Don't we all, however, what you want and what you get are not under your control. If you believe it is you are delusional.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Printable View
Don't we all, however, what you want and what you get are not under your control. If you believe it is you are delusional.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Why do you feel the need to lie? No one cares if you leave for any reason. All the math guys tell you is that decision won't lead to any more profits in the long run.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
But, if you return, you really didn't cash out. You put your money right back into the machine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
You might also miss them when you return. Same machine same odds. There is no difference between playing another hand today or playing that hand next week.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
What is not rational is your continued blather that is in direct contradiction to known mathematics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I'll clarify the arci agenda for you Alan. Let's look at this from a clean angle and remove ourselves from the pressure video poker's put his life under first.
Everyone knows walking with a profit of any kind is far better than losing and is the smartest and best way to control what you do, rather than let the casino coerce you into doing anything other than that. How often do we see RF's? Seldom of course. But what after hitting mine the other night for instance, if I stayed playing until my body wouldn't let me any more? Overwhelmingly, I would lose some of it, lose a good portion of it, or lose all of the $4376 I was ahead (I naturally left no floor tip)--or even more! So I did the only smart thing and stopped for the remainder of our stay.
Arci (and other severely misguided self-proclaimed "AP's") almost always not only play right thru those big hits--they even start pounding away on the machine next to their locked up winner because their confidence and sweaty palms direct them to....to the gratifying delight of the casino staff, of course. So what's their excuse for not walking with such a big profit? (And this is the funny AND sad part). They expect they'll lose it anyway especially if they're far ahead of theoretical expectation at that point because the math is the math is the math, and in their blocked minds it's just not possible or even probable to come out ahead of it. And this is why they feel the burning need to get to the casinos and play as many hands as fast as possible for as long as possible. They KNOW in their minds they'll never stay that far "ahead of the curve", and if they're in "catch up" mode they figure the more hands they play the faster they'll arrive at "expectation" since the math, again, to them, promises this.
Case in point: Why did arci make that fateful move to LV? Because he was so overwhelmed by the promise of the math that he erroneously believed that if he and his wife sat at machines for 6, 8....10 hours a day or even more, he'd not only be at expectation sooner, he'd have the missus' HELP in getting there! Plus, the more money run through, the higher the "income" because of that mythical tiny percentage in phantom bucks awaiting them at the end of the rainbow (year). Typical gamblers fallacy.... or more like FOLLY to the educated mind, which also concludes that all they're really doing is creating justification for playing far more than they should-something none of them will ever admit to.
This thing I do and you and sling and others do--walking away with a profit as often as possible? They think it's irrelevant and even stupid because of their belief in how they think long term theory applies to what they do. Short term play bursts do not compute to them, because they cannot fathom or comprehend ANY player not wanting to sit at machines for ungodly amounts of time just to play the "approach expectation" game. And not only will they never see this as viable, they'll totally reject that anyone could ever win "over time" doing so. It is a mental block that's there because they need it to be there. Arci, Dancer, Wizard etc. etc. etc.....they're all the same. They don't want something to be, so it just isn't. Nothing measures up to their beliefs, which is why whenever I've challenged any of these "geniuses" on air, in the paper, on my site or on their own forums, they run as fast as they can. No one wants their belief system challenged, let alone destroyed. And in front of others? OMG!!!
Rob, get real. I play what would be considered "by AP rules," and I have no issue with stopping tomorrow permanently if there isn't any value to it. I can play 15 hours a day for a week if called for. I can never play again if called for. I don't find vp much of a recreational thrill, as some do. I'm sure there are plenty of people just like me. Unlike some folks with extraordinary claims and alleged abilities, I don't think I'm one of a kind. Your attempt to bundle playing "by AP rules" with various and sundry psychological interpretations is strange. It suggests you are the grand inquisitor or something, and know thousands of AP's upon which to draw your conclusions. I mean, at least when people label you as having "narcissistic personality disorder," they're basing it on thousands of posts over years in various forums. Your conclusions regarding the mental makeup of all AP's are way, way out there.
I wonder if Alan would allow you to demean a segment of the population as you do if the niche population in question were bowlers, softball players, or people who pay for infomercials.
Then you are not the typical vp-playing "AP", because if you were then you'd SAY you wouldn't play again if the "positive opportunities" went away, but you'd do what the vast majority has done and reinvent the rules just so you could keep on keeping on. AP's have always been the #1 group of gamblers casinos count on for their vp profits. Yes anyone can claim to being a vp AP. It helps with their gambling sanity. But no AP ever won without luck being the #1 factor. That's why casinos continually have fair to very lucrative promotions as they've ALWAYS had. They count on roping in as many self described AP's as possible because they know these people will first bring in whatever money possible from whatever source possible, then they know exactly how these people create greater than 100% plays in order to play in the promo.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
That's why AP's are the world's best fools gold prospectors. Theory is their most important product. They have more phantom bucks in the banks than even they think they do.
