This statement is inherently false!Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Are you telling us that when you win at 8/5 BP you had an edge but when you lose you don't? What drugs are you on?
Printable View
This statement is inherently false!Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Are you telling us that when you win at 8/5 BP you had an edge but when you lose you don't? What drugs are you on?
He lost $8800 in one day. That's what I'm talking about. Why? Someone who made a million dollars knows when to walk away. Ask Rob Singer. LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by jbjbHe's made nearly a million dollars from this endeavor. Where is he losing?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonOf course you don't know. It's gambling, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
But he did keep playing until he wiped out the previous five days of profits. Now, where is there sense in doing that?
I have a hard time understanding how you keep playing with your edge but lose. Obviously if you're losing you don't have an edge at all.
Reality check.
I never had an edge. I accept my losses because of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjbThis statement is inherently false!Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Are you telling us that when you win at 8/5 BP you had an edge but when you lose you don't? What drugs are you on?
But someone with an edge and loses needs to consider why.
Rob Singer hasnt won squat.
Right. I would too. As you can't grasp, having an edge doesnt guarantee a win OR loss on any bet. It takes many to overcome the variance. Again, I suggest learning about N0 (N zero).Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonI never had an edge. I accept my losses because of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjbThis statement is inherently false!Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Are you telling us that when you win at 8/5 BP you had an edge but when you lose you don't? What drugs are you on?
I'm sorry but if you really have an edge you should be winning. I will accept that even casinos don't have a profit every day but they still have an edge and that's how they remain in business.
Kewlj says he has a $100k bankroll which allows him to ride out this slump.
I simply said, couldn't he have limited his daily slump to $2000 so he wouldn't have to reach into his bankroll?
Only kewlj can answer these questions:
1. When did you realize you were having a losing day?
2. Would you rather have walked out losing only $2000 or did you feel you had to keep playing even though it cost you $8800 that day?
The only chicken shit here is you, Town Cunt....how are those jugs doing again?...Working for ya?Quote:
Originally Posted by coach bellyIn other words...you can't answer because you don't know the answer, but you are not man enough to admit that.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmFat belly, I told you I don't waste my time answering questions from someone who has trolled the hell out of me. So stay in the dark and eat batshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach belly
You can't answer Alan's question either.
You've pulled this chicken-shit move before...answering everything like a know-it-all until you don't know the answer, then you say you can't be bothered.
Arrested development...you may be an old man, but you act like a child...you spineless earthwormm.
Why do so many discussions that heavily involve Alan, just turn truly bizarre? This discussion, 18 y.o.’s in a row, tracking a second table. Alan starts off with a position that is just wrong. Something he just doesn’t know about or understand and then when it is explained to him, he just digs in deeper, doubles down. It’s very frustrating. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I can’t tell if he truly doesn’t understand some of these things, doesn’t want to understand, or is just playing with us (trolling), or some combination of the three. But it really is becoming a bit much to take on an ongoing basis.
In this case, there are so many statements that Alan made that are just outrageously bizarre. I am not going to list them all, but I did quote the worst of them. If Alan is sincere with this statement, he is just totally clueless about advantage play.
I guess the one saving grace is that there is some good information in this thread, by a number of people that just might be beneficial and be helpful to someone honestly trying to understand or learn some of these things and concepts. I just no longer think that is Alan. I think he is just playing the antagonist. :rolleyes:
And you are a punk little bitch fat ass troll. No amount of information I give you will do you any good. You are to stupid to learn it.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach bellyIn other words...you can't answer because you don't know the answer, but you are not man enough to admit that.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmFat belly, I told you I don't waste my time answering questions from someone who has trolled the hell out of me. So stay in the dark and eat batshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach belly
You can't answer Alan's question either.
You've pulled this chicken-shit move before...answering everything like a know-it-all until you don't know the answer, then you say you can't be bothered.
Arrested development...you may be an old man, but you act like a child...you spineless earthwormm.
Same with AP's, Alan.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Do you get it now?
Kewlj let me ask the question differently: if you're not winning with your edge what's the point of having an edge?
Now you have mentioned the 18 yos and my challenge about counting two tables? I'm almost 66 years old and I've been posting on forums since Al Gore invented the Internet. Is there anything else from my body of work you care to bring up?
