![]() Newsletter Signup
Stay informed with the
NEW Casino City Times newsletter! Recent Articles
Best of Elliot Frome
|
Gaming Guru
Is Payback Overrated?28 April 2005
To prove my point, I created two versions of a roulette wheel game on my computer. In the first one, the Player bets 'Even' each time, and if a '0' comes up, it is a push. The payback of this game is exactly 100%, as the Player will be paid even money each time a even number comes up. In the second scenario, I've used the traditional payouts, whereby the Player wins even money when a even number comes up, and loses half of his wager when the '0' comes up. The payback of this version is 98.65%. So, the difference is about 1.35% or a bit less than the difference between a full-pay jacks or better and an 8/5 jacks or better (where the difference is just over 2%). So, we all know that over the 'long run', the first version of the game will
return 1.35% more than the second version. What is the impact for a relatively
short session? The results are STAGGERING! I simulated one million sessions
of 1000 games each and recorded the results. For Video Poker, 1000 hands would
be about 2 hours or playing for the average player. The results of the simulation
are shown in the table below:
I have to admit, that even I was surprised by the impact. With only a 1.35% difference in payback, the game changed from one where you had an equal chance of walking away a winner or a loser, to one where you were going to lose twice as many times as you win! When I first got the results, I went back to check the program and make sure there wasn't a mistake. But then, I began to think about it. On average, in 1000 'hands', the '0' will come up (on average) about 27 times. For each of these 27 times, the Player would lose half a unit or 13-14 units per session. This means that every session, that in the first version, wound up anywhere from a push to the Player winning 13 units would now likely become a loss. When looking at the detailed results (not shown above), it turns out that this accounted for about 17% of all sessions. Lo and behold, an additional 17% of our sessions were turned into losers in the second version of the game. Of course, Video Poker is a bit different than our roulette game above. First of all, it has a much longer cycle than the roulette game. With only 37 different outcomes as compared to the millions in Video Poker, we cannot expect the results to be so clearly defined so quickly. Video Poker is also much more volatile than roulette, especially when we're just betting 'even' all the time. In a short session of 2-3 hours, hitting a four of a kind just once more than 'average' will almost guarantee a winning session. Hit a Royal in a short session and you can be SURE to walk away a big winner. At the same time, some of the same concepts do apply. When you play 8/5 jacks or better video poker instead of a full-pay machine, you will get 1 less unit every time you hit a Flush or a Straight. On average, these hands will each occur about once in 90 hands. In a 1000 hand session, you'll hit these hands a total of about 22 times on average. This means you won't be receiving those additional 22 units. Playing max-play quarters, this would translate into 110 quarters or $27.50. This means that many of the sessions that you would play on a full-pay machine where you would walk away up $25 or less will now be LOSING sessions. A session on a full-pay machine in which you would win $50 is reduced to a $25 winning session. So, not only does playing lower paying machines decrease your chances of having a winning session, it also DECREASES the amount you will win in a winning session and INCREASES the amount you will lose in a losing session. This example used only a 1.35% difference in payback. Imagine what you are
doing to your bankroll when you sit down and play a 96% game when perfectly
good 99.5% games can be found nearby! Recent Articles
Best of Elliot Frome
Elliot Frome |
Elliot Frome |