Windfall or downfall?
6 July 2007
By Mark Pilarski
Dear Mark: I finally hit my first royal flush in
over twenty years of playing video poker, but
first, my confession. I didn't play -- as you
always recommend -- the full amount required. I
lost out on a 4,000-coin payout and received
just 500 coins because I only played two
dollars. I just wanted to share what happened to
me with your readers so that others will not
experience my win/lose event. Anita R.
It's hard to fashion a graceful way to put
congratulations and condolences in the same
sentence, but I suppose you deserve both.
Correct you are, Anita, that I have always
recommended that you should play the full
amount, but it's still the players
responsibility to eyeball all the posted
information concerning the number of coins to
insert, lines needed to be lit, prizes or awards
to be had.
Had Anita looked at the paytable that was smack
dab in front of her, one small though not
infinitesimal caveat should have set off
pre-jackpot bells and whistles. She should have
noticed a non-symmetrical progression on the
royal flush payline.
A typical royal flush payline looks like this:
250, 500, 750, 1000, 4000. She missed the jump
in payout when a fifth coin is inserted. That
royal flush is so dominant in the casino payout
calculations for video poker machines that not
playing that fifth coin not only cost her
champagne wishes and caviar dreams, but by
playing the machine short, it will cost her 12%
over the long haul. Hey, and you slot players,
listen up.
For almost all multiple-pay and multiple-play
slot machines, playing the maximum coin level
also yields the best percentage payback. Again,
note the proportional differences among payoff
categories. For example: One coin inserted pays
500 coins, two coins 1000, and three coins a
tidy 4000. Pay dirt comes when you play three
coins, but play fewer, you payback spirals
south.
My parting thought is that if you can afford to
play the maximum coins allowed, do so. If you
can't hack it on a one-dollar one-armed bandit,
switch to a lower denomination machine.
Dear Mark: In a recent article, a writer asked
about blackjack where the dealer does not take a
hole card until all hands have been played. I
got on a cruse ship in San Juan, PR, and was
introduced to this game. I watched a few hands
and ran like hell. All the casinos that I could
find played with this same rule. What a license
to steal! Charlie L.
Living here in the states, I'm no expert on
Puerto Rican blackjack (yep, I know people born
in Puerto Rico are statutory U.S. citizens), but
looking down on it from 36,000 feet, there is no
need to go into a sorry Charlie tizzy unless the
player loses their entire wager on splits or
doubling against a natural.
As I have stated before, the casino advantage
remains the same whether the dealer takes a hole
card and peeks, or waits until play is complete.
Here's the deal, Charlie. If a player does split
or double, and only the original bet is swept
into the tray when the dealer has a natural,
then the casinos don't have your called "license
to steal" over a player.
The abracadabra black magic the casino does
possess over all players is that you must act on
your hand before the dealer takes action on his
or hers. That is where their advantage lies.
Gambling Wisdom of the Week: "It's not whether
you won or lost, but how many bad-beat stories
you were able to tell." -- Grantland Rice,
Sportswriter
|
