John Grochowski sums it up nicely about video poker and craps

I think gaming author John Grochowski sums up the discussion about payback and odds at video poker and craps very nicely in this article. And those of you who follow the math religiously will see that John G. makes it clear that luck is a very big part of your return when you play. And those of you who follow the math of craps religiously with your max odds bets will see that John G. makes it clear that no matter how much money you pour into the odds the house still is more likely to take your money.

Here is the link to his article:

http://grochowski.casinocitytimes.co...nd-craps-61658

Alan, luck is always a factor in any given session which is what he was discussing. Over time, not so much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

Alan, luck is always a factor in any given session which is what he was discussing. Over time, not so much.

---

Don't have much time because we're going out with another couple to have brunch and watch me win big on the championship games today. But I wanted to jump on what arci said here just to show how little he knows what he's talking about.


"Luck is ALWAYS a factor in ANY given SESSION". Now that's telling. So what we have is the forum's self-proclaimed braniac who tells "nothing but the facts", readily acknowledging that luck is "always a factor" in "today's and any other day's" session, but for some reason that "always" and "any given session" suddenly disappears when you look at all the sessions at one time. They're there, then they aren't! So what happened--did the math reach in and snatch that away too?

My my my....what has he gotten himself into here!?

BTW arci, if don't feel bad congratulating me on keeping my vp winning on track. It could have been worse for you--I could have hit the progressive on the machine for over $30k. But wish me luck on today's bets please!

This is the problem I have with "the math" and Rob knows what I am talking about: why should the math even anything out over the long run? If luck is a factor in any given session it should also be a factor in all sessions. If I am playing a 99.5% game and have a return of zero percent (I go bust) in one session, why should the math make me a big winner in the next session to bring me back to 99.5%??

I think most video poker players will play till they win an acceptable amount of money (the win goal) or lose everything in their budget for that trip (the loss limit). Smarter players stick to their loss limits and don't keep running to the ATM. And smarter players realize that they can't keep winning indefinitely and stick to a win goal so they don't risk giving it all back in that particular session, and have money to play again next time.

That's my idea. But, what do I know? I'm not a math expert. I just play for fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

Alan, luck is always a factor in any given session which is what he was discussing. Over time, not so much.

---

Are you saying that luck diminishes the more you play? I need to know what time this "over time" kicks in so that I can plan my sessions accordingly. I only want to play in as many of those luck infested sessions as I can before "over time" begins. Thanks in advance.

Is this really that difficult to understand? There is both good luck and bad luck. On any given session one of them will generally be a bigger factor. However, over time we they tend to even out and cancel each other out. Here's an example to demonstrate. I mentioned my very good session last month where I hit 7 $1000 jackpots (wild royals) in one session. Good luck, right? However, a few years back I went about 2 months without a single one of these jackpots playing 8-10 hours every week. That was horrible luck.

For the past year I ended up with 4 extra wild royals (68 vs. 64). Not exactly earth shattering. And, I ended up minus 5 in natural royals. Good luck vs. bad luck. Over time these elements tend to average out. And, math gives us a very nice way of examining this process ... it's called statistics. We've discussed this many times. Our actual results form a bell curve around expected results.

People who think they can always be lucky are deluded. People who think they can control the random frequency of the cards are deluded. If a person is fortunate enough to get results on the right side of the bell curve they have had a slight bit more good luck than bad luck as there is no way to control which side of the bell curve a person will fall in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

Are you saying that luck diminishes the more you play? I need to know what time this "over time" kicks in so that I can plan my sessions accordingly. I only want to play in as many of those luck infested sessions as I can before "over time" begins. Thanks in advance.

---

Here's an example of "over time". You get in a car and start driving to a destination far away. You start out making good time and then hit some heavy traffic that slows you down. As you proceed to your destination you may hit many spells of making good time and making bad time.

Now consider a short trip. You may hit one of those heavy traffic areas or one of the light ones. Your speed over those short trips can vary significantly. However, in the long trip you can't avoid hitting both and your average speed will be higher than the heavy traffic speed and slower than the light traffic speed.

