Printable View
And of course you are right. But if you had asked the question in reverse, any AP would then agree with you. Low variance games create more opportunity for more points and higher slot club status. Why? BECAUSE YOUR BANKROLL LASTS LONGER. No amount of lengthy face-saving babble will ever change that fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Indeed you are correct Rob. So far this year I have more than 155-thousand tier points in Total Rewards, but I am showing only a small loss on the year. Yes, my royal in January helped. But the point is clear: with a much smaller loss I am scoring more points, getting more comps, and at Rincon cash back. Plus I still have more money to go after those elusive royals. in other words, I didn't blow it on higher variance games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I find it ironic that our "AP friends" would advocate playing higher variance games. Even Dancer doesn't. A higher variance game might have the bigger payoffs and even a positive edge, but its that higher variance that can bankrupt you before you hit those big pays.
Unless, of course, you are a magical player who always is rescued by a royal in the nick of time....
I reread this entire thread and saw no evidence of anyone advocating playing higher variance games.
Are any of you actually challenging the assertion that low variance games, given a "normal length" session of two to four hours, have a lower percentage of winning sessions than higher variance games?
The assertion that Dancer (who, as I said, I am not a fan of) doesn't advocate higher variance games is incorrect without references to bankroll and risk of ruin probabilities. Dancer doesn't advocate high variance if it puts you into certain risk of ruin percentages, but if your bankroll is sufficiently large compared to your stakes, he has nothing bad to say about high variance.
Yes there are arguments for and against high and low varience games. But in the context Alan's putting it, he is right. Could arci also possibly right depending on the circumstances? Yes, but only after he inserted his foot into his mouth. Again. :)
That's a different topic. Essentially, that is referring to what you like to call the "long term". That is, your bankroll takes fewer big hits. However, we were talking about individual sessions which I presumed was about 4000 hands plus or minus a couple thou.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
As we can see the dufus really knows nothing of the subject matter.
It finally dawned on me that some of the confusion may be due to different definitions of bankroll employed by Alan versus myself and Arci. The idea that low variance enables me to play longer and get royals and such is silly to me because I've never had to stop playing because I didn't have enough money. My bankroll compared to the stakes I'm playing for make it damn near impossible for me to run out of money, so I don't even concern myself with that.
But when you define "bankroll" as some pre-set amount to be lost on a trip, then that changes things. I am unfamiliar with that. If I play for 10 hours, I doubt if I put 10% of my gambling bankroll through a vp machine. So on a really, really terrible day, I might lose 10% of the 10%.
Here's where you can get into trouble, Arc. Anything could happen in the short term of 4,000 hands. When it comes to your high variance game, you could make a killing... or you could get killed. Frankly, I'm really surprised you would discuss anything over the course of 4,000 hands or "the short term." I would think that goes against your religion??Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
This is fun. :) Watch arci backtrack, do an emergency walk-around, then require others to define his own words for him. And finally, after more namecalling, comes the inevitable a-humma...a-humma...a-humma--and straight from the corner too!!
The subject was sessions because you are the one that thinks setting a win goal (winning a particular session) makes sense. That's the entire reason for the discussion. I've stated many times that all I worry about is winning over time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
You were also the won who asked me how many sessions I won. You also asked my strategy for play. All of these get back to what a person does on a trip to a casino.
I guess this points out yet again what poor reading comprehension some people have.
My grandson always blames it on someone else too :). But a good bounce on Grammy's knee brings him to his senses.
Either a player believes in individual sessions or they don't. Whenever Dancer's asked about it he never acknowledges it and refuses to even comment. But a waffler....now that's a different story. Once you're caught in the middle arci and make more stupid comments, you always end up dangling.
"believes in individual sessions" ??????Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
What kind of nonsense is that? We are all forced to play individual sessions. That's simply a fact of life. It doesn't take belief.
Could you say anything more silly? Well, I suppose so, you've done it over and over.
I could dig up a thousand posts where you've claimed "it's all one lifelong session until you quit playing for good" but all that would do is force you into more denial, more spin....more lies. And one would think you have more important matters to tend to these days--and I don't mean sneaking out to the Indian casinos either :)
Life is one long logical session. It still requires playing individual physical sessions. Only a dufus wouldn't understand the difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
:).....arci, better quit while you're behind, my friend. You dig that hole too deep, you may never be able to get out of it again. And you wouldnt't know WHAT to do with yourself if you couldnt't....no, not that! Couldnt't sit at another vp machine again.