Of course I get it. But I think a player with an edge would do a better job with money management than blow a week of work in one day when at any point he could have walked away and maintained his profit.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterVSame with AP's, Alan.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Do you get it now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Can someone....anyone explain these 3 statements to me???...one which contradicts the other two! :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
He didn't know it would be a shitty day, it's just the way the cards flopped.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Just as casinos experience wide variance, so do AP's; it's only in the long run that it seems to even out.
This is the thought process of a degenerative or recreational gambler. An AP would never think like this. :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
An AP is about accumulating EV. That is long-term. And in the end, EV and actual win will be close. In the short term, whether you are running above or below EV, just doesn't matter. That is just variance. :cool:
Alan, are you familiar with "standard deviation"? That is a range of results that is 'completely normal' for any amount of play. For a relatively small amount of play, based on mid level limits, standard deviation might be a range between -$10k and +12k. That would mean that any results within that range is very normal, very routine. It's just variance!
They don't contradict. And I even said that with your bankroll you can also ride out the one day slump you had.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Can someone....anyone explain these 3 statements to me???...one which contradicts the other two! :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
But I continue to question your judgment. And I do that because there are people who learn from these discussions so please explain.
To start answer these questions which I asked before:
When did you realize you were losing? Why wouldn't you walk away before you lost $8800?
Having an edge is one factor to be a smart gambler, but money management is also important.
As you know I was lucky enough to hit a $100,000 royal in October of 2015, and I did it with only $2,000 in the machine. It took nearly a year for me to lose that money back -- it didn't happen in one day or one week. And for months I didn't go near a $25 VP machine.
In October of 2016 I was lucky enough to hit another $100K royal and this time it came on $2500 of free play. Again, it took nearly a year for me to lose it back, and again for months and months I never went near a $25 machine, and in fact I played very little video poker.
That was my money management. I don't claim to ever have a profit from gambling, but I've learned my lessons over the years. There were many times I had big wins and lost it quickly, sometimes, very quickly. I pledged never to make that mistake again.
I just want to know what compelled you to keep playing when you were losing. You didn't lose $8800 on one hand, did you?
Advantage players have an edge too. And just like the casinos the AP doesn't win everyday but still has an edge so remains in business.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Now, Alan, if someone was laying you 2 to 1 flipping coins would you put a stop loss per day on it?
I hope you're right.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
I would always have a stop loss. The question is would I have a stop win? The answer is "no." I would adjust my stop loss higher. Do you understand the difference?Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmAdvantage players have an edge too. And just like the casinos the AP doesn't win everyday but still has an edge so remains in business.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Now, Alan, if someone was laying you 2 to 1 flipping coins would you put a stop less per day on it?
I asked kewlj and he hasn't responded. So I will ask you: at what point do you say "I'm having a bad day, it's time to go"? Do you say that when you've lost 10% of your previous win, or 20% of your previous win, or 50% of your previous win or 100% of your previous win?Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
What would YOU do MisterV?
aLAN NEVER ASKED THE RIGHT QUESTIONS FROM THE BEGINNING,Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Can someone....anyone explain these 3 statements to me???...one which contradicts the other two! :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
So KJ said he lost 8800, his previous 5 days winnings. But he never asked what was your daily bankroll. If his daily bankroll was 10k....then big deal. If his daily bankroll was 200 dollars..then he can critique all he wants.
Every time I was invlved in a hot table at craps, it didnt start out that way, I had to feed the table till things turned around....and you never know when that happens. And I am not an AP........but it happens with anyone. Sometimes I CONTINUE AND LOSE THE REST OF MY BANKROLL FOR THE Day....AND SOMETIMES I CONTINUE AND THINGS TURN AROUND.
Well, I m not a "smart gambler", I am a professional blackjack player. So I don't know what "smart gamblers" do. If you are telling me "smart gamblers" rely on win/loss stop limits, then they are NOT going to be long-term winning players.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I purposely didn't answer your questions the first 3 times you asked because they are irrelevant questions and frankly you are not going to understand my answers. But I will answer to humor you.
When did I realize I was losing? Don't be ridiculous. I know where I am at winning or losing maybe not to the penny, but pretty close, every single minute of play.
