the hand-pay setting affects the bug — all my cash outs must be hand paid because my machine doesn't have a hopper or TITO.
I also would like to see a video of the bug!
link to original post

If it doesn't have a bill validator then I don't think it will work.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
  • Threads: 167
  • Posts: 5937
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
July 3rd, 2022 at 7:01:19 PM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

Quote: smoothgrh

My software was among the affected chips that IGT listed in its "Mandatory Notice" for compromised programs.
I could set the denominations and turned on the Double Up feature. I'm not sure if the hand-pay setting affects the bug — all my cash outs must be hand paid because my machine doesn't have a hopper or TITO.
I also would like to see a video of the bug!
link to original post

If it doesn't have a bill validator then I don't think it will work.
link to original post



Do we really know how the bug was operated?
Have the actual details ever been published?
smoothgrh
smoothgrh
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 1251
Joined: Oct 26, 2011
July 3rd, 2022 at 7:13:37 PM permalink
My machine has a bill validator.

The details are in this Wired article.

I think how the bug works is this: when you win, you can hear the physical win meters inside the machine clicking and counting up. However, the meter doesn't start running immediately after a win — you have to do something else to trigger it, like pressing Deal. My guess is that in some software, it doesn't count up when you change games, so if you come back to that game in a higher denomination, it then registers the win.
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
  • Threads: 167
  • Posts: 5937
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
July 3rd, 2022 at 7:27:01 PM permalink
Quote: smoothgrh

My machine has a bill validator.

The details are in this Wired article.

I think how the bug works is this: when you win, you can hear the physical win meters inside the machine clicking and counting up. However, the meter doesn't start running immediately after a win — you have to do something else to trigger it, like pressing Deal. My guess is that in some software, it doesn't count up when you change games, so if you come back to that game in a higher denomination, it then registers the win.
link to original post



I have heard from NON OFFICIAL SOURCES that the Wired article deliberately published false information about how the bug operated.

Do you know for a fact the exact procedure for using the bug?
smoothgrh
smoothgrh
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 1251
Joined: Oct 26, 2011
July 3rd, 2022 at 7:49:00 PM permalink
If it's false, then I have no idea how it works.

I figured there'd be no reason to publish false information because the affected chips would be long gone by the time the article was published. (Or at least if some distributor or casino were foolish enough to not update the chips, they'd at least turn off the Double Up feature.)
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
  • Threads: 167
  • Posts: 5937
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
July 3rd, 2022 at 8:33:51 PM permalink
Quote: smoothgrh

If it's false, then I have no idea how it works.

I figured there'd be no reason to publish false information because the affected chips would be long gone by the time the article was published. (Or at least if some distributor or casino were foolish enough to not update the chips, they'd at least turn off the Double Up feature.)
link to original post



I've read the Wired article several times and I've never seen anything specific about pushing buttons including what buttons to push or when. All I've seen is some phrasing about magical buttons.
ChesterDog
ChesterDog
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 1480
Joined: Jul 26, 2010
July 3rd, 2022 at 8:49:40 PM permalink
Quote: AlanMendelson

Quote: smoothgrh

If it's false, then I have no idea how it works.

I figured there'd be no reason to publish false information because the affected chips would be long gone by the time the article was published. (Or at least if some distributor or casino were foolish enough to not update the chips, they'd at least turn off the Double Up feature.)
link to original post



I've read the Wired article several times and I've never seen anything specific about pushing buttons including what buttons to push or when. All I've seen is some phrasing about magical buttons.
link to original post



The Wired article spells out a 10-step procedure to utilize the bug.

Search for the word "locate" in the article to find step 1.
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
  • Threads: 167
  • Posts: 5937
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
July 3rd, 2022 at 9:28:14 PM permalink
Quote: ChesterDog

Quote: AlanMendelson

Quote: smoothgrh

If it's false, then I have no idea how it works.

I figured there'd be no reason to publish false information because the affected chips would be long gone by the time the article was published. (Or at least if some distributor or casino were foolish enough to not update the chips, they'd at least turn off the Double Up feature.)
link to original post



I've read the Wired article several times and I've never seen anything specific about pushing buttons including what buttons to push or when. All I've seen is some phrasing about magical buttons.
link to original post



The Wired article spells out a 10-step procedure to utilize the bug.

Search for the word "locate" in the article to find step 1.
link to original post



There are NON OFFICIAL SOURCES who said Wired deliberately published the wrong sequence.

So again... who has confirmed this sequence?
DRich
DRich
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 11596
Joined: Jul 6, 2012
July 4th, 2022 at 2:40:13 PM permalink
Quote: smoothgrh

If it's false, then I have no idea how it works.

I figured there'd be no reason to publish false information because the affected chips would be long gone by the time the article was published. (Or at least if some distributor or casino were foolish enough to not update the chips, they'd at least turn off the Double Up feature.)
link to original post



I found one of the chips in Southern Nevada about two years ago.
At my age, a "Life In Prison" sentence is not much of a deterrent.
AlanMendelson
AlanMendelson
  • Threads: 167
  • Posts: 5937
Joined: Oct 5, 2011
July 4th, 2022 at 3:27:59 PM permalink
Quote: DRich

Quote: smoothgrh

If it's false, then I have no idea how it works.

I figured there'd be no reason to publish false information because the affected chips would be long gone by the time the article was published. (Or at least if some distributor or casino were foolish enough to not update the chips, they'd at least turn off the Double Up feature.)
link to original post



I found one of the chips in Southern Nevada about two years ago.
link to original post



Are you going to keep us in suspense? Was the Wired article correct?
DRich
DRich
  • Threads: 86
  • Posts: 11596
Joined: Jul 6, 2012
July 4th, 2022 at 4:13:20 PM permalink
Quote: AlanMendelson

Quote: DRich

Quote: smoothgrh

If it's false, then I have no idea how it works.

I figured there'd be no reason to publish false information because the affected chips would be long gone by the time the article was published. (Or at least if some distributor or casino were foolish enough to not update the chips, they'd at least turn off the Double Up feature.)
link to original post



I found one of the chips in Southern Nevada about two years ago.
link to original post



Are you going to keep us in suspense? Was the Wired article correct?
link to original post



I have no idea. I notified the Nevada Gaming Board and had it replaced.
At my age, a "Life In Prison" sentence is not much of a deterrent.
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22272
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
Thanked by
smoothgrh
July 4th, 2022 at 7:27:35 PM permalink
Quote: AlanMendelson

Quote: ChesterDog

Quote: AlanMendelson

Quote: smoothgrh

If it's false, then I have no idea how it works.

I figured there'd be no reason to publish false information because the affected chips would be long gone by the time the article was published. (Or at least if some distributor or casino were foolish enough to not update the chips, they'd at least turn off the Double Up feature.)
link to original post



I've read the Wired article several times and I've never seen anything specific about pushing buttons including what buttons to push or when. All I've seen is some phrasing about magical buttons.
link to original post



The Wired article spells out a 10-step procedure to utilize the bug.

Search for the word "locate" in the article to find step 1.
link to original post



There are NON OFFICIAL SOURCES who said Wired deliberately published the wrong sequence.

So again... who has confirmed this sequence?
link to original post

I sent you intrusions for a key aspect, if it doesn't allow this, then it's not glitched.
Last edited by: AxelWolf on Jul 4, 2022
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
  • Jump to: