A machine that is due is
a glittering myth
20 August 2007
By Mark Pilarski
Dear Mark: A slot attendant in a UP casino (what
Larry refers to with "UP" is a casino in
Michigan's Upper Peninsula) advised me to play a
particular one-dollar progressive video poker
machine because it was due to hit. It didn't,
and I ended up losing my evening's allotted
bankroll. Did she really have a clue on the
machine's ability to hit a royal flush? Larry L.
If the slot attendant told you that you could
save a ton money on your car insurance by
switching to GEICO, maybe after fifteen minutes
(actually it takes around 40, I've tried it),
she might be right. But her prognosticating
powers are limited to parroting television
commercials, and not to when a royal flush is
due. But you knew that all along, eh?
No matter how long it has been since that
machine had last hit a royal flush, the random
number generator used to shuffle the cards lacks
memory, and it certainly doesn't know that some
poor schlub's aboard, in desperate need of the
progressive jackpot to make their readjusted
sub-prime mortgage payment. The probability of a
royal flush on each and every hand remains the
same, approximately 40,000 to one.
What you are doing right, Larry, is having the
discipline of an "allotted bankroll" for your
single gambling session. No player should ever
bring his or her entire bankroll to any one
session. Players should always divide their
bankroll into the number of days they'll be
gambling, then divide each daily bankroll into
the number of sessions they will be playing each
day.
As for a session bankroll, I recommend at least
200 bets, but it also depends upon several
factors: The game you're playing, denomination
of the machine, session length (how many hands),
quality of your video poker play, and how much
you're willing to lose. But you knew that all
along, too, eh?
Dear Mark: Referring to your column in the Reno
Gazette-Journal June 7, 2007 about the poor odds
offered by a 6-to-5 payoff for a blackjack: Most
casinos in Reno, if they offer a single deck at
all, have enough "rules" to change the odds from
an ordinary single deck game so that they are
grossly in favor of the house. For example,
Harrah's offers a single deck game, and they may
pay 3-to-2 (I can't recall), but you cannot
double down on anything but a 10 or 11.
It's a lot more fun for us geezers to play the
6-to-5 game offered across the street where the
6-to-5 game allows splitting, re-splitting,
doubling down on anything, etc. It's much more
like a game of blackjack should be. And, with
these liberal rules, I suspect the odds are
favorable if not the very best. John O.
Two decades ago when I was pitching cardboard on
a single deck game, even then you couldn't
double unless you possessed a 10 or 11. My beef,
John, in that June 7th column, was that casinos
were offering single-deck blackjack games that
pay a natural blackjack 6-to-5 instead of the
traditional 3-to-2. This variation of
single-deck blackjack being offered to the
unmindful was taking a house edge as miniscule
as 0.18%, and with one slight rule variation,
abracadabra; the casino advantage became 1.45%.
I believe this enormous 800% increase in the
house edge is far too prohibitive. And even if
you were to add up all the rule benefits you may
get down the road, you are still not quite at
that 0.18% house edge offered on a single deck,
or even on a multi-deck game with liberal rules.
That said, I will without end recommend that
blackjack players always play in a casino that
offers the best playing conditions. Look for the
following combination of rules favorable to the
player: A single deck game (one that doesn't pay
off 6-to-5 for a blackjack), and on a multiple
deck game; surrender, both early and late,
doubling down allowed on any two cards, doubling
allowed after splitting pairs, multiple pair
splitting allowed, re-splitting aces, dealers
that stand on a soft 17, and deep-deck
penetration. That's pretty much what you geezers
should be searching for, and getting 7-to-5 for
your snapper.
Gambling Wisdom of the Week: "I simply don't
subscribe to silly superstitions, but I do
wholeheartedly believe in my instincts. When I
gamble, I take along my most trusted friend. I
never gamble with a fool." John Gollehon, Strike
The Casino With Winning Strategies
|