Why wouldn't I walk away? Because whether I was winning or losing that day, is completely irrelevant. That is just variation. I was accumulating strong EV and in the end (long-term) my actual win and EV will be very close. Whether or not I win or lose for that day isn't what determines a successful day. Accumulating EV is. And that particular day that you are obsessing on ($8800 loss) happens to be my best day of the year. I accumulated more EV that day so far this year and in the end that will translate into actual win. :cool:
I used to have a 'signature line' on another site that read: "I don't track my play by wins or losses. I track my play by EV accumulated. That makes every day a winning day and in the end (long-term) actual wins and EV will come together."
That sir, is the basic philosophy of AP. :)
LarryS I disagree with you. Kewlj said he has a $100K bankroll, so his starting bankroll each day is not significant. He always had more money within his reach.
The question is why he let go of his five days of profits in one day? Perhaps for him $8800 of profits against a $100K bankroll is insignificant -- and it is. But at the same time did he have to lose all $8800 in one day? What was so compelling that he had to keep playing?
Being an AP, as I understand it, is having a business. What business owner keeps throwing good money after bad? I've asked him when did he realize he was losing? Did he not realize he was losing until all $8800 was gone -- the amount he previously won over five days?
You are getting stupider and more bizarre by the minute.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonI never had an edge. I accept my losses because of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
But someone with an edge and loses needs to consider why.
I think you need to find out what a rising stop loss is.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
No, it's just foreign to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmYou are getting stupider and more bizarre by the minute.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonI never had an edge. I accept my losses because of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
But someone with an edge and loses needs to consider why.
If you flip a coin ten times and it comes up heads 7 times there is nothing unusual about that. But if you flip a coin 10,000 times and it comes up heads 7,000 times then either the coin or the coin flipper is crooked. KJ just experienced some above normal short term variance is all. Now, on to the next subject.
I love it when discussions turn to coin flips. It means you've run out of answers. That's okay.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
It's not about a coin flip and I really want kewlj to respond:
1. When did you realize you were losing?
2. What made you keep playing to the point that you lost $8800 which was the amount you won in the previous five days?
And you earned how much lifetime in your gambling career??? Oh wait, you haven't earned ANYTHING!!! :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonI think you need to find out what a rising stop loss is.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
You are right. This is not about a coin flip. It is about what a dunce you are. Dunce Mendelson.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonI love it when discussions turn to coin flips. It means you've run out of answers. That's okay.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
It's not about a coin flip and I really want kewlj to respond:
1. When did you realize you were losing?
2. What made you keep playing to the point that you lost $8800 which was the amount you won in the previous five days?
I think what Alan is attempting or 'hoping' to do in this thread is paint me as a player lacking self control. He could not be more wrong on this issue. :rolleyes:
Earlier, I sort of listed when it's time to quit, and how winning and losing is not part of that decision. I specifically left out a circumstance of when a player is losing control, losing discipline, maybe chasing. Axel picked up on that and mentioned it. I specifically left that out because IF that situation is occurring, the player has bigger problems. An AP is disciplined and in control of emotions at all times.
There have been exactly two times in my 14 year career that I felt I was losing control of my emotions so I quite early. They both occurred 6 months apart, late 2010 and early 2011. And they both involved huge WINS....not huge losses.
One is an episode I call the perfect shoe. I believe I wrote about it at WOV and am not going to repeat it here. But the synopsis is that from the time the shoe went positive, max bet positive, which was fairly early on, I did not lose a round. I believe I pushed two hands and won every other including a number of double downs and splits (oddly no blackjacks). Playing heads up I won just over 20k in that one shoe. It was by far the most I had ever won in a single day and obviously session (and still is) and frankly I sort of lost my composure. I was not mentally prepared to continue that day, so I quit early even though I only played about 30 minutes that day.
So I intentionally left that type of extremely rare and unique situation out. But if a player is feeling the need to quit early because he/she is not in control of their emotions on a regular basis, they have issues. They are lacking one of the top characteristic that an AP must have to succeed.
I believe Alan is trying to paint me in that light, as he attempts to discredit me, which has been an ongoing thing with him. Alan, you are completely off base. :rolleyes:
I never had an annual profit gambling.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjbAnd you earned how much lifetime in your gambling career??? Oh wait, you haven't earned ANYTHING!!! :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonI think you need to find out what a rising stop loss is.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Kewlj I'm not trying to discredit you but anyone BESIDES an AP is asking what I'm asking. What's wrong with cutting your losses?
Answer that, please.
I have answered that....a half dozen times. Losses don't matter, in the short term. Playing and accumulating EV is what matters. As a matter of fact, I will even go a little further which will blow your mind and say that losing sessions are beneficial. :cool: They contribute to longevity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
You didnt answer my questions, but okay. I wish you the best of luck.
I'd cut the soles off my shoes, sit in a tree and learn to play the flute.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Kewlj I'm not trying to discredit you but anyone BESIDES an AP is asking what I'm asking. What's wrong with cutting your losses?
Answer that, please.
how the fuck does one know that when they stop they are cutting losses or cutting out future profit. Are your a fortune teller. Can you always tell when the next hot roller is going to start at craps? You only know in hindsight if u had actually cut losses had you stopped. You never know at the moment. You can say NOW that if KJ stopped he would have lost less. Or if he never got out of bed he would have lost nothing. Very easy to say after the fact.
Alan just does not understand this topic. Stop responding NOW or this will go on for about 3 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Can someone....anyone explain these 3 statements to me???...one which contradicts the other two! :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Of course you haven’t. I do wonder, then, why you continually challenge and question those who have.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonI never had an annual profit gambling.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjbAnd you earned how much lifetime in your gambling career??? Oh wait, you haven't earned ANYTHING!!! :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Kewl-can you explain exactly what it means to "accumulate EV". I'm not understanding that concept.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJI have answered that....a half dozen times. Losses don't matter, in the short term. Playing and accumulating EV is what matters. As a matter of fact, I will even go a little further which will blow your mind and say that losing sessions are beneficial. :cool: They contribute to longevity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
On days that I can't pick a winner in horses I do stop as tomorrow is another day. Ev or not, if I am having a bad day I don't chase my losses. Same as when I was a sports bettor. On the other hand, I never quit when craps were going bad as I knew I would have at least one big hand if I were patient and waited for my roll. I don't know what's right or wrong but I would recognize a bad day and walk if I were in Kewl's situation----probably at around 4k. Now I don't know what his average bet is. If he's betting a thou per hand then the 8k is nothing.
EV is "expected value".
Example....I am playing a game with a calculated return of 104%. This means for every 1000 in action I should profit 40.00. Therefore my EV is +40.00 for a 1000.00 session. When you truly have an edge you make a schedule and play it. Variance is not going to affect you if you really have an edge and play according to your bankroll using Kelly Criterion or something similar.
Professional gamblers measure their results on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis using EV. If I get 25K down at 104% return I earned 1K for the day. If I want to make 100K for the year then I know that I have to set a schedule and maintain it to get in the 2.5 million in action needed.
Variance must factor in. Imagine you are playing a game called Mega Roulette. Here are the rules and payouts:
1. The roulette wheel has 100 trillion spots.
2. You may only bet on 1 spot at a time (1 spot per spin).
3. Each spot pays 1 quadrillion to the 1 quadrillionth power to the 1 quadrillionth power to the 1 quadrillionth power to the 1 quadrillionth power to the 1 quadrillionth power.
4. Each spot has an equal chance of hitting.
The EV advantage on this game is too large for the human brain to imagine, but you will never hit your number during the lifetime of the universe (i.e. nearly infinite variance).
From the math I've seen on Megabucks it goes positive at $24,000,000. But the odds on the top line hit is 50,000,000. It's not what I consider hittable. No AP will touch it.
Exactamundo - thanks for providing a real world example.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Exactly! Wonderful explanation of EV, MaxPen. And this is precisely why Alan's concept of stop losses and limits is nonsense to AP's. Our daily goal is not bases on any kind of win or loss, but rather getting in the action that we need to generate a predetermined amount of EV needed.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPen
There is one possibility where losses enter into the picture. I have been reluctant to mention it because I don't want to give ammunition to the stop limit guys that really don't understand the concept. That situation is that I nor most player DON'T carry our entire bankroll with us for security reasons. So there is some sort of 'playing bankroll' or 'trip bankroll' that we have on us. So in the event of losing that portion of BR actually on me, I have two options, to replenish and continue or call it a day. Unless I have lost that 'trip bankroll' very quickly, in the first hour or two of the day, I will usually call it a day.
So in effect that IS a 'loss limit' but it is more a loss limit based on security reasons. If you get robbed once, as I have. you quickly learn you have to find that balance of carrying enough to play, but also only a portion of bankroll.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Does this mean when Alan wins $10K playing craps, that this is actually a bad day since he has accumulated -EV ?Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
This is confusing, weren't you tracking your play when you wrote this?...Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Stop playing these little "gottch ya games" coach. You are an intelligent knowledgeable gambling guy. Start contributing in a positive manner instead of playing these silly games.
kewlj, if I start with a say a hundred thousand bankroll and due to variance lose half of it does that mean when I start my next session it's the same as if I were starting from day one with a fifty thousand bankroll so at that point I have a much higher chance of going bust?
Basically yes.
True 'Kelly' which is optimal for bankroll growth, says that you resize as your bankroll goes up and down. So technically if you win a wager, your next bet should be slightly larger than the last with the same advantage. :rolleyes: But nobody does that. No one is going to resize that frequently. Plus you would be wagering all these odd amounts. So the compromise position is to resize after a certain % bankroll gain or decline. Something like maybe 20-25%.
The year I started off losing 34k, which was 34% of my original 100k bankroll, I probably should have resized somewhere about 20-25k loss level....but I didn't. I really despise the idea of losing 10's of thousands of dollars playing one betting level and resizing and trying to win that back playing half the level. :( So I didn't 'resize' when I should have....and got lucky. I think if I had hit 40-50k, I would have resized. I did have the advantage at that time that 100k starting bankroll wasn't all my wealth, but it was a significant portion of it at that time.
The other thing is that I am not trying to grow my bankroll so that I can move up in stakes (betting levels) so as to earn even more money. I am done with that. I went through that growing my bankroll period. I am now comfortably bankrolled for the levels that I want to play for a while. Levels that I have identified as fairly well tolerated, which will hopefully allow for some longevity of another 10 years. "Hopefully"...:rolleyes:
You stop(or lower your bets) when your bankroll is in jeopardy. That's so you can reevaluate what and how much you can afford to bet going forward without going broke. It's seem like KJ didn't feel as if an $8800 loss was going to put him in a much different situation.
One might ask why re-size. You just built up all that accumulated EV after those losses.
That is correct. You can't play $25 level video poker for an hour, experience a bad run and get your ass handed to you and then drop down to 25 cent level and think you are going to win all that back and get to the level of 'expectation' that you should be at for total play. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by regnis
My conclusion that eventually (long-term results) EV and actual results will 'line up' pretty close together is based on the same or relatively close level of play. It is just very hard to "catch up" playing much lower levels. To avoid this you have to make sure you are properly bankrolled from the start. I mean to the point that you are playing nearly 0 RoR to start with, so you don't have to resize. Many players aren't in that position. Many players are still building their BR.
If you are uncomfortable answering the questions then don't answer them, but suggesting that I stop asking questions is disingenuous.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
You had 5 winning days and 1 losing day, I'm trying to understand how the losing day is the best of the 6.
You didn't provide details of your play on the losing day, and how that differed from the play on the winning days
such that you could accumulate more EV.
Did you play more hands on the losing day?
Earlier you referenced the end of your "work day", does the length of the work day vary,
and what circumstances would cause the length of your play to change from one day to the next?
Yes, I did. I had better conditions on that particular day (8800 losing day). It was a weekday (Monday) and I happened to luck into a couple heads up play sessions. That means more rounds played and higher EV.
Most days with bigger win AND loss total will be days played with better conditions, meaning getting in more rounds (heads up) or more opportunities to track multiple tables jump directly to other max bet counts. It really is about those higher counts....what I call "max bet opportunities". The more of them you have the more likely to win (or lose) a little more money. So your bigger winning AND losing days are likely to be days played with better conditions.
And just the opposite, if I end up playing days with crowded condition and less chance to jump to better tables and opportunities, I am likely to experience smaller winning and losing days. There are fewer 'max bet opportunities' and that is where your wins and losses REALLY come from.
To keep your Risk of Ruin next to nil.Quote:
Originally Posted by regnis
What risk. You have all that accumulated EV to cash in on.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjbTo keep your Risk of Ruin next to nil.Quote:
Originally Posted by regnis
But seriously, as KEWL answered, you can't recoup if you decrease too much. Also, if you do believe in the math and the accumulated EV, you will have decreased at a time that you should be winning. Just seems a slight dichotomy.
I understand that the higher counts would last longer playing heads-up, since fewer cards are dealt for each round,Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
but doesn't it take longer for the max bet opportunity to develop for the same reason?
Do you continue to play heads-up if the count is negative or marginal?