Oh look, another comment by the all seeing, all knowing psychic, Madam Roberta. LOL
One can only chuckle at anyone who would spew such obvious lies while demonstrating his unending envy of successful VP players.
And now, an arcimede$ quote fest:
Absolutely correct arc, we are dealing with a random number generator and all of the correct strategy holds in the world won't alter what the RNG does.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
You don't know that, unless you can predict the future and can predict how the RNG will perform. As mentioned above, you can follow the correct strategy 100% of the time but that doesn't mean the RNG will cooperate with you. Even at a positive expectation game there is now way to guarantee a profit -- and you know that, arc.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
Let's continue with the arc fest:
Yes, you cashed out and yes you came back to play again. So what? Does the fact that you come back to play again nullify the profit you cashed out the day before?Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
This next quote is in reply to my comment that when you walk away you might miss the next winner or loser:
That's correct, so what's your point? I don't know about you, but I like to go home with a profit. Nothing forces me to keep putting profits back into the machine to risk losing them. Are you compelled to keep playing after a profit? Does the math compel you to keep playing? I don't think so. If you keep playing it is not because of the math. You might keep playing out of boredom or because of greed, or fear that someone else will hit the next royal. But there is no math that tells you to push the button again.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
But wait, there's more!
What mathematics tells you that it is wrong for me to leave with a profit? What mathematics tells you that when playing a game of chance (which what video poker with a positive expectation pay table is) that you should keep playing?Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
It seems to me that a positive paytable has become an excuse to justify the continued play at a game of chance.
Now, I might be wrong. There might be some mathematical law or principle which says you must continue to play a game with a positive expectation and video poker with a positive paytable. If there is, what is it? Where will I find it?
Also show me the mathematical law or principle which says it is wrong to leave a casino with more money than you came to the casino with?
I think the only people who believe it is wrong for a player to leave with more money than they came with are the casino owners, managers and employees. When they wish you "good luck" I am sure they sincerely mean it.
You beat me to the punch Alan--I was going to offer a similar reply. I don't understand how anyone can question leaving with a profit. Even if you look at it mathematically, if you have hit a royal or some big quads and are substantially ahead, you have gotten ahead of the "MATH", and will most likely begin to lose back some of that profit. Even on a positive expectation game(which I for one don't have access to), you will reduce your return on investment, even if you somehow achieve the expected return thereafter.
So you can continue to play simply because you enjoy doing so, you can take the profit and run, or, as Alan seems to do, you can raise your stop and play a little more. But the most likely event if you keep playing is going to be a reduction on your return on investment. So again, what's wrong with taking the profit.
And no, if I come back next week it is not a continuous game. I have $$$ in my pocket. I have another loss limit. I cannot give it back next time. I am not forced to keep playing in the manner in which an AP must keep playing.
The Bears won a game yesterday. They are credited with a win. Next Sunday is another game. It is not one continuous lifetime game. That's how some of us approach it.
Red--you bet sports. You are good (I assume-and so you say). The games you won this weekend you got paid for and have $$ in your pocket. You weren't compelled to stay up late and bet Hawaii (I do miss the days of calling sport phone at 3 in the morning to get the Hawaii score), even though your skill gives you an advantage. No--you pick your spots and every weekend you hope to profit. Why do we insist on making VP different?
Regnis, you are quite wrong here.
If I think the Hawaii game has a 55% chance of covering, I play it. It's a perceived advantage. I don't stop because I was 8-0 that day. I don't stop if I was 0-8 that day.
That's what positive expectation video poker is about. If you have an advantage, then it makes no sense to stop because you have a "win" in the books. If you've lost, similarly, it makes no sense.
I don't really care if I've lost eight in a row or won eight in a row. If I know what I'm doing, it's irrelevant. My bankroll is sufficient that those kinds of streaks don't matter. As my former girlfriend said, I'm equally miserable win or lose, because there's something I could have done better.
In fact, sports gambling is actually a great way to highlight what's wrong with Alan's argument. You don't examine a schedule of games and choose how many to play based on whether you won the first one or two or three. You examine the schedule and play the appropriate number all at once before they begin. Screwing around with stop losses and betting more if you win early -- that stuff is for amateurs.
By the way, regnis, I have to tell you. The Hawaii reference made me think you have my phone tapped. I lost a horrendous game in Hawaii last week. I had Oregon State -9 -- they were up 38-7 heading into the fourth. Well, a bunch of defensive substitutes, a blocked punt, a fumbled kickoff return, two roughing the passer calls, and a fourth and one bomb later, Oregon State wins 38-30. I stayed up until 2:45 AM watching that mess. Would have been worse, but they had an early start. Had a headache for two days. So I chuckled at the Hawaii reference -- that was a bad one.
I would concede that sports betting, like stock market investing, and even like playing live poker, is not the same as video poker. Your knowledge can improve your chances of winning and give you an advantage in sports betting, and stock market investing and playing live poker (tells, ability to read other players, knowledge of chances of a draw, etc.).
But the great equalizer in video poker is the Random Number Generator which can cancel out the knowledge of any player who believes he plays perfect strategy.
Somehow the idea of advantage play which does exist in blackjack because you can count cards in a game with a finite number of decks transferred over to video poker.
I would liken someone who claims to be an advantage player in video poker to someone who claims to be an advantage player in craps but has no ability to control the dice. When you can control the RNG in video poker, then you have an advantage. Otherwise, all of your strategy is just operating with a hope and a prayer that the RNG will come through for you.
In short, there is no advantage play in video poker.
Red seems to be buying into the myth that the Wizard ropes in his customers with--that a positive EV bet is a good bet, win or LOSE! And have you ever heard more explicit nonsense in your life? In other words, all those AP's out there who've gone broke gambling over the years....these people all have something to be proud of.....while poor little 'ol me--I just can't seem to lose playing games that come in at .6% under, so I should be beating my head against the wall!
Taking a profit after playing is the only sure way to win. Continued playing almost always leads to a reduction or worse when you remain at the same denomination and/or do not use my play strategy. And there actually IS a difference if you keep playing today on this machine or return in a few days to continue. You'll get a completely difference set of deals & draws. No one knows where in the shelf life of the RNG it'll be at. One thing is for sure--it won't deal the same hands both times.
Wise up people.
I'm glad we cleared that up, Alan, about they're not being any advantage play in video poker. Why exactly do you play it? Do you enjoy losing? Be honest. Some gambling personality theorists used to suggest gambling was a way for wayward souls to punish themselves. See, what you're suggesting -- the "it's all just luck" perspective -- has been discussed for decades. Another name for it is -- "it's all just God" perspective. The two are just different names for the same attitude. "If the RNG wants you to win, you'll win." That's the same as "if God wants you to win, you'll win."
What's fascinating here is that Rob does suggest quite blatantly that he's "blessed by God."
Anyway, the old theories had to do with people perceiving themselves as sinners or just behaving badly, as in messing around on significant others and so on. Gambling was a way for these people to evaluate what God thought of them. If they won, it was interpreted as momentary salvation despite their sins. If they lost, it was fate/God/the RNG punishing them for their behaviors. So the "action," the quickening of the nerves, the little churns in the stomach, that people would experience while gambling, were at least in part caused by the nervousness of being evaluated by God or gods as they gambled.
It's good to know old theories may have current relevance.
It's like how I say that tournament poker is for people who enjoy losing. Everyone except for the 1st place finisher walks away disappointed.
That's why I only play it once in awhile.
It's way too depressing.
BTW Rob, the 3-year-old is my natural child, not a stepchild.
In the last year I've actually won playing VP because of a combination of luck and leaving with a profit. I only wish I could do the same at craps.
In previous years I kept playing VP only until I hit a big payoff or lost my daily imit. But this year by accepting smaller win goals I have had much better results.
Simply I am not as greedy. A small win makes me smile.
Obviously, you do not understand the concept of randomness nor statistical probabilities. Why do you continue to make silly assertions about things you know nothing about?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Complete nonsense. Alan, you've been asked before to consult with PhD's in mathematics. Why haven't you taken the time to educate yourself? Why do you continue to spew absolute nonsense? The only reason the computer in front of you works is due to statistical probabilities. Yet, with the evidence starting you in the face, you still deny statistics applies to VP.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
No Alan, you did better because you had a higher frequency of good paying hands. That had nothing to do with when you quit playing on any given day. If you understood what random means then you would understand what I am saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
arc, I will never put my money in your hands.
When I put $200 of free play in my girlfriend's hands she knew exactly what to do (and it was carried to a fault which is what's funny):
She played 5 coins in and with every winner she hit the cash out button. Thanks to a couple of quads, and her cash out total was a bit north of $600. (She won about $80 more at craps.) Would you have told her that she should have kept playing?
Yes it did. And by quitting when ahead the money came home with me.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$