Something I'm thinking about

#1
You all seem to carry the same general notion that slot machines are as useful as flushing dollar bills down the toilet. Which may be true, in a long term sense. But something I've taken in consideration is the possible payouts, compared to that of blackjack. When you play blackjack, even with perfected BS and card counting, you're lucky to even double your money any given time you play, right? Well with slot machines of course there is a higher possibility of winning nothing at all, but then there's of course the chance of winning thousands off of a one dollar bill. The first time I ever stepped into a casino I put 5 dollars in a machine and cashed out with 60 in less than five minutes. That's simply impossible with blackjack. Of course, I just got lucky. And I know blackjack is all about the longterm, but I simply don't see slot machines as a complete waste of money due to your chance of winning substantially larger amounts of money in a very shorter amount of time. And since many machines require as low as pennies to play, why not? I'd rather win 5k in one night and never look back rather than go to a casino every weekend for 15 years to find out you're barely ahead.
 
#2
Oh, and what about blackjack machines? Still more of a gamble than the real thing, but at least you aren't relying solely on luck.
 

GeorgeD

Well-Known Member
#3
You are right in a sense. My wife plays the slots while I play BJ and there have been times she's been a few hundred ahead when I've lost. Keeping track over the past year, she's not lost a lot for the time spent.

Still, I know that in the long run she will eventually lose more on those machines even the $25 ones than even a BS BJ player will lose at a $25 table. The casino will comp her better, but not enough to get parity with the BJ

If all that is important to you is a small chance of a bigger return, buy lottery tickets. Slim chance, but you could win millions.
 
#4
That's a bit TOO slim of a chance for my taste. However, I do a couple of free lotteries on the internet. To be honest I don't even know if it's legit, but it's not costing me anything so why not?
 

ccl

Well-Known Member
#5
blackjack is possible to do the 5 into 60 within a few minutes. before i really started to research playing better, i just played to play using i guess reall really basic strategy i had been told by people that had played for years. A few times ive sat down on $5 tables with enough to play 2 hands and ended up within 15 minutes walking out with over $200, its rare but it happens.

chris
 
#6
Slots vs BJ

There are progressive slots that at certain times under certain conditions are a very good play. You have to get to know the machines, as well as VP progressives. You just have to be aware of your surroundings and what is going on.

As to BJ play, my high is $36,000 in one full day, night of play. A teammate scored for $56,000 in 6 hours of heads up play.

I am not a believer in the "long run" fallacy.

CP
 

EasyRhino

Well-Known Member
#7
It's still mainly flushing your money.

If you want a shot at a big win, sit at the blackjack table and bet half of your trip bankroll on one hand (leave the other half for split/double). Keep increasing your bets until you have a big score, and go home.

You can "simulate" the high variance and right-tailed skew of a slot's distribution this way, with a much lower house edge.

Wear a strobe light and make beeping noises while playing if you want.
 
#9
Yeah but then you have the possibility of losing your whole bankroll in one hand. Of course you can still win a lot of money in a short amount of time, as Creeping Panter and EasyRhino described, but the risk of ruin is substantially higher. Blackjack is the funnest casino game and the most realistic way to make money in a casino, but I just want to have that chance of making the most amount of money in the shortest amount of time with the lowest ROR.
If I ever hit a jackpot then I'll come back and do what you said Rhino :grin:
 

rollem411

Well-Known Member
#10
Rook said:
Yeah but then you have the possibility of losing your whole bankroll in one hand. Of course you can still win a lot of money in a short amount of time, as Creeping Panter and EasyRhino described, but the risk of ruin is substantially higher. Blackjack is the funnest casino game and the most realistic way to make money in a casino, but I just want to have that chance of making the most amount of money in the shortest amount of time with the lowest ROR.
If I ever hit a jackpot then I'll come back and do what you said Rhino :grin:
The difference is that your ROR increases for slots the more you play.

So basically if you don't play that often, why not try to hit big, but, if you do intend on playing slots for a long time...I'd suggest leaving them alone because you will only lose in the long run. Plus they aren't even fun.
 

callipygian

Well-Known Member
#11
Basically, you're talking about playing a game with really low odds and a large potential payout, even if the EV is strongly negative. You might as well put single-number bets on roulette if that's what you want. Because roulette spins are less frequent than slot pulls, you're probably losing less per hour at roulette in the long run.
 

Guynoire

Well-Known Member
#12
You can have both

There is a positive expected value game with high payoffs. It's called video poker and if you're in a competitive market, Nevada, you can easily find positive games up to the dollar level.
 

Thunder

Well-Known Member
#13
I would make the argument that your best chance for a quick, large, payout would be in nl hold 'em. One good hand can lead to you tripling your money on a single hand if the conditions are ripe for it. (usually when there is a flush and straight draw with cards from 8-A) Pretty often I will leave a table having doubled my money in under an hour. Blackjack on the other hand for the most part I would say it's rare you'll double your bankroll (assuming your ror is acceptable) in a single session and even more rare to do it in an hour but then again, the variance isn't as high.
 

EasyRhino

Well-Known Member
#14
Rook said:
but I just want to have that chance of making the most amount of money in the shortest amount of time with the lowest ROR.
No such thing.

There is a DIRECT correlation between odds of a large win and risk of ruin.

When playing slots (or VP), unless you're hitting a rare, large, win, then the payout of the machines is pretty miserable. Like 80%. It will, over the vast majority of sessions, grind you into dust quickly. With the occasional big win.

Same as anti-martingaling blackjack, or letting it all ride on one number in roulette.
 
#15
EasyRhino said:
No such thing.

There is a DIRECT correlation between odds of a large win and risk of ruin.

When playing slots (or VP), unless you're hitting a rare, large, win, then the payout of the machines is pretty miserable. Like 80%. It will, over the vast majority of sessions, grind you into dust quickly. With the occasional big win.

Same as anti-martingaling blackjack, or letting it all ride on one number in roulette.
I agree with what you're saying, just not the number. You don't give up 20% to the house on VP when you don't get a royal flush, more like 5%. It's kind of like a blackjack hand where you don't get an ace on your first card. 5% is plenty big enough to empty your pockets, especially when you are getting 800 hands per hour like a reasonably quick VP player does.

Still you will get an ace every 13 cards, but you will go a LONG time between royals and sometimes even between quads. You need a very large BR to play VP. This I learned the hard way- playing a VP promotion that was giving me around 2%, I earned about $600 in cashback over an evening. Only problem is I dropped $3K cash in a $1 machine- did not hit quads or SF all night.

The good part is the comps and promotions are better for a VP player so if you are milking a blackjack game long-term at a local store, some advantage VP play might be a good thing to add to your bag of tricks.
 
Top