Originally Posted by
mudpuppy
Can you clarify what you mean by relatively low variance? Do you mean relative to other video poker games?
I've always understood that video poker is relatively high variance versus most casino games (except slots of course) because you're relying on hitting a royal every once in a while to stay close to that house edge. If you don't hit a royal then you can easily see an effective house edge that is much much higher. Thus the desire to play a multi-line machine in order to see a lot more hands and increase the likelihood of a royal. The down side is in my experience the multi-line machines tend to have lower pay tables than single play.
I mean in relation to other VP games. Personally, I don't really "love" VP as a way to "comp hustle," since it's way too regimented and most of the best games have had their theo slashed (internally) for comp earning/marketing purposes.
Originally Posted by
sbjnyc
It depends on how you frame the question. If you play 7/5 100 play JoB (the only version I've ever seen in a TR property) it will naturally have a lower variance than the single line version with the same coin in. That said, I'd rather play a single line game with a better return for the same coin in (ie $5 8/5 JoB > 5¢ 100 line 7/5 JoB) even with the higher variance - ignoring taxes. But the trading of variance for EV is not really a question of mathematics for the vast majority of players.
Edit: I personally wouldn't play $5 8/5 JoB.
"8/5" Bonus Poker — 99.17%, is a great game to look for; especially since you can't hurt yourself too badly by playing BP with JoB strategy (if you don't care to learn all the nuance...) It's also slightly more fun, IMHO. (In the realm of "VP-fun," I'm not a huge fan of video poker, personally....)