Now, you may be able to do some good trip planning and increase your average speed. This is similar to playing higher return VP machines. However, there's no way to know for sure. An accident could slow you down on the normally fast part of a trip. Same with VP, you could hit a bad spell even on high return games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

There is both good luck and bad luck. On any given session one of them will generally be a bigger factor. However, over time we they tend to even out and cancel each other out.

---

I'm sorry, I missed the class and didn't read the book about good luck and bad luck cancelling each other out over time. I had no idea that is what happens.

I thought that all gambling is determined by luck -- the luck that you pick the right spot where the ball will land, or how the dice will land, or what symbols the RNG chooses. All of these things are out of the control of the gambler. The only skill we have is selecting what games we play or bets we make hoping to take advantage of good luck or bad luck (if you consider betting the dark side in craps as taking advantage of bad luck).

In the case of video poker, the pay table or the "expected return" is nothing more than a guide to help you pick a game to play. The pay table or expected return has no impact on whether or not you will have good luck or bad luck when you play. One can have good luck and hit a royal playing 6/5 Jacks or Better, or one can have bad luck and go bust playing 10/6 Jacks or Better.

Curiously, this seems to be what you are talking about here, Arc:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

Now, you may be able to do some good trip planning and increase your average speed. This is similar to playing higher return VP machines. However, there's no way to know for sure. An accident could slow you down on the normally fast part of a trip. Same with VP, you could hit a bad spell even on high return games.

---

Your pay table has nothing to do with whether or not you will hit pot holes playing your game.

Alan you are spot on when saying that luck determines one's outcome at the machines. If it wasn't, I would have never been (and for some very lucky reason, still am) such a consistent winner when I played SPS. You're also correct in identifying that the paytables and game are only there for guidance. It's kinda funny watching all this common sense flowing while arci's fantasy-driven belief system scrambles around looking for those slippery slope words that can still make him feel good about his very flawed approach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I'm sorry, I missed the class and didn't read the book about good luck and bad luck cancelling each other out over time. I had no idea that is what happens.

---

I'm glad you're getting an education. I used the terms good luck and bad luck to keep it simple. That way even cavemen and newsmen could understand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I thought that all gambling is determined by luck -- the luck that you pick the right spot where the ball will land, or how the dice will land, or what symbols the RNG chooses. All of these things are out of the control of the gambler. The only skill we have is selecting what games we play or bets we make hoping to take advantage of good luck or bad luck (if you consider betting the dark side in craps as taking advantage of bad luck).

In the case of video poker, the pay table or the "expected return" is nothing more than a guide to help you pick a game to play. The pay table or expected return has no impact on whether or not you will have good luck or bad luck when you play. One can have good luck and hit a royal playing 6/5 Jacks or Better, or one can have bad luck and go bust playing 10/6 Jacks or Better.

Curiously, this seems to be what you are talking about here, Arc:

---

Yes it is. You can run into construction or an accident on a normally low traffic road. But, these are short term events. That's the whole point. Over time these kinds of things average out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

Here's an example of "over time". You get in a car and start driving to a destination far away. You start out making good time and then hit some heavy traffic that slows you down. As you proceed to your destination you may hit many spells of making good time and making bad time.

Now consider a short trip. You may hit one of those heavy traffic areas or one of the light ones. Your speed over those short trips can vary significantly. However, in the long trip you can't avoid hitting both and your average speed will be higher than the heavy traffic speed and slower than the light traffic speed.

Now, you may be able to do some good trip planning and increase your average speed. This is similar to playing higher return VP machines. However, there's no way to know for sure. An accident could slow you down on the normally fast part of a trip. Same with VP, you could hit a bad spell even on high return games.

---

Terrible analogy.

You still haven't explained how good luck will eventually dry up in random events (other than to say "over time", which can never be quantified). The luck of hitting a royal (or any large win) has nothing to do with how many hands previously played or how many hands yet to be played. The RNG doesn't know and doesn't care. Therefore, "over time" is irrelevant. Luck is luck.

Actually it was a very good analogy of the concept of over time. Sorry if you didn't figure it out.

Nothing I said mentioned anything "drying up". Nothing I said stated previous events had some kind of influence on the future. Why would a traffic jam due to an accident yesterday have any influence on traffic flow today? You appear to be going out of your way to misstate what I said. I suspect that's why you didn't like the analogy.

