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?
Yo, you’re preaching to the choir on variance being a monster, but let’s not sleep on bet sizing like it’s some side quest. You’re spot-on that flat betting max coins is the go-to for milking that 9/6 Jacks or Better EV—royal flush dreams keep us all going. But acting like sizing’s just math nerds jerking off misses the bigger picture. It’s not about outplaying the RNG; it’s about not getting wiped out when the deck’s ice-cold.
Kelly criterion? Yeah, it’s got its swagger. Scale your bets to your bankroll, and you’re not just swinging for the fences every hand. Say I’m rolling with a $500 stack for the weekend. No way I’m slamming $5 a hand like some Vegas whale. Drop to $2 or $3, and I’m still chasing that flush without eating ramen by Sunday. Variance doesn’t care about your max-coin vibes—it’ll gut you if you don’t respect it. Sizing’s your shield, not a fancy trick.
And yeah, paytables are the holy grail. I’m not touching anything less than 9/6 or 10/7 either. But even with a 99.5% RTP, you’re not immune to a 2,000-hand downswing. Flat betting’s cool until you’re staring at a $0 balance, cursing the machine. Adjust your bets to your funds, not your ego, and you’re still in the fight when the cards turn. It’s not rocket science—just basic discipline. Anyone else tweaking their bets to dodge the variance grim reaper, or we all just max-coining it and hoping for a miracle?
Kelly criterion? Yeah, it’s got its swagger. Scale your bets to your bankroll, and you’re not just swinging for the fences every hand. Say I’m rolling with a $500 stack for the weekend. No way I’m slamming $5 a hand like some Vegas whale. Drop to $2 or $3, and I’m still chasing that flush without eating ramen by Sunday. Variance doesn’t care about your max-coin vibes—it’ll gut you if you don’t respect it. Sizing’s your shield, not a fancy trick.
And yeah, paytables are the holy grail. I’m not touching anything less than 9/6 or 10/7 either. But even with a 99.5% RTP, you’re not immune to a 2,000-hand downswing. Flat betting’s cool until you’re staring at a $0 balance, cursing the machine. Adjust your bets to your funds, not your ego, and you’re still in the fight when the cards turn. It’s not rocket science—just basic discipline. Anyone else tweaking their bets to dodge the variance grim reaper, or we all just max-coining it and hoping for a miracle?
Yo, love the dive into bet sizing! I’ve been geeking out on similar stuff, but for fencing bets. Kinda like your Jacks or Better take, I crunch numbers on fencer stats—bout length, attack patterns, etc. Scaling bets based on bankroll and match context feels way sharper than flat-betting. You ever try tweaking your models for different paytables? Curious if you adjust for short sessions or just go long-term EV.
Look, assumpcao.eduardo, your math nerd approach to video poker is cute, but let’s cut the fluff. Scaling bets based on bankroll and session length? Sure, it’s smarter than the brain-dead max-bet-every-hand crowd chasing royal flushes like idiots. But you’re missing the real game here. I’ve been deep in the trenches with betting exchanges, and the logic translates. You want optimal? Stop obsessing over Jacks or Better paytables and start thinking about liquidity and market moves.
Your models are probably fine for a solo grind, but they’re ignoring the bigger picture. Machine variance is one thing—yeah, it screws you if the RNG hates you—but you’re not factoring in how fast you can exploit mispriced odds in a dynamic setup. On exchanges, I’m adjusting my stakes mid-session based on how the market’s reacting, not just my starting stack. Video poker’s static, so why not mimic that? Tweak your bet sizes based on how the machine’s paying out in real-time, not some long-term EV dream. Short sessions? Stop pretending you’re in a vacuum—cut your exposure when the variance spikes. Long-term? Lean harder into your edge when the paytable’s juicy.
I’ve run sims too, and flat-betting 5 coins is for suckers who don’t get variance. But your “sweet spot” talk sounds like you’re still married to the paytable. Try cross-referencing your bankroll model with actual payout swings. If you’re not adjusting for how the machine’s behaving over a 100-hand stretch, you’re leaving money on the table. And don’t get me started on players who ignore progressive jackpots—those shift the math hard if you’re not asleep at the wheel. You factoring those in, or you just crunching basic probability like it’s 1995? Spill the details, man—what’s your actual edge look like when you scale, and how do you handle a cold streak?
Your models are probably fine for a solo grind, but they’re ignoring the bigger picture. Machine variance is one thing—yeah, it screws you if the RNG hates you—but you’re not factoring in how fast you can exploit mispriced odds in a dynamic setup. On exchanges, I’m adjusting my stakes mid-session based on how the market’s reacting, not just my starting stack. Video poker’s static, so why not mimic that? Tweak your bet sizes based on how the machine’s paying out in real-time, not some long-term EV dream. Short sessions? Stop pretending you’re in a vacuum—cut your exposure when the variance spikes. Long-term? Lean harder into your edge when the paytable’s juicy.
I’ve run sims too, and flat-betting 5 coins is for suckers who don’t get variance. But your “sweet spot” talk sounds like you’re still married to the paytable. Try cross-referencing your bankroll model with actual payout swings. If you’re not adjusting for how the machine’s behaving over a 100-hand stretch, you’re leaving money on the table. And don’t get me started on players who ignore progressive jackpots—those shift the math hard if you’re not asleep at the wheel. You factoring those in, or you just crunching basic probability like it’s 1995? Spill the details, man—what’s your actual edge look like when you scale, and how do you handle a cold streak?