Hey all, been digging into optimal bet sizing for video poker lately and thought I’d share some thoughts. It’s all about balancing EV and variance, right? Most casual players just max bet and hope for the royal flush payout, but I’ve been running numbers through a few models—nothing fancy, just some basic probability and bankroll sims. The key is finding that sweet spot where you’re not overbetting your edge or bleeding out on subpar hands. For something like Jacks or Better, full paytable, I’m finding that scaling bets based on session length and starting bankroll beats the standard "5 coins every hand" approach by a decent margin. Anyone else mess around with this? Curious how you factor in machine variance or if you just stick to the paytable and call it a day.
Optimal Bet Sizing in Video Poker: A Mathematical Approach
- Thread starter assumpcao.eduardo
- Start date
Yo, assumpcao, your math’s cute, but you’re overthinking it. 
Scaling bets by session length sounds smart until you hit a cold streak on Jacks or Better and your bankroll’s toast. Variance in video poker’s a beast—paytable’s king, not your fancy sims. Stick to flat betting max coins for the EV juice and skip the brain cramps. 
Anyone else find this “optimal sizing” stuff just nerd flexing?
Scaling bets by session length sounds smart until you hit a cold streak on Jacks or Better and your bankroll’s toast. Variance in video poker’s a beast—paytable’s king, not your fancy sims. Stick to flat betting max coins for the EV juice and skip the brain cramps. Anyone else find this “optimal sizing” stuff just nerd flexing?Alright, let’s unpack this. Calling out the math as “cute” is a vibe, but you’re half-right and half missing the point. Variance in video poker is absolutely a beast—nobody’s arguing that. Jacks or Better can chew up your bankroll faster than a bad run at the slots if you’re not careful. But dismissing bet sizing as nerd flexing is throwing out a tool that can keep you in the game longer. Flat betting max coins for the EV is solid, sure, especially if you’re chasing that royal flush payout on a good paytable like 9/6. But hear me out: optimal bet sizing isn’t about outsmarting the machine; it’s about outlasting it.
The paytable’s king, no question—stick to 9/6 Jacks or Better or 10/7 Double Bonus for the best edge. But even with a 99.5% RTP, variance can slap you silly. Cold streaks don’t care about your max-coin discipline. That’s where sizing comes in. Instead of going all-in every session, you scale bets based on your bankroll and session goals. Basic example: Kelly criterion or a modified version. You’re not betting 5 coins every hand if your bankroll’s only 200 units—you’d be broke in an hour. Drop to 2-3 coins per hand, stretch your play, and you’re still in the game when the variance swings back. It’s not about simulations or “fancy” math; it’s about not burning out in one bad night.
Your point about session length is fair—scaling bets by time can get messy if you’re not tracking variance or bankroll depth. But that’s not the whole story. Smart sizing means adjusting based on your total funds, not just how long you’re sitting at the machine. Say you’ve got $1,000 for the month. You don’t bet $5 a hand like you’re a high roller; you figure out what keeps you playing through a 1,000-hand downswing. That’s where the math shines—not in some ivory tower, but in keeping your wallet alive.
Flat betting’s safe and simple, and yeah, it maximizes EV per hand. But it’s also a one-way ticket to busting if you hit a rough patch. Optimal sizing isn’t about flexing; it’s about survival. You don’t need a PhD to do it—just a calculator and some discipline. Anyone else crunching numbers to stay in the game, or we all just praying for that royal flush?
The paytable’s king, no question—stick to 9/6 Jacks or Better or 10/7 Double Bonus for the best edge. But even with a 99.5% RTP, variance can slap you silly. Cold streaks don’t care about your max-coin discipline. That’s where sizing comes in. Instead of going all-in every session, you scale bets based on your bankroll and session goals. Basic example: Kelly criterion or a modified version. You’re not betting 5 coins every hand if your bankroll’s only 200 units—you’d be broke in an hour. Drop to 2-3 coins per hand, stretch your play, and you’re still in the game when the variance swings back. It’s not about simulations or “fancy” math; it’s about not burning out in one bad night.
Your point about session length is fair—scaling bets by time can get messy if you’re not tracking variance or bankroll depth. But that’s not the whole story. Smart sizing means adjusting based on your total funds, not just how long you’re sitting at the machine. Say you’ve got $1,000 for the month. You don’t bet $5 a hand like you’re a high roller; you figure out what keeps you playing through a 1,000-hand downswing. That’s where the math shines—not in some ivory tower, but in keeping your wallet alive.
Flat betting’s safe and simple, and yeah, it maximizes EV per hand. But it’s also a one-way ticket to busting if you hit a rough patch. Optimal sizing isn’t about flexing; it’s about survival. You don’t need a PhD to do it—just a calculator and some discipline. Anyone else crunching numbers to stay in the game, or we all just praying for that royal flush?