Translation: The dufus realizes what a complete dufus he is ... so, better try and change the subject before anyone figures it out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
What? More namecalling!?
And you know what THAT means....:)
Oh, and BTW.....a new term: LOGICAL SESSION?, :) A-HA HA HA HA HA HA! ROTFLMAO!! Have you not yet figured out what it is I do to you!? :)
Funny, I suspect every single person reading this forum understands the concept of a logical session. The fact you don't is why you are a dufus.
First time I ever saw the phrase "logical session" so please explain what it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
In all of the other discussions the claims by the APs were that there is only one life-long session of video poker so it was foolish to even consider short term play.
To be fair to all sides: there are so many different definitions we need a dictionary and rule book for some of these discussions, as well as an index of what has been said before and where. It's enough to make people dizzy. But, we are seeing some new terminology here that was not used before. So, I hope those folks over at LVA realize they are missing out on a lot of new info here. LOL
Both protagonists in this VP drama appear to be making things up as they go along. So, to join in, I'll add something new to the terminology to succinctly describe this drama: silly-sad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Vegas Vic, I'm going to disagree with you. I think this is a very good discussion. I think it would be better without the hits below the belt, and without the name calling, and without the personal snide remarks. But other than the childishness, it is a good discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegas Vic
I don't blame arci one bit for making something else up on the go....and getting caught again doing it. After all, what else does he have left? Stimulation comes in many forms. I suspect that because today's Sunday, the missus thinks he's off to church asking for forgiveness (which should take quite some time). But where do you think he REALLY IS....:)
Where he took his latest wrong turn was in waffling between a term he previously would never use in describing anything about advantage play--the short term--and his misguided belief that it is all one lifelong term. Over the years I've found that the longer I've explained and discussed how we all only and always play in individual, unrelated short term bursts, all the so-called and self-proclaimed gurus & experts eventually find themselves doing exactly what arci has done here: they start talking in common sense, then either catch themselves and are ashamed for going out of character, or get reminded by another embarrassed party--and become predictably defensive. One of my discussions with Mike Shackleford provides another good example.
A logical session is any grouping of hands you want to consider. It could be your life-time results, it could a year's play, it could be a month, it could be an hour. The physical session is bounded by your time in the casino.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Oh, I get it. When I talk about a "logical session" it is a grouping of hands/plays that I set. Okay, then. Did I tell you about that logical session seven years ago when I was dealt a royal flush on my first hand? (The illogical session also includes about a hundred plays before I hit the royal and one more to clear the machine when they paid me._Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
Absurd.
Sorry to inform you that I don't belong to any church. You sure have it figured out, don't you. LOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I was at the casino today raking in around $1300. My first trip in over 2 weeks. That was close to my high for the day.
Once again you just have to laugh at the dufus claiming he is right and every mathematician and professional is wrong. It's absolutely hilarious when you think about it. There are probably millions of people capable of understanding VP math. Not one of them would agree with the dufus. Of course, anyone who believes he is right and the millions are wrong doesn't look too bright either.
:) Soooo funny....he made something else up!Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
If this were Hunger Games, he'd be eaten alive!!!
No church affiliation? No kidding! To do what you've done, then expecting you have a relationship to some sort of deity would be like Bob Dancer not having to keep working!Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
PS: Given a choice between staying home with my sickly wife or going to a casino to get my gaming fix, what kind of person do you think would do the latter? It's all been said.
So goes love....or lack thereof.
No, it's actually the way scientists often view areas of study. In order to compare things that may not be exactly alike they normalize those items. Since the results of that normalization are not real, they are by definition virtual. It's quite hilarious to see Alan claiming scientists must all be "absurd". But then, he appears to believe everything the dufus tells him instead of listening to mathematicians and professionals .... which puts it all in perspective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Oh hey, I got a great idea. Let's get into a religious discussion. That ought to be interesting since the dufus appears to believe the Earth is less than 10K years old.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Once again we see the dufus is out in left field. The medical profession recommends that caregivers take an appropriate amount of time for themselves. I've literally been ask dozens of times if I'm getting away enough. But, the dufus now believes he is smarter than the entire medical profession. Not surprising since he believes he is smarter than all the mathematicians in the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Hey Alan, are you starting to get the picture yet? This guy is a complete loon. I think I've been too kind in calling him a dufus.
