Hey everyone, I’ve been tinkering with my video poker game lately and, uh, had this odd thought about borrowing some blackjack ideas. I know it sounds a bit out there since they’re different beasts, but hear me out. In blackjack, you’re always weighing when to hit or stand based on the dealer’s upcard and your odds, right? So I started wondering if I could apply a similar mindset to VP, especially with hands where the decision isn’t super clear—like, say, holding a low pair versus chasing a flush draw.
I’ve been playing mostly Jacks or Better lately, and there’s this spot where I’d normally just keep the pair and move on. But then I thought, what if I treated it like blackjack and considered the “dealer’s edge”—or in this case, the machine’s paytable odds? I started digging into the expected value of each move, and it got me second-guessing the standard strategy a bit. For example, with a hand like 7-7-9-10-J (no suit match), the safe play is holding the sevens. But if I think about it like blackjack, where you sometimes take a risk based on the situation, I wonder if going for the straight might shake things up profitably over time.
I ran some quick numbers—not full-on simulations, just back-of-the-napkin stuff—and it seems like the EV difference isn’t as big as I expected. Standard strategy says the pair’s the way to go, with an EV around 0.45 or so, while the straight draw sits closer to 0.38. But if you’re on a machine with a slightly juiced paytable, or if you’re in a streak where draws feel hot, could it be worth the switch? I’m not saying it’s a game-changer, just that it’s got me rethinking those middle-ground hands.
Has anyone else tried mixing things up like this? I’m kinda hesitant to lean too hard into it without more data, but it’s been fun to experiment. I’d love to hear if you’ve played around with VP decisions in a way that’s, uh, not exactly by the book.
I’ve been playing mostly Jacks or Better lately, and there’s this spot where I’d normally just keep the pair and move on. But then I thought, what if I treated it like blackjack and considered the “dealer’s edge”—or in this case, the machine’s paytable odds? I started digging into the expected value of each move, and it got me second-guessing the standard strategy a bit. For example, with a hand like 7-7-9-10-J (no suit match), the safe play is holding the sevens. But if I think about it like blackjack, where you sometimes take a risk based on the situation, I wonder if going for the straight might shake things up profitably over time.
I ran some quick numbers—not full-on simulations, just back-of-the-napkin stuff—and it seems like the EV difference isn’t as big as I expected. Standard strategy says the pair’s the way to go, with an EV around 0.45 or so, while the straight draw sits closer to 0.38. But if you’re on a machine with a slightly juiced paytable, or if you’re in a streak where draws feel hot, could it be worth the switch? I’m not saying it’s a game-changer, just that it’s got me rethinking those middle-ground hands.
Has anyone else tried mixing things up like this? I’m kinda hesitant to lean too hard into it without more data, but it’s been fun to experiment. I’d love to hear if you’ve played around with VP decisions in a way that’s, uh, not exactly by the book.