4 ms·

There are lots of +EV (expected value) opportunities in many house favored games of chance including slots and video poker. It's pretty simple. The house edge i

by rjf72 8y ago

There are lots of +EV (expected value) opportunities in many house favored games of chance including slots and video poker. It's pretty simple. The house edge is x per game. Many games have a jackpot that adds a fixed value per hand. When that added value exceeds x it suddenly becomes profitable to play the game. That doesn't mean you'll earn money after 100 or even 1000 plays. But it does mean that as your plays approach infinity, so does your wallet. In effect the role of the house and the player swaps. Normally the house wins in the longrun, but can get wiped out in the short run. If you consider the jackpot the house's money (which it isn't - which is why this does not matter to them), then suddenly it becomes the case that the house may wipe out players in the short run, but will lose money in the long run. In any case the point here is that variance is brutal when you're talking about edges that come from rare events. But if you enjoy playing the games, then knowing you're doing so at an edge is even more enjoyable. And it's also a fun little thing to work out on your own for those that enjoy math. --- This is all an aside on "slot experts" and other mathematical games of chance. I've no idea about coin pushing stuff or advantage in those sort of games.

Simple_Guy 8y ago
The house is not getting wiped out. Their bank is too large to be wiped out by a slot machine. They are only threatened with high rollers playing 10M a hand baccarat. $10 slot variance will never harm a casino.
yters 8y ago
In any game of chance where the gambler has finite money and the house has infinite money, the gambler always loses if he plays long enough, even if the odds are in his favor.
- Simple_Guy 8y ago
  This is only true if the gambler does not vary the size of his bet.
  - joshka 8y ago
    And this is why the house defines rules on: * Minimum bet size * Maximum bet size * Whether they'll let you change bet sizes during play
  - yters 8y ago
    Correct if the gambler's money can be divided infinitely small. But if there is a lower limit, like 1c, then ruin is inevitable.
    - Simple_Guy 8y ago
      heat death is also inevitable. the mean time before ruin is also important
- benj111 8y ago
  Which house has infinite money?
mherdeg 8y ago
As a very infrequent gambler (I love Vegas but make it out there 1x/year or less) it has been fascinating to see how playing a +EV game changes my perspective on casino gambling from "This is entertainment" to "This is work". Three or four times I have spent an hour at a Sam's Town full pay deuces wild video poker machine, where you wager $0.50 per hand and your expected value is $100.76 per $100 wagered. This works out to like $5/hr with perfect play at a moderate pace. This earning rate is one of the least bad outcomes at the casino -- you'd be spending $10/hr on average at a cheap, slow craps table playing the pass-line bet. Now, if you're gambling at the casino and the game is bound to earn you money, this should be maximum fun, right? Not only do you get the thrill of seeing whether the random number generator gave you money, but also there's no real downside because if you play long enough you'll come out ahead? Strangely that's not how it works out. There's some kind of mindset shift between negative-EV-play and positive-EV play. When I'm losing money at craps or blackjack it's like "oh, this is fun, we're rolling the dice, we're flipping the cards, some of us will probably win a bit and some of us will lose money but we had fun." When I'm earning money very slowly at video poker it's like, "uhh, I guess the math is interesting here but I think I have fully understood the spreadsheet and, uh, am I seriously being paid $5/hr to perfectly implement a lookup table? Could I be earning more with Mechanical Turk?". I somehow managed to hit that rare high-variance event once (a natural royal flush, expected every 45,000 hands or so?) and have very little interest in ever playing these slow-burn +EV games again. This in turn kind of makes all gambling boring -- if the +EV stuff isn't worth it, what is the point of any of it?.
- Simple_Guy 8y ago
  The point is you try to find the opportunities that pay more than $5/hr. Poker for example, is quite fun, more profitable and more social too. The strategy is deep but not yet perfected, so you are constantly learning. fun.
- taurath 8y ago
  From researching video poker +EV people, their lifestyle and their expected earnings, it seems a terrible terrible way to make a living - at most you’re getting like $40k a year, sitting in a casino in front of the same game for 8-10 hours and making no real choices. It’s pretty close to one of the worst lifestyles I could think of.

by rjf72 8y ago

Simple_Guy 8y ago

The house is not getting wiped out. Their bank is too large to be wiped out by a slot machine. They are only threatened with high rollers playing 10M a hand baccarat. $10 slot variance will never harm a casino.

yters 8y ago

In any game of chance where the gambler has finite money and the house has infinite money, the gambler always loses if he plays long enough, even if the odds are in his favor.

Simple_Guy 8y ago
This is only true if the gambler does not vary the size of his bet.
- joshka 8y ago
  And this is why the house defines rules on: * Minimum bet size * Maximum bet size * Whether they'll let you change bet sizes during play
- yters 8y ago
  Correct if the gambler's money can be divided infinitely small. But if there is a lower limit, like 1c, then ruin is inevitable.
  - Simple_Guy 8y ago
    heat death is also inevitable. the mean time before ruin is also important
benj111 8y ago
Which house has infinite money?

mherdeg 8y ago

As a very infrequent gambler (I love Vegas but make it out there 1x/year or less) it has been fascinating to see how playing a +EV game changes my perspective on casino gambling from "This is entertainment" to "This is work". Three or four times I have spent an hour at a Sam's Town full pay deuces wild video poker machine, where you wager $0.50 per hand and your expected value is $100.76 per $100 wagered. This works out to like $5/hr with perfect play at a moderate pace. This earning rate is one of the least bad outcomes at the casino -- you'd be spending $10/hr on average at a cheap, slow craps table playing the pass-line bet. Now, if you're gambling at the casino and the game is bound to earn you money, this should be maximum fun, right? Not only do you get the thrill of seeing whether the random number generator gave you money, but also there's no real downside because if you play long enough you'll come out ahead? Strangely that's not how it works out. There's some kind of mindset shift between negative-EV-play and positive-EV play. When I'm losing money at craps or blackjack it's like "oh, this is fun, we're rolling the dice, we're flipping the cards, some of us will probably win a bit and some of us will lose money but we had fun." When I'm earning money very slowly at video poker it's like, "uhh, I guess the math is interesting here but I think I have fully understood the spreadsheet and, uh, am I seriously being paid $5/hr to perfectly implement a lookup table? Could I be earning more with Mechanical Turk?". I somehow managed to hit that rare high-variance event once (a natural royal flush, expected every 45,000 hands or so?) and have very little interest in ever playing these slow-burn +EV games again. This in turn kind of makes all gambling boring -- if the +EV stuff isn't worth it, what is the point of any of it?.

Simple_Guy 8y ago
The point is you try to find the opportunities that pay more than $5/hr. Poker for example, is quite fun, more profitable and more social too. The strategy is deep but not yet perfected, so you are constantly learning. fun.
taurath 8y ago
From researching video poker +EV people, their lifestyle and their expected earnings, it seems a terrible terrible way to make a living - at most you’re getting like $40k a year, sitting in a casino in front of the same game for 8-10 hours and making no real choices. It’s pretty close to one of the worst lifestyles I could think of.