Ask the Wizard #277
October 12th, 2011 at 12:29:03 PM
permalink
I've just finished my latest Ask the Wizard column. Before I announce it on my Odds site, please have a look. I welcome all comments and corrections, as always.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 12th, 2011 at 12:59:19 PM
permalink
That was the most intense "Ask the Wizard" in a long time. I had to park my brain by the side of the highway to let the transmission cool off....
The only suggestions I have would be to put the title of the magazine article DorthyGale cites in quotes, ("A Favorable Side Bet in Nevada Baccarat") or italics.
The other would be to add column and row "level" headings to the tables in the matrix explanations.
Still smokin...
The only suggestions I have would be to put the title of the magazine article DorthyGale cites in quotes, ("A Favorable Side Bet in Nevada Baccarat") or italics.
The other would be to add column and row "level" headings to the tables in the matrix explanations.
Still smokin...
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
October 12th, 2011 at 1:04:03 PM
permalink
Shouldn't the first question read, "Why is it that the basic strategy says to HIT on 16 Vs. 10,..."
October 12th, 2011 at 1:11:12 PM
permalink
This may not be relevant, but I noticed the date of the column is in 2010.
October 12th, 2011 at 1:18:48 PM
permalink
Quote:in his article A Favorable Side Bet in Nevada Baccarat
for titles of articles, put them in quotes, they say
edit: someone else beat me to it. But italics are for the name of the mag, quotes for the articles, that one is fairly easy to remember. Or maybe these days it matters less
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
October 12th, 2011 at 1:20:15 PM
permalink
You're right, I meant HIT 16 against 10. Doh!
About titling the rows and columns in the matrices -- I thought about that. However, they are matrices, not tables. Math books on matrices never label the rows and columns, so I didn't want to be the first. Besides, I try to explain what each cell is.
About titling the rows and columns in the matrices -- I thought about that. However, they are matrices, not tables. Math books on matrices never label the rows and columns, so I didn't want to be the first. Besides, I try to explain what each cell is.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 12th, 2011 at 1:24:41 PM
permalink
25,000,000 hands of video poker!!!! Any Idea of how many hours that dude has spent playing at a machine and what his expected loss would be?
when man determined to destroy himself he picked the was of shall and finding only why smashed it into because."
— E.E. Cummings
October 12th, 2011 at 2:01:14 PM
permalink
Quote: Scotty7125,000,000 hands of video poker!!!! Any Idea of how many hours that dude has spent playing at a machine and what his expected loss would be?
I know the person who asked that pretty well. Assuming 1,000 hands an hour, and 40 hours of play per week, one could play 25 million hands in 12 years. I can't reveal who asked the question, but that is quite plausible for this particular individual.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 12th, 2011 at 2:14:12 PM
permalink
The Wiz posted right before me and made me recheck my work, but he's off by a factor of 7.
Even at a sustained rate of 1200 hands/hour (3 seconds per hand), that's over 20,800 hours or about as much as you work in an entire decade. Put another way, it's equivalent to playing VP for three hours every single day for nineteen years.
Now, I can't conclusively rule that out, but I hope someone isn't devoting that much of their life to playing video poker.
Wiz calculated 625 weeks of play (1000 hands/hour * 40 hours/week) but then divided by days per year (365) to arrive at 1.7 years. If you divide by weeks per year instead (52) then you get 625/52 = 12 years.
Whether it's 10 or 12 years, the point is the same.
Even at a sustained rate of 1200 hands/hour (3 seconds per hand), that's over 20,800 hours or about as much as you work in an entire decade. Put another way, it's equivalent to playing VP for three hours every single day for nineteen years.
Now, I can't conclusively rule that out, but I hope someone isn't devoting that much of their life to playing video poker.
Wiz calculated 625 weeks of play (1000 hands/hour * 40 hours/week) but then divided by days per year (365) to arrive at 1.7 years. If you divide by weeks per year instead (52) then you get 625/52 = 12 years.
Whether it's 10 or 12 years, the point is the same.
"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
October 12th, 2011 at 3:13:37 PM
permalink
Quote: Scotty7125,000,000 hands of video poker!!!! Any Idea of how many hours that dude has spent playing at a machine and what his expected loss would be?
