As I pointed out in Part 1, the wise Video Poker player only sits down at Video Poker when s/he can get a long-term advantage and that translates into a game with a total return of over 100%. That return can come about in a variety of ways; through the basic pay schedule of the game alone (like All American or full-pay Deuces Wild) or through a combination of a progressive Royal and the basic pay schedule (like a 9/6 Jacks game with a 6000-coin Royal) or, through the basic pay schedule and a good cash-back slot club (like Pick 'Em poker and a 0.5% slot club). All of these examples have a long-term return of over 100.5%, but each has a different impact on the bankroll requirement of the player. One of the ways (as I explained in the first part) that this bankroll requirement is measured is through the use of variance. I won't go into the definition of that again, but I went on a bit too long in Part 1, so I want to conclude my thoughts on how a player can best use the concept of variance.

It goes without saying that an under-financed Video Poker player is doomed to failure. Oh, sure, there might be some lucky soul out there who puts a twenty in a machine, starts to win and never has to put up any more $$$ for the rest of his life. I don't know who that is and you probably don't either; the rest of us have to put up with losing session after losing session, even though we are playing a game that, if we play correctly and play long enough, we are virtually guaranteed to beat! That sums up variance in realistic terms. Some games have a higher (or 'more') variance than others. Blackjack, for example, has a relatively low variance because the results of a bet have so few, well, variances. Think about it: If you bet $5 on a hand of Blackjack, what can happen? You might get a 'Blackjack' and win $7.50, or you might double or split a pair and then you'd have $10 riding on the hand and, once in a blue moon, you'd split a pair, then double after splitting, so you might have 3 or 4 bets on the hand. The variance of a Blackjack bet where the player may double after split is 1.32. The lowest variance for the common games of Video Poker is 15.00 and that's for Pick 'Em Poker which is a game that's about as exciting as watching paint dry. But, you can still only lose one bet (and losing's the problem, not winning, right?), same as in Blackjack, so why the big difference in variance? Well, it's partly in the way that variance is figured which causes that. In a Video Poker game, you might bet one coin and win 800 by hitting a Royal, and that 800-1 'spread' is part of the calculation. That distorts things a bit. Let me give you an example. There is a variation of Joker Poker which pays 4000 coins for a Royal and one with an identical pay schedule, except that the Royal pays 4700. The game with the 4000 Royal has a variance of 26.24 per coin bet and the 4700 game has a variance of 33.63. Does this mean that it's riskier to play the 4700 game? Not at all. The extra pay on the Royal is just that: extra. You could do very well playing that game with the same strategy as you'd use at the 4000 game, because all the variance is on the upside, in your favor. It's like playing a game where the casino is offering a 700-coin bonus for any Royal and you decide to not add that extra value into your playing decisions. Remember how I showed you that some playing changes result from a bigger progressive and that moves your payoffs 'up' the schedule (you break a 'high' pair to draw to a 3-card Royal, etc.)? That won't happen unless you make it happen; should you choose to. In that case, our analysis of the variance fails us, but it doesn't negate its value.

Let's jump back to my Blackjack example for a moment. A skilled card-counter can get an average edge over the house of about 1.25%, depending upon the rules, penetration, number of decks, etc. But let's use that for this calculation. If a player uses a betting spread of $5 to $40, his or her average bet will be about $10, give or take. If you were to play a $2 Video Poker game 5 coins at a time, your average bet would obviously be $10. The bankroll needed by the Blackjack player (if s/he bets only in 'positive' situations; what we call 'wonging') is $2500 which carries a 6% risk of losing it all. For the same average bet of $10 at an All American game with a 0.5% slot club (long term return of 101.2%), a bankroll of about $36,000 is needed to give the same 6% risk of ruin! I play both games, so I'm not recommending one over the other but if big "ups and downs" in your bankroll (the definition of variance) bother you, Video Poker may not be your game. And don't forget, you might play 50 or 60 hands of Blackjack per hour, and it's going to be more like 500-600 hands per hour at Video Poker. But, you'll make about $7.50 an hour at Blackjack and you'll make about $75 an hour at VP. From a "return on investment" point of view, Blackjack's smaller bankroll requirement makes it a bit more attractive, but the Video Poker is more appealing from an hourly 'pay' point of view. The reality is that if you multiplied the Blackjack by a factor of 10 in order to get the same $75 an hour income, you'd have a hard time finding a game where you could play the hours you can put in at a VP game. Imagine making $50-$400 bets hour after hour with impunity at your average casino; they'd love you for a while, then one fine day they'd toss your butt out. I like the balance which playing both games offer. When my head starts buzzing from all the decisions of a Video Poker game, the slow pace of a Blackjack game is a welcome break. You can do that, too. All the information you need is right here on this site.

See you here next time.

©copyright, 2000 The GameMaster Online, Inc.