Climbing the denomination ladder

May 22, 2007 2:48 AM

If I’m not mistaken, I’d say that video poker players are changing over from being single-denomination players to a more aggressive/progressive type of approach. I know the ones that I train are doing it but what about all the others?

Some hard core regulars claim some sort of edge over the casinos at single lower-denominational (quarters) play supposedly because that’s mainly where the casinos insert games that theoretically pay out greater than 100 percent.

But from the massive amount of correspondence I receive it looks like many players are finally understanding that with a well thought-out plan, playing three, four, five or even more denominations offers the player a much better chance of winning. If they have the nerves and the bankroll, that is.

It’s important for everyone to remember that no matter which strategy you choose to use, the game of video poker is unforgiving and has taken more scalps than any other casino game. One of your first priorities should be to understand your own personal gambling bankroll, fit it to your goals, and learn how to stay clear of the many new games coming out on the market all the time.

Because all these fancy new games are being marketed by famous names, manufacturers and advertised on many gaming sites, they intrigue players.

I’ve been able to look the other way with all these new games flooding the casinos, and I have no doubt that’s one of the reasons why I’m able to consistently do well year after year no matter what the distractions.

One thing people who want to win must pay attention to is the basics. Do you remember years ago when you sat down with the guys to play a "friendly" game of poker? It all started off as a fun time with games everyone could understand. Then as a few players got bored they’d concoct games that seemed to thrill them but those of us who were doing well from the start wanted no part of the nonsense.

That’s where we’ve gotten to today with video poker. Sure, the new games offer bells, whistles and all kinds of excitement never before experienced with something as "monotonous" as Jacks or Better. But my friends, the manufacturers aren’t coming out with these crazy games to give you and me a better chance of taking more money home from their lifeblood — the casinos.

Most people I speak to or chat with understand the concept of progressing in denomination in order to afford a better opportunity of winning. The detractors, of course, usually will come along and input their whining about how it’s nothing more than that dreaded Martingale style of gambling. But you know, if they were the experts instead of me they wouldn’t be making up that stuff and speaking out of turn now would they.

Let’s look at it this way as form of simplification. Say you came into a casino with $1000 and chose to play one of those "positive EV" 10/7 Double Bonus Poker games at the 50¡ level. That’s 2000 credits, and at the start it sure does look and feel good, does it not? Especially if you know optimal-play and are blazing fast. After all, the gurus always say that’s how to win, right?

Well, four hours later and after many ups and even more downs you’re in the hole 1400 credits. But what’s this? All of a sudden you’re dealt four Aces and now you’re only down $300 (600 credits) because that’s a nice juicy 800 credit win. Phew! Sometimes people are happy to "only" be losing by that much!

Now let’s take a look at how that scenario would change if the player followed the Singer Single-Play Strategy. We’ll say NO quads were hit after 1400 credits were played. That’s a rough time because 400 credits were lost at dollars, $2, $5 and 200 were lost at $10. Right there we’re down $5200.

But here comes those four Aces as stated above, and because we’re playing an advanced Bonus game where they pay at least 800 credits, we’re up a cool $2800 which attains the minimum $2500 win goal and sends the player home a winner. Now please tell me, which makes more sense.

Yes, the critics will cry "gee Rob, that’s great and all that, but your big losses will eventually drown out all your wins." Well, they couldn’t be more wrong about that one either. When the strategy was developed it was clearly known the profits from large winners would far exceed the losses sustained by wipeouts. And that’s exactly what’s been happening for over ten years. When you’re ready for a change I’m just an e-mail away.