At 25c VP, that's $31.25 million coin in, and on a 99.5% pay back machine, an expected loss of $156,250.
You'd expect around 625 Royals in that time if playing JoB (or a close variant). How close the player is to the expected loss will be very close to a function of the number of Royals they did hit.
Not read the article, so no doubt there's more details there. You'd get some $156,000 loss in comp dollars and various offers, no doubt. If there's a non-cash aspect, then the value of those offers is in the eye of the reciever (for instance a free room isn't necessarily worth what you would have paid for that room).
"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
October 12th, 2011 at 3:18:27 PM
permalink
Quote: Scotty7125,000,000 hands of video poker!!!! Any Idea of how many hours that dude has spent playing at a machine and what his expected loss would be?
Expected loss probably negative, which means expected gain.
October 12th, 2011 at 3:36:29 PM
permalink
You're right, I was off by a factor of 7, which I just fixed.
Let's just say that not all video poker is negative EV. During the 80s and 90s there was no shortage of positive games, which is when most of this play was probably done.
Let's just say that not all video poker is negative EV. During the 80s and 90s there was no shortage of positive games, which is when most of this play was probably done.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 12th, 2011 at 4:06:24 PM
permalink
Only thing I might add would be when or if the patent for Carribean Stud Poker expires and it hits the public domain.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
October 12th, 2011 at 5:32:57 PM
permalink
Quote: WizardYou're right, I was off by a factor of 7, which I just fixed.
Let's just say that not all video poker is negative EV. During the 80s and 90s there was no shortage of positive games, which is when most of this play was probably done.
Oh, I don't doubt that the player was playing +EV games. I just question the rationale behind spending the equivalent of 12 years' full-time employment sitting in front of a video screen, pushing buttons, and hoping the screen shows you the results you want. . .
Oh wait, never mind. I used to be a software engineer so I did that too. :)
"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
October 12th, 2011 at 6:04:08 PM
permalink
Quote: AZDuffmanOnly thing I might add would be when or if the patent for Carribean Stud Poker expires and it hits the public domain.
Good suggestion. Casino game patents last 20 years, so Caribbean Stud would have expired in 2009. I tend to think most novelty games have a useful lifespan of less than 20 years anyway.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 12th, 2011 at 6:35:55 PM
permalink
Quote: WizardGood suggestion. Casino game patents last 20 years, so Caribbean Stud would have expired in 2009. I tend to think most novelty games have a useful lifespan of less than 20 years anyway.
Actually, the patent laws from 1989 stated that patents expire 17 years from publication, so it would have expired in 2006. They changed to the 20 year term in 1995, as part of the GATT agreement in 1994. But it's quite interesting, much like the high tech industries, that casino patents have shelf lives that usually are eclipsed by the patent term.
-B
October 12th, 2011 at 7:05:14 PM
permalink
Quote: toastcmuActually, the patent laws from 1989 stated that patents expire 17 years from publication, so it would have expired in 2006. They changed to the 20 year term in 1995, as part of the GATT agreement in 1994. But it's quite interesting, much like the high tech industries, that casino patents have shelf lives that usually are eclipsed by the patent term.
-B
Did they just change a lot of this again? I read the USA is joining the rest of the world and moving from a first-to-invent to a first-to-register system. Did terms change as well.
Wiz, also would this mean I could set up a CSP layout and call it "Carribean Stud Poker" or would I have to call it something else? Sorry to be a Danny Detail on it all.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
October 12th, 2011 at 7:10:36 PM
permalink
The name is a trademark / copyright issue, not a patent one. TESS shows several live registered trademarks for "Caribbean Stud".
"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
October 12th, 2011 at 7:21:16 PM
permalink
I assume you are talking about a casino game that actually made it , not the first one patented ?? In 1977 someone patented an electronic dice game for casinos. That same year also a horse race game for casino play was patented. In 1980 several patents were issued for electronic roulette.
One patent was to suspend a color TV camera above the roulette wheel and have it rotate the same speed as the wheel. Then it was to be broadcasted to monitors where bettors could watch in slo-mo or stop action.
One patent was to suspend a color TV camera above the roulette wheel and have it rotate the same speed as the wheel. Then it was to be broadcasted to monitors where bettors could watch in slo-mo or stop action.