Ah-ha-ha-ha!! How about the truth arci? Time for yourself to go to a CASINO....where it all started? That's so despicable it's even low for you. I'd say you're getting exactly what you've asked for.
John Edwards has nothing on this guy.
Another comment by the dufus ... another lie. My wife's problems started when she was diagnosed with type I diabetes at the age of 19. Casinos never had anything to do with her problems. But hey, maybe the dufus has secretly been following her around for decades and, since he knows more than anyone in the medical profession, we should listen to him. Bwah hahahahahaha.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I really do think I need a stronger name for this loon. Dufus just isn't strong enough.
As for my trips to the casino ... I actually hire an old friend of my wife's to come over and stay just in case something came up. This lady is a retired nurse who lives on SS so she really appreciates the money I pay her.
No Arc. Now you're being absurd. What's next? Showing how the odds of video poker draws relates to curing the national debt? Wiping out HIV? Telling us where Jimmy Hoffa is?Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
You have introduced us a new term for video poker discussion: "logical session." I never heard it from Bob Dancer, or John Grochowski, or Wizard of Odds Shackleford, or even from Singer!! But now, you tell us it is the standard for video poker analysis!!
Well, if you keep posting it, and create your own website or blog about it, eventually Google will pick it up, Wikipedia will create a page, and you, Arc, will be known as the father of "Video Poker Logical Session Analysis." And then the rest of us will be able to say with pride -- we were there at the moment of creation.
Of course you will have to get Dancer, Grochowski, Scott, Shackleford and everyone else to rewrite their books. Perhaps South Point or Station Casinos will hire you for a series of seminars? Hmmm, let's see: I predict your "logical session" of lectures will be...... ZERO.
Silly nonsense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I said nothing of the sort. I simply pointed out that people can view VP play in many ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
This is all very simple stuff, Alan. For example, if you said you lost $xxx last month playing craps you are essentially defining a virtual session of one months play of craps. You're getting hung up on the word virtual. In this case it just means a different way of viewing data than the actual physical sessions. I thought most people understood what it meant. I guess I overestimated you.
If the point of this comment was to demonstrate your ignorance, I congratulate you on being very successful.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
There's a lot of verbal debris floating around, but I think Arci's point is that if you canvass opinions about what's been discussed here regarding beating a negative game and quitting while ahead, you're going to have to choose between two camps. Either Rob and Alan (who has adjusted what he's said) were correct, or Arci and professional mathematicians are correct. Now I'm not a mathematician; the closest I came to any math understanding was playing basketball for the Penn State math department team. But I know a few folks who teach college statistics. One of the two camps is correct. Now it's possible that Rob and Alan have uncovered some heretofore unknown way of circumventing a negative expectation game, but I don't think it's likely. You can choose which camp is likely to be correct based on whatever criteria you want; it's a free country.
Got to you, huh! Maybe you could possibly have used even more words to try to lie your way out of it? So you're blaming it all on the teenage years....ROTFLMAO!!! Either way, you caused her downfall, and now, while my wife and I enjoy going out, traveling, shopping and more, sounds like you two created exactly what you deserved. Poor baby....chin up!Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
So goes love....or lack thereof.
Rob has, as explained, on a session-by-session basis. And I expect if you compared arci's lone degree if he even has one (remember how we were all duped by Frank....) with my undergrad EE and MBA from BC, you'd understand who the real professional is. You see, people who communicate on the Internet and have a weak background ALWAYS use formulas, theories and use lots of numbers to describe what their mind cannot. They typically use lots of time to gather Internet searches that fit their argument or spin it appropriately. We were treated to a ton of Frank's "self-taught" BS in a slick cover-up effort. And while I've been onto arci's game for years, it's enjoyable watching him continue to dance and make things up. In fact, I tingle. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
redietz you continue to make the same mistake. If you look at the math of a negative expectation game, you will lose over the long term. there is no doubt about this. but should you choose an exit point, and you have a positive exit point, you will leave a winner.
I think you understand that.
So the question becomes: can you leave a winner a sufficient number of times to offset the sessions when you lose?
Rob says he's done that, and his combined wins from negative expectation games has totaled nearly a million dollars. I have tried that and I see how it can work. However, I don't have ten years of practicing this, as Rob did, but my experience has been that in nearly every session of play there is a time when I have shown a profit -- even if only $1.
What Rob's "quitting when ahead" system does is substitute the art of knowing when to quit with the science of the math of video poker.
What is really crazy here is that the rules of science are being applied to an art form. If the math guys would take a step back and realize that Singer also agrees that you can't beat a negative expectation game unless you do something different, we might all be in agreement.
I've said it here and on the LVA forum over and over again -- and I am not an advocate of Rob's system. I've looked at it as a reporter would. We know you cannot beat in the long term a negative expectation game. And Rob will tell you the same thing. The way to win -- and to beat it -- is in the art of when and how you play it, and when you don't play it. This is really what should be discussed here: the "artful decision Rob makes to cash out." He admits it is based on personal experience, and frankly a lot of us have these non-scientific personal experiences that tell us the same thing.
Right now there is a print by the late German artist Herbert Schneider above my desk. Schneider's art is basically abstract art. If I were to make an analogy here:
Schneider is to an architect's blue prints, what Singer is to conventional video poker play.
http://alanbestbuys.com/sitebuilderc...g.w300h225.jpg
It's just hard to resist pointing out how stupid most of your comments have become.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
My goodness. You must be the most ignorant man on the planet. I thought most people knew type I diabetes is an auto-immune disease which is generally considered to be hereditary. It is also called juvenile diabetes because it generally shows up at a young age. It has nothing to do with a person's "teenage years" and what they did or did not do. It is also possible the Epstein-Barr virus may play a role.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Totally hilarious. I guess I must have been the one who introduced her parents to each other. Not sure how I managed that before I was born.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
You are really complete clueless, aren't you. You're already about 10' into this hole of yours but you keep digging away.
Sorry Alan, but your statement is nonsense. Let's reword what you just said. {What Rob's system does is substitute the art of knowing the answer is 5 when presented with the problem ... what is 2+2.}Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Do you really believe a system can change 2+2 to make it equal 5? No? Well, that is EXACTLY the equivalent of what you just said. The math for VP is trivial. There is no way to avoid it just like there is no way to avoid the fact that 2+2 = 4.
Alan, you are blinding yourself to reality because you don't understand the math. I just made it easier for you. If you believe quitting while ahead can change your return then you must also believe 2+2 can equal 5 by just writing the numbers a little more artfully.
There's a reason why all the mathematicians disagree with you. They know this stuff is really simple. If you want to continue to believe in fantasies, feel free. Just know that any knowledgeable person will think you are a fool.
Arc, you totally missed what I wrote. This has nothing to do with changing the value of 2+2. I give up.
Alan, I was using 2+2 as an analogy. It is a level of math I'm sure you understand. You realize there is no artsy you can add 2 and 2 and get anything but 4. If someone tried to tell you they could get 5 out of adding 2 and 2 with some special movement of their hand, you would think they are full of it. Right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Well, what I'm telling you is the claim that you can overcome the expectation of a game by cashing out when you are ahead is EXACTLY equivalent. You just don't have the mathematical knowledge to understand it. But, it's just as true as the 2+2 analogy.
I'm sorry you don't like the answer. That doesn't change reality.
I'm sorry that you don't like my answer. That doesn't change the reality that you are not talking about what Rob is talking about. It's apples and oranges, Arc. I don't know which one of you is the orange and which one is the apple, but this lack of communication makes you both fruits.
Alan, you've brought arci to the end of his rope (and so haven't I, btw, from the looks of his need to respond to my truthful taunts :)) as you can easily see whenever he brings up the 2+2 equals 4 example. As you've clearly pointed out, this is not about changing the math books to create a different end result, and has always been about having the discipline and the ability to do certain things that keep the player, in language arci may understand, on the positive side of the bell curve throughout their vp journey, because no one player ever gets anywhere near anything that can even be considered entering the "long-term.
You see, strict math people like him have a neurotic need to pretend everyone is wrong who doesn't see it their way, which is there cannot possibly be any way to beat a negative expectation game, now or forever, simply because it includes the word "negative". It's really no different than him showing the same neurotic requirement that he MUST explain away--if in his mind only--any perceptions that he's now living despicably as he disappears on his poor ill wife just to get gambling fixes at casinos. If it were me, I'd spend every waking moment with the person I've chosen to spend my life with in such a situation, and I WOULD NOT & COULD NOT continue a bad habit knowing she's unable to do anything about it. Of course, I'd have never moved to LV just to be closer to the machines, dragging her in daily when there were far more healthier options available either.
So you see, his agenda, frustrations, and making-it-up on the go is all related in every aspect of what he does, and the anger & conflict is readily apparent as the vehicle for all this. Taking words out of context is his specialty, but he gets this one: So goes love....or lack thereof.
Rob, do me a favor: stop making references to Arc's wife and her illness, unless you would like to start another thread about diabetes, its care, possible cures and prevention. Until I was blessed with a combination kidney/pancreas transplant almost four years ago, I was an insulin-dependent diabetic for about 32 years. I first became diabetic when I was 24. I had various complications including cataracts, nerve damage and of course kidney failure which led to dialysis.
It's not fun. It robs people blind -- literally as it is a great cause of blindness, and amputations, and can lead to heart disease, stroke, and more.
For the record: I'm your buddy but I don't like what you say about Arc's family situation. And this is not the first time I've told you this in a public forum. Stop it. You have bigger battles and a bigger purpose and that is to show the public the reality of casino gaming. And maybe with the bucks you'll make for people, and save for people, they will make contributions to help end diabetes.
Oh I understand the illness very well. I have two aunts and an uncle who've died from the complications. This hasn't been about the disease, but rather about the poor way our friend reacts to being the caretaker during her unfortunate journey. I couldn't be as heartless. When a video poker addiction consistently comes before the considerations of someone close--and the person flaunts it--someone needs to remind that person of a few forgotten things.
I'll not say another word, unless arci chooses to toss in more meaningless mea culpas.
I knew you would face this situation with denial. You don't want to know or understand the truth. Your comment about apples and oranges is a perfect example. Math is math, Alan. They are not different fruits.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
As for the dufus commenting about my wife. It really should provide you with insight into exactly what kind of person you are dealing with. Clearly, he knows nothing about my wife, his only reason for bringing this up is to try and denigrate me. Of course, that is laughable. It only makes him look even more foolish (if that is possible).
The dufus is a total loser. He doesn't understand simple math, he is the laughing stock of the knowledgeable VP community and he is no doubt a a pathological liar. By having his nonsensical system highlighted on your website, you are bringing disrespect to yourself. When are you going to wake up?
He's just a glutton for punishment Alan, as you can see! But I'll have to take credit for that, I know. I mean, how many direct hits did you think he could take without losing it anyway?:) Just imagine you're him for a moment. How would you feel with a conscience like that? Would you not continuously take the devil's advocate point of view against rational thinking people yourself, as you watch things fizzle before your very eyes? It's the only reason he's here, as I'm sure you've figured out by now. If he wanted to blab on and on about advantage play without the conflict, he'd be spending all his effort on LVA or videopoker.com. He requires at least SOME sort of stimulation these days....
I'll just throw this in -- I've done the full-time caretaking thing. Medical professionals will tell you, rather strongly, to get at least a couple of shifts away from the caretaking every week. I really did not, and it was a mistake long term, as things do not get better and you need to have some reserve of energy with which to deal. Video poker or going to the movies are really good options because you just zone out and give your mind a rest. If you don't get breaks, you'll physically wear down and exhibit problems, and this helps nobody; it makes the person receiving care feel guilty.
If you haven't done it, Rob, you have no idea what full time caregiving entails. You really don't. And spending a couple of days in hospital with a sick aunt or somebody doesn't count for anything. Real caregiving is like being in a foxhole with someone, and knowing you may not get out. Arci's to be commended for hanging in there. Many men abandon the post.
Very articulate and accurate description of the medical profession's take on caregiving. But, don't expect anything to change with the dufus. His statements on topics like this are clear evidence of his narcissistic nature.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Sure that makes sense, to a point. Depends upon what type of relationship it is and if the caretaker had anything to do with exacerbating the problem. Arci addicted he & the missus to the vp machines, and when they could have and should have been involved in far more productive and healthier activities, what did he do? Yup, ignore all that, entice her with a vice he knew she couldn't and wouldn't fight, and head straight to LV until he HAD to listen to the medical professionals--or likely end up in the Clark County jail system. Now of course, while you're an apologist for the guy, he rambled off to get his gambling fixes under the guise of "how important it is for caregivers to have time away".Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
That might hold water.....if it weren't for the tiny fact that this is a SPOUSE. When my mother died of colon cancer at a very young age, I watched my father and her mother sit by her side for almost two years, non-stop until she passed. You didn't see him sneak off to the track or go out with the guys or even go to work, making believe it was a better way just so he could do it. I never understood that until I was married and until I had a child. Maybe we have different value systems, but I learned from my father and he was 100% right. YOU NEVER ABANDON A SPOUSE IN THEIR TIME OF NEED--ESPECIALLY TO DO SOMETHING SO VILE AS GOING TO A CASINO--BECAUSE NO MATTER WHAT THEY OR ANYBODY ELSE TELLS YOU, THEY REALLY, REALLY DO NOT WANT YOU TO LEAVE THEIR SIDE. IT HAS A LOT TO DO WITH RESPECT.
So goes love....or lack thereof.
My condolences, Rob. I know what a difficult disease that is -- my best friend passed away at 34 from it, and it had killed his father and uncle at similar ages. Very genetic, very difficult.
Thank you. My mom also had two sisters that died from it in addition to her. I'm just lucky not to have had it....yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
There are two forms of diabetes: one is the failure of the pancreas to produce insulin or the body's inability to use the insulin to control blood sugar, which is often known as Type 1 or Juvenile Diabetes.
And then there is Type 2 diabetes where the insulin production is not enough to control blood sugar levels. Diabetes is also a disease of old age. The pancreas is one of the first organs to give out.
In my case, NO ONE in my family had it but me. Not my parents or grandparents, their siblings. And not my kids. Sometimes it's just bad luck. And some think it might be caused by a virus and I might have been exposed to the virus.
I became diabetic when I was a reporter in Syracuse. Curiously, there were a lot of employees at the station with diabetes, and for a small TV station it was very unusual. I once mentioned this years later and it was suggested that I report this to the CDC for investigation but I never did.
I did a little reading on the Epstein-Barr virus. It's a unique virus in that it tries to fool the bodies immune system. It does this by something called cellular mimicry. Essentially, it disguises itself to look like one of your normal cells. However, this often doesn't work as the bodies immune system still attacks the virus.
The problem is your immune system is now trained to attack your own body in a very special way. It is believed that many auto-immune problems could be due to this chain of events. Whatever part of the body that was copied becomes the target of the immune system. If it is the pancreas you end up with Type I diabetes. However, there are over 100 auto-immune diseases that could be related.
So, it may be the heredity factor is just something that makes one susceptible to the virus and not a major factor in the disease. If Alan and many of his comrades all were exposed to a strong and special version of the virus that might explain why so many came down with the same disease.
I read where about 95% of all adults are carriers of Epstein-Barr. So, most of get it at some time. It is the virus that causes Mononucleosis.
Rob, when it comes to another person's personal life, regardless of what your life has been like, kindly STFU.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
So goes love Vic....or lack thereof :)
(You can see why arci tells all those lies about himself....and me.)
Funny, everything I've stated has proven to be true. OTOH, just about everything the dufus says turns out to be a lie. You know, like those secret regulations absolutely no one knows about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Keep digging dufus. People catch on sooner or later.
Funny, you didn't comment on the other part of that. :) Could it be because the truth always bears down on pathological liars?
The more you ignore it, the more you show how deeply it hurts! As well it should, so please don't get angry and go losing it again in your reply!
I'm concerned about what's happened to the gift that keeps on giving....aka, arci.
All our best, my friend! :)
Been busy lately. My wife started up with a new home health care agency and that has taken a lot of time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
However, I had her friend come over last night and took yet another trip to the casino. Overall, I came out $1700 ahead. However, the key take away here is that I have now won 4 of my last 5 sessions. This was after losing 8 of the previous 9. That is how advantage play works. As I said before, I should win about 40-50% of my sessions, but the variance of the game means streaks will not be uncommon.
This is why claims that somehow an APer will not win are so silly. Playing with an edge will work kind of like the tides ... You may have lows as well as highs but the overall effect will eventually rule for the vast majority of players.
Sounds like a great life arci, and you're just the guy for the job! I guess that's what you mean when referring to the "highs and lows". Only problem is, it sounds like the lows are when you are home, and the highs are when you get your fixes at the Indian casino. You don't see a problem with that? But it may be that ALL so-called AP's wrestle with these type of challenging moral and social problems. Look at Dancer for instance; then see if you can explain why Fezzik is a walking humiliation sponge. Then we have Frank, a piece of work in his own right. And how about those idiots on LVA?
Chin up, my friend!
Arc, Im glad you're back and I hope you get things settled at home. Always nice to hear about wins. What denomination were you playing to win $1700? Obviously, $1700 is more impressive at quarters than at $5 or $25.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
My other nagging question is this: If you win 40-50% of your sessions, how much are you able to lose during the losing sessions to still have a profitable win?
To be honest the biggest highs have been at home. My wife is now at her highest weight in a couple of years. Many of her problems have been handled and, with any luck I can see her continuing to improve significantly. :) :)
My other highs this year have been at my recreational hobbies. At the end of the bowling season I had an accomplishment that is likely only been done by a very few people worldwide. I bowled 3 consecutive 800 series. And, just last week, I had a one under par round on the golf course. :)
But what about our favorite dufus? He can't think past casinos and his hatred of anyone who has been successful. His own existence now confined to trailer parks and living with the very people he has denigrated for years. Karma is a bitch.
I do not grasp what significance lifestyle situations have to do with anything discussed here. For the record, I am a satanist, a regular at The Green Door, a card-carrying member of the Man-Boy Love Society, I drive an old DeLorean, I'm too far left for the Socialist party to admit me, I have a wheelchair fetish, and --horror of horrors -- I fully intend to attend Penn and Teller's Dougnut and Bacon Party on Friday, July 13th, at South Point. Any comments?
One under is a great score. I only did it once in 18 holes-when I was in college. Funny thing. I shot 40 on the front nine and was totally embarrassed and just started basically bunting it down the fairway on the second nine. I had given up, basically. Shot 31 on the back nine. Maybe a person can try too hard!Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
The bowling, to me, is a great accomplishment. I know some people who are very, very good, and I don't think any of them shot three consecutive 800s. That is extraordinary.
Part of arci's very boring and detested "existence" these days must include references to accomplishments that would put him "over the edge". What else in the form of entertainment does he have? So his wife is supposedly "gaining weight". He knows what's going on, he knows the odds, and if he didn't have a writing forum that helps keep his chin up, he'd absolutely be losing it--although we'd never know to what extent that was. I like to think of it as to an extent commensurate with his despicable actions in dealing with the tragedy of another human being. As we know, what goes around ALWAYS truly does come around.
This morning, a friend and former student of mine called and asked if I were playing any vp up here while we're stopped in Reno. I said there wouldn't be any more play until we returned from our tour of the Oregon coast, Wyoming, Idaho and Colorado in early October. Got lots of hikes planned, tours, and just plain healthy living. I know it isn't throwing balls at pins down an alley or feeding the Indian casino machines, but it'll do. :)
BTW, arci fell right into his own little trap again when he just couldnt't wait to tell everyone about his so-called "winning 4 out of 5 sessions". But notice how he once again, just as he has always done for years, suddenly explained how he had been in an 8 out of 9 session losing streak. Phew...he made it out of it--just as the math predicts! Now how come he was never able to announce that losing streak when he was experiencing it? Well, all that means is he's still in the middle of it, only he has always been too embarrassed and unwilling to say he was losing, unless of course, he could "soften the blow" with a tale of currently winning.
Anyone who believes in the words of a hack like this is gullible. Oh what's that? You pandering to him because of his tough life at an age when OTHER retirees are enjoying their lives fully?
:) :)
I play at the dollar denomination ($5/hand). It is the highest available for this game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
For the two previous years (2010 and 2011) my average win is around $2400 and the average loss is about -$1200. I won 57 times and lost 67 times.
What more do I need?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I've mentioned losing many times. I even commented last year about only winning 30% of my sessions the first few months. However, I don't normally discuss either my winning or losing. But, it gets the dufus in such a knot when I mention my winning that I do it just to see him get all frustrated and make silly comments like this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Pure projection.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Thanks, it's probably on a level of shooting a competitive 59 in golf. Although probably a little more rare. It's something I would never have conceived possible before it happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
As for golf my best golf score was a 69 last year (2 under par). While a good score for me it is nothing special for a good golfer and nothing even close to this bowling feat.
