Ask the Slot Expert: Lessons for game shows from gambling - part 2

Some of the lessons we learn from gambling can be used for playing game shows and vice versa. Last week we looked at the importance of knowing the rules of the game you are playing.

Know the math

This week let's look at the importance of knowing the math of the game you are playing. I don't mean that you should be able to derive blackjack's basic strategy or a calculate a video poker paytable strategy, but you should know those strategies. Similarly, you should know which bets are better than others at a craps or baccarat table.

The current game show in which some math knowledge is useful is the new incarnation of Deal or No Deal, Deal or No Deal Island, which is sort of like a cross between Survivor and Deal or No Deal.

Briefly, the contestants compete in a mission to determine the six big values that will be in the cases in the end, Deal or No Deal, game. The other six cases have low values, from a penny to a grand. The player chooses a case to be their case.

Then the game consists of multiple iterations of opening cases and getting an offer from the banker to end the game. If the player accepts the offer and the offer is greater than the amount in their case, it is a good deal and the player gets to choose a contestant to be eliminated. If the offer amount is less than the value in the case, it is a bad deal and the player is eliminated.

If the player refuses the offer, we repeat the above until we reach the final offer. For the final offer, there are two cases. One is the player's and the other is the last remaining unopened case of the original 12.

If a player accepts an offer, that value is added to the grand prize, which the last player standing will play for. If the player rejects all offers, the value in their case is added to the grand prize.

As I said last week, Dr. Will, a Big Brother star player, liked to play mind games with his fellow contestants. When he played Deal or No Deal, he chose case 1 as his case. When he had to open cases, he opened them in numerical order.

Some of the other contestants said, "What kind of a strategy is that?"

It's a perfectly good strategy and it's no better or worse than choosing cases based on birthdays, number of relatives, favorite players' jersey numbers, and other systems players have used. The player has no knowledge about the values in the cases, so it is impossible to devise a strategy.

Players need a strategy, though, for accepting offers.

The banker's offer is always somewhere between the lowest and the highest values still available. The game will always end in a 50/50 proposition because there are only two cases left unopened, so two values are still available and the offer will be between them.

The host says that the object of the end game is to add as much as you can to the grand prize. No it isn't. The object of the end game is to make a good deal and not be eliminated, regardless of how much is added to the grand prize.

Much of the time, there are an equal number of cases with values below the offer and above the offer. If players accept the offer, they have a 50/50 chance of it being good. They might as well keep opening cases until the final offer in the hopes that they will open low-value cases and have a larger offer.

It's not like plain vanilla Deal or No Deal, where the player left with the money. There was no penalty for making a bad deal, so the players might as well take an offer when they are satisfied with the amount. A bird in the hand, as it were.

Players should be looking out for instances in which there is an imbalance of values above and below the offer. They should consider accepting an offer when there are more values below it than above it. Instead of 50/50, now there is a greater probability that the value of the offer will be higher than the value in their case and they'll make a good deal.

A player recently accepted an offer when there were two values above it and one below. Curiously, the same players who criticized the "numerical order" picking strategy are adept at determining the odds of making a good deal and said that she shouldn't take the offer.

When she opened her case, the value was below the offer and she was eliminated. Oops.

Boston Rob talks to the eliminated players on his after show on Peacock. After discussing her strategy and her relationships with the other players, he concluded the interview by saying that he had to criticize how she played the end game. He said, in his Boston accent, it was "no bueno."

He asked her what she was thinking when she accepted that offer. With two values left above the offer, there was a 66% chance that the value in her case was above the offer and that she would make a bad deal.

She said that the offer was high and she wanted to be able to add a high value to the grand prize.

Rob said that it doesn't make any difference how much you add to the grand prize if you're not around to play for it. He said that the object of the end game is to not be eliminated. It doesn't matter how much you add.

Watching her add money to the pot and losing the chance to win it reminded me of seeing players who play progressive machines and don't bet enough to be able to win the progressive. Like her, they're just growing the pot without having a chance to win it.

If you would like to see more non-smoking areas on slot floors in Las Vegas, please sign my petition on change.org.

Send your slot and video poker questions to John Robison, Slot Expert™, at slotexpert@slotexpert.com.

Copyright © John Robison. Slot Expert and Ask the Slot Expert are trademarks of John Robison.