October 12th, 2011 at 7:25:47 PM
permalink
Good comments. Please keep them coming.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 12th, 2011 at 7:32:13 PM
permalink
4,448,419
Telnaes May 15, 1984
Slightly off topic The above patent was filed in 1982. Doubt it went anywhere. Some silly idea of using a RNG on a slot machine.
LOL !!
Telnaes May 15, 1984
Slightly off topic The above patent was filed in 1982. Doubt it went anywhere. Some silly idea of using a RNG on a slot machine.
LOL !!
October 12th, 2011 at 7:37:27 PM
permalink
Quote: toastcmuActually, the patent laws from 1989 stated that patents expire 17 years from publication, so it would have expired in 2006. They changed to the 20 year term in 1995, as part of the GATT agreement in 1994. But it's quite interesting, much like the high tech industries, that casino patents have shelf lives that usually are eclipsed by the patent term.
I ran this by my patent attorney, and he confirmed you're right. The period was expended from 17 to 20 years in 1995.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 12th, 2011 at 8:44:41 PM
permalink
My only comment would be for the regular reader, they will scroll down through all the math to see the final odds, but it is great you put how you obtained the number in as well.
October 12th, 2011 at 9:10:39 PM
permalink
Quote: BozMy only comment would be for the regular reader, they will scroll down through all the math to see the final odds, but it is great you put how you obtained the number in as well.
I would be remiss in my duties if I didn't go through the math.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
October 13th, 2011 at 10:02:28 AM
permalink
Quote: MathExtremistOh, I don't doubt that the player was playing +EV games. I just question the rationale behind spending the equivalent of 12 years' full-time employment sitting in front of a video screen, pushing buttons, and hoping the screen shows you the results you want. . .
Oh wait, never mind. I used to be a software engineer so I did that too. :)
Hehe, I really enjoyed that one.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
October 29th, 2011 at 11:27:13 AM
permalink
Hey wizard! Love you, love your book, G102. Have a question for you. I want to play "by the math" blackjack for one month. My goal (just a hope) is to start only with $500 dedicate myself to my local and close casino 5 days a week with a starting on hand bank roll of $150 a day (unless you suggest otherwise) and by the end of the month intent in a $1000 profit. Without simply betting it all ($500) on two hands I would rather take the $150 and I was thinking $50, but I am not here for my own ideas, I would like yours. I am also concidering triple attack black at once out of the month... Your thoughts would be appriciated. Im a huge fan and speak of your book and website often. Sinclerly, Tyler of arizona 25 yrs old
October 29th, 2011 at 1:59:59 PM
permalink
Thanks for buying my book. I heard somebody out there bought a copy. Can you make a new thread for your question under the blackjack forum.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
November 2nd, 2011 at 9:52:41 AM
permalink
can you tell me what happens to the house edge if spanish 21 is played with a single spanish deck?
found the fault with dgs sofware on 3/3 sites tested (thousands of hands). want to know if i should be asking for refunds.
thanks
found the fault with dgs sofware on 3/3 sites tested (thousands of hands). want to know if i should be asking for refunds.
thanks
November 2nd, 2011 at 10:11:58 AM
permalink
From Ask the Wizard #277 first question:
"Why is it that the basic strategy says to hit on 16 vs. 10, while the Hi-Lo count says to stand on a count greater than or equal to zero? Isn't the basic strategy based on a full shoe, thus with a count of zero? It would seem both can't be right. Jufo81"
I am Jufo81 and I don't think I have ever asked that question...? I believe it was someone else.
"Why is it that the basic strategy says to hit on 16 vs. 10, while the Hi-Lo count says to stand on a count greater than or equal to zero? Isn't the basic strategy based on a full shoe, thus with a count of zero? It would seem both can't be right. Jufo81"
I am Jufo81 and I don't think I have ever asked that question...? I believe it was someone else.
November 2nd, 2011 at 10:16:33 AM
permalink
Quote: Jufo81I am Jufo81 and I don't think I have ever asked that question...? I believe it was someone else.
Sorry. I just made it good 'ol Anon E. Mouse. I don't know why I put your name there. Probably a copy&paste from another question.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