And once you jump to another table, doesn't that conclude the heads-up play?
Isn't that a type of Gambler's Fallacy?Quote:
Originally Posted by regnis
Exactly my point BillQuote:
Originally Posted by Bill YungIsn't that a type of Gambler's Fallacy?Quote:
Originally Posted by regnis
I think I had the measles when they taught this lesson in math: losing dollars is okay because you thought you should be winning.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
I promise I am done with this. No one ever told me EV DOLLARS is what it's all about.
But your point is based on a false premise.Quote:
Originally Posted by regnisBut yurQuote:
Originally Posted by Bill YungIsn't that a type of Gambler's Fallacy?Quote:
Originally Posted by regnis
Exactly my point Bill
You should be done with this topic. You should have been done before you even opened your mouth, using Singer's talking points to prove your ignorance on a topic you haven't a clue about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonI think I had the measles when they taught this lesson in math: losing dollars is okay because you thought you should be winning.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
I promise I am done with this. No one ever told me EV DOLLARS is what it's all about.
No, you go answer a call of nature whether you actually have to answer one or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach belly
How can you get into a high positive count heads-up situation without playing negative or marginal counts?Quote:
Originally Posted by tableplayNo, you go answer a call of nature whether you actually have to answer one or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach belly
Didn't poker player David Sklansky write if you lose then you weren't playing optimally?Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJYou should be done with this topic. You should have been done before you even opened your mouth, using Singer's talking points to prove your ignorance on a topic you haven't a clue about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonI think I had the measles when they taught this lesson in math: losing dollars is okay because you thought you should be winning.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
I promise I am done with this. No one ever told me EV DOLLARS is what it's all about.
Maybe, you should take some time off, and look at ways to improve your game. Over the next 30 years, say, of staring at multiple tables to count cards, and posting on gambling forums to make sure that the WoV et al doesn't forget you, a small improvement in tact or technique might go a long way.
Losing is a good thing? Then improve upon it.
Assuming you're taking out one thousand a week in addition to maintaining your bankroll, cutting ev in half (by betting at a lower level) doesn't sound quite right. What am I missing?
You play the neutral count - the high negative count is abandoned with a bathroom break.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach bellyHow can you get into a high positive count heads-up situation without playing negative or marginal counts?Quote:
Originally Posted by tableplayNo, you go answer a call of nature whether you actually have to answer one or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach belly
Don't play the Singer card because Singer has nothing to do with this. Now I am not going to debate you anymore, because others are starting to do a good job of it now. You are using, what Lane Kirkland (Google him) once called "voodoo economics." I have never in my life seen so much bullshit before. You lost $8800 and you have the nerve to tell us it was "my best day of the year"? WTF kid????Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJYou should be done with this topic. You should have been done before you even opened your mouth, using Singer's talking points to prove your ignorance on a topic you haven't a clue about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonI think I had the measles when they taught this lesson in math: losing dollars is okay because you thought you should be winning.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
I promise I am done with this. No one ever told me EV DOLLARS is what it's all about.
Try counting cards at a $25 minimum game with a $100 bankroll compared to a $50,000 one. That's why you resize.Quote:
Originally Posted by regnisWhat risk. You have all that accumulated EV to cash in on.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjbTo keep your Risk of Ruin next to nil.Quote:
Originally Posted by regnis
But seriously, as KEWL answered, you can't recoup if you decrease too much. Also, if you do believe in the math and the accumulated EV, you will have decreased at a time that you should be winning. Just seems a slight dichotomy.
You missed it, jbjb. We're starting to giggle at all this "accumulated EV." The emperor has no clothes.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjbTry counting cards at a $25 minimum game with a $100 bankroll compared to a $50,000 one. That's why you resize.Quote:
Originally Posted by regnisWhat risk. You have all that accumulated EV to cash in on.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
But seriously, as KEWL answered, you can't recoup if you decrease too much. Also, if you do believe in the math and the accumulated EV, you will have decreased at a time that you should be winning. Just seems a slight dichotomy.
That is fine you old fossil! I'll return your disrespect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
A for the rest of you blabbering, you really just proving your ignorance. Just like numerous other topic, everyone that actually has a clue is just laughing at your stupidity.
kewlj you live in a fantasy world. I'm done with you. And say what you want. I'm not going to respond. You're dead to me, too.