Its a good analogy but it is not relevant. The fact is, as Vegas Vic said, luck is luck and it is not on a schedule. And RNGs are not able to adjust to luck or can an RNG knowingly gIve you the expected return in a paytable.

Frankly this trust in expected return becoming the actual return borders on voodoo.

Alan, he deflected to a traffic analogy because he got stuck when he first talked about luck "always" being a factor in all sessions. But what he actually did was tell the truth for a change, because every sensible person knows that if you got lucky today you can get lucky tomorrow or every day. There IS no mythical mathematical evening out of luck over time just to satisfy the theory behind game ER.

Think of it this way. The day before I hit the $6000 winner you posted a picture of, I was playing around with dollar JW because I've never played it before. I got five 6's--a $1000 hit up here--and I was lucky. I only won $180 that day but that lucky hit helped. I think last month I was playing DW also for dollars, just for fun to see what all the fascination is about. Well I hit four deuces also for $1000, but I left a $600 loser. But I was STILL lucky because of that hit or else the results would have been worse. So when arci tries to explain luck, he's ignoring all the times he gets a lucky hit if he loses. That's where he hides.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Its a good analogy but it is not relevant. The fact is, as Vegas Vic said, luck is luck and it is not on a schedule. And RNGs are not able to adjust to luck or can an RNG knowingly gIve you the expected return in a paytable.

Frankly this trust in expected return becoming the actual return borders on voodoo.

---

So true-the RNG doesn't know if I have been winning or losing and can't decide it's time to "even things out". The RNG doesn't adjust up or down to make my results consistent with the expected return. LUCK!!!! That's the key.

By the way-got quad aces two more times today on a Super Pay 3 Way. Once on super aces for $4,000. Once on Bonus for $1200.

Still can't get a royal if my life depended on it. RNG must not realize I'm owed several royals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by regnis

By the way-got quad aces two more times today on a Super Pay 3 Way. Once on super aces for $4,000. Once on Bonus for $1200.

Still can't get a royal if my life depended on it. RNG must not realize I'm owed several royals.

---

I am sure that you can find a video poker math book somewhere that says the RNG is keeping track and knows that it owes you some royals -- and they will come to you when you least expect them. But they are "expected" because the math says so.:rolleyes:

Maybe I need to send a couple of my "associates" to talk to the RNG-lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Its a good analogy but it is not relevant. The fact is, as Vegas Vic said, luck is luck and it is not on a schedule. And RNGs are not able to adjust to luck or can an RNG knowingly gIve you the expected return in a paytable.

Frankly this trust in expected return becoming the actual return borders on voodoo.

---

Actually, it is very predictable. It just isn't exact. Why do people have problems when predictions are in ranges or based on probabilities? What's wrong with a 95% chance of success vs. a 5% chance of success? Is that really that hard to comprehend?

When dealing with the future there are very few things that are exact. Why do you need VP results to be exact? Why can't you accept we do know something about what will happen even if we don't know it to 3 significant digits?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Alan, he deflected to a traffic analogy because he got stuck when he first talked about luck "always" being a factor in all sessions. But what he actually did was tell the truth for a change, because every sensible person knows that if you got lucky today you can get lucky tomorrow or every day. There IS no mythical mathematical evening out of luck over time just to satisfy the theory behind game ER.

---

No, you can't get lucky "every day" and rather than your idiotic claim that such a result is "sensible" I believe most people understand it is much closer to impossible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Think of it this way. The day before I hit the $6000 winner you posted a picture of, I was playing around with dollar JW because I've never played it before. I got five 6's--a $1000 hit up here--and I was lucky. I only won $180 that day but that lucky hit helped. I think last month I was playing DW also for dollars, just for fun to see what all the fascination is about. Well I hit four deuces also for $1000, but I left a $600 loser. But I was STILL lucky because of that hit or else the results would have been worse. So when arci tries to explain luck, he's ignoring all the times he gets a lucky hit if he loses. That's where he hides.

---

Yup, every time Singer plays he get lucky and hits a big jackpot that other gamblers rarely get. I suspect any "sensible" person realizes this is pure BS. Just another example of why he's a pathological liar. I doubt any of what he said above ever occurred.