I sense a bit of frustration in the points arci responds to....and especially in the ones he doesn't. Notice his nervous but hilarious response on why he never, ever tells anyone he is in a losing streak UNLESS he can caveat that news with how he has overcome it within the AP framework. As he creates a world of make believe for two, he can't help himself as he succumbs to the actual truth. But I don't really blame Alan & redietz for pandering to the guy. They feel sorry for him, while I know him as a long-time pathological liar on the Internet who desperately requires the acceptance and sympathy of the others and constantly makes up scenarios of "fun" even as his other half suffers--and thus, the stories of an AP who does nothing but win while the Indians have no problem with it.
Here'a point to think about. Here we have arci saying how he only gets out of the house and away from other people's problems, once a week as he goes to the casino for his fix. Now all of a sudden he conjures up bowling alley and golf course escapes, with results that will likely get honest folks' blood boiling a little.
It's fun watching him bury himself.
More projection. Perfect insight into what the dufus thinks of himself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Rob, what is your point? If you are trying to discredit his video poker play you're failing because you are hiding your video poker arguments in an overgrown forest of personal insults. You really are your worst enemy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I was hoping you would respond to Arc's claims about session wins and session losses. You didn't and you posted more dribble.
Arc, thanks for responding about your session wins and session losses. Now a question: how do you set or how do you decide when to stop playing when you are losing? Is there a set limit of about $1200 or is it flexible and if flexible according to what? Thanks.
And arci, what is your normal length of time playing? Do you set an hours-playing limit? Does your fatigue limit vary greatly or is it pretty consistent?
As I've mentioned before I play about 6-7 hours each trip unless I run out of the money I bring with me before then. That only happens about 5% of the time and even then I've usually played 5-6 hours.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
The time is based on the amount of time it takes for me to feel I'm getting tired. I usually take a half hour break in the middle.
One more question, Arc. How do you decide to quit when you have a profit? Is fatigue the deciding factor, or is there some point where you want to "lock in" or "protect" your profits?
I think based on your previous answers you are going to say that there is no reason to quit when you have a profit to lock it up or protect it, and you will only stop because of fatigue. But I just had to ask.
The only time profit might come into play is if I hit a nice jackpot in what would typically be my last hour of play. If I already have played over 6 hours and hit for a $1000 or more then I would probably quit shortly after that time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
OK, but what if that last hour big win didn't give you a winning session? What if you were still in the hole?Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
edited to add:
And if you meant that "hit for a $1000 or more" meant a profit of a thousand dollars or more, then really you're not much different than the rest of us who would quit to preserve a big win. Quite frankly, a thousand dollar profit is one heck of a win goal for someone playing dollar video poker. Rob has a win goal of $2500 and he's willing to play right up to $100 machines to get it, and says he will usually reach it at the $10 level. Me? I'd be darn happy with a $1,000 profit playing $5 games now. (I wasn't like that in the past but I have since scaled back my win goals.)
Arc, I was expecting you to say that if you had a $1,000 win you might as well keep playing your normal routine -- whether that be six hours or reaching your point of fatigue --- because picking a random exit point would make no sense in your do-it-by-the-math world.
It would depend on how I felt. If I felt good then I would probably continue. If I was tired I would quit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
But, I'm talking about having played the minimum amount already, so it has nothing at all to do with win goals. It's just a factor in my last hour of play as I'm already starting to feel the fatigue. It's just something that gets me off my butt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I'm already in my normal routine. I've already played 6 hours or more. So, it's just down to deciding the precise minute I'd leave which really doesn't make too much difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I also usually play to a $100 boundary. Again, no reason other than making the bookkeeping easier.
You've mentioned playing for a "minimum amount" to keep up your various "levels" which I guess refer to comps and free play, etc. Do you keep playing for the minimum amount of time if you are having a bad day? You mentioned that only 5% of the time you've exhausted the money you bring with you. Is losing your day's bankroll acceptable or just a "cost of doing business" or like the rest of mere mortals, do you also feel like a dumb schmuck?? (LOL)
Completely acceptable and expected about 5% of the time. If you can't take the heat then stay out of the ... casino. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I never feel "dumb" when something that is expected happens. I might feel a little unlucky especially if I'm on a run of bad results. However, it all balances out eventually and approaches expectation.
Look, no one feels "good" when they have a big loss, but understanding the math gives one an understanding of the situation. That takes the edge off any negative feelings and allows you to look ahead to better results.