His best day EVwise but his results were off. Alan, with the stop win/stop loss, you are the voodoo gambler. You like to stick a pin in it. Like that is going to do any good. All that stop loss you did after you hit those big royals didn't do you a bit of good because you wound up blowing all the money back anyway. It just prolonged your misery.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonDon't play the Singer card because Singer has nothing to do with this. Now I am not going to debate you anymore, because others are starting to do a good job of it now. You are using, what Lane Kirkland (Google him) once called "voodoo economics." I have never in my life seen so much bullshit before. You lost $8800 and you have the nerve to tell us it was "my best day of the year"? WTF kid????Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJYou should be done with this topic. You should have been done before you even opened your mouth, using Singer's talking points to prove your ignorance on a topic you haven't a clue about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
The problem with losing to conceal winning is the always coming back. Persons who lose keep on losing. Not losing doesn't equal not winning.
And it's what you do and don't do at the blackjack tables that gets you into trouble. Not what you do in the washrooms.
No, he wrote that if you aren't taking a lot of variance, both positive and negative, you aren't playing optimally.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Yung
I believe it was in his relatively short, thirty pages or so, soft cover book on Razz poker, but he may have mentioned it in others. And that he meant it strictly in the context of actually knowing the others' cards. How ones strategy ultimately differs from that. To play perfect poker would be to know the others' cards. Ie, optimal strategy. Sort of like "running through the finish line". Trying to do the impossible.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmNo, he wrote that if you aren't taking a lot of variance, both positive and negative, you aren't playing optimally.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Yung
There is no such thing as a stop win, so you stop. The voodoo is telling me that that a fantasy win with EV is equal to real dollars. Wake up call: it's not. Quit the bullshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmHis best day EVwise but his results were off. Alan, with the stop win/stop loss, you are the voodoo gambler. You like to stick a pin in it. Like that is going to do any good. All that stop loss you did after you hit those big royals didn't do you a bit of good because you wound up blowing all the money back anyway. It just prolonged your misery.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonDon't play the Singer card because Singer has nothing to do with this. Now I am not going to debate you anymore, because others are starting to do a good job of it now. You are using, what Lane Kirkland (Google him) once called "voodoo economics." I have never in my life seen so much bullshit before. You lost $8800 and you have the nerve to tell us it was "my best day of the year"? WTF kid????Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
"His best day EVwise but his results were off"? Give me a friggin break. What planet do you live on?
You haven't a clue what you are talking about and you are making yourself look extremely stupid to the people lurking this forum. But if you don't care then I don't either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Blackjack is a thin edge game. If your bankroll size allows you to play though $100,000 dollars of expectation (EV) a year then you are going to have winning days and losing days. But your results at the end of the year should be pretty close to expectation. It could be more or less. If you insert a stop loss in your play, say $2000 a day, then you won't get very close to running the 100K in expectation in a year because of the loss of hours of play. If you go $2000 stuck sometime during the day it doesn't mean you will continue to lose for the rest of the day.
Mickey, Mickey, Mickey. EV is one thing. Winning is one thing. Losing is one thing. To tell me you had positive EV but you lost $8800 and you had the best day is a far reach.
Now, I wasn't born yesterday, and I don't drink. So you're going to have a hard time --- a very hard time --- feeding me this kind of BS.
Adios to you, too. Go back to posting photos of casinos.
Here's what this is really about. Alan has a hard-on about discrediting me. He has tried to from the day I joined this site, every chance he got. So he challenges everything I say. What he doesn't realize is none of what I say or do I stuff that I have come up with. These are mathematically proven techniques utilizes by many, many professional players and teams that have won 10's, even hundreds of millions of dollars.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmYou haven't a clue what you are talking about and you are making yourself look extremely stupid to the people lurking this forum. But if you don't care then I don't either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
So Alan hears some concept about EV that he has no clue about because he is a degenerative gambler, NOT an AP and he thinks it's bullshit. But it is all mathematically proven stuff. I take no credit for it. I am not even a math guy. I just benefit from learning these math concepts from other people who are much smarter 'math' guys.
So Alan isn't really challenging me as he thinks and gets a hard-on about. He is challenging the mathematics, the proven mathematics....proven by many, many professional players that have make millions and millions of dollars.
Alan is just a degenerative gambler, completely ignorant of winning play, advantage play. Hell, he doesn't even realize how much he is embarrassing himself.