Playing according to long term math

I had a fascinating discussion with our board member John about the long term math of video poker. John basically said he plays according to long term math and I said the long term math doesn't matter because none of us will ever see the long term.

I also said that yes, I would play video poker games with the best pay tables.

I just looked at the Wizard of Vegas forum and there is a thread there asking what is the long term? And the Wizard said, in part:

" It can be said that the more you play the closer to the "long run" you will get, but you will never fully arrive there."

I agree. None of us will ever see the long term, nor will we ever see a full and equal distribution of results in any game and that includes video poker, craps, roulette or blackjack.

My position is that with each repeat of a combination of cards or a number in craps or roulette the chance that you will ever see the long term and an equal distribution of numbers gets harder to reach.

Using a single six sided die is the easiest way to explain this:

With one die the long term equal distribution would be getting one roll each of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. But if just one of those digits repeats just once then the long term equal distribution would become:

1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6

And if you get one number to repeat four times, then the long term equal distribution would be:

1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6

Now consider a game like video poker with 52 unique cards and let the distribution of that deck of 52 vary with just one card being dealt twice... and then see how many hands the long term becomes!

All agreed, and all is exactly right. The trick in vp at least, is in first understanding, then putting that knowledge into practice, and finally -- at least for social purposes -- trying to explain why and how using a short term approach is a far superior method of successful play.

People do have to understand the best explanations of what the long term really is if they ever hope to understand how to play short term strategy successfully. But the interested player MUST FIRST set aside their misguided bias that playing positive machines will yield winning years, and playing negative games will not. Only then will said player be able to enter into a world that will unveil the sensibilities of beating any machine on a regular basis, with adequate bankroll, proper discipline, and a strategy designed to leave the casino after a minimum 5% win. The player will also discover the harsh truth that few ever have the willpower AND the tools to do it. And that's why the casinos, together with their long term math supremacy, will always remain open to all.

Alan, we've been over this before. While you never get to the exact long term, you approach it within a range that can be predicted. That's why the amount of edge a person has is important. If the error range is less than the edge you can be highly confident of winning. The question becomes one of probabilities. Do you play when you have a 95% chance of winning or not? Is it worth an effort to give yourself that kind of chance? Or, do you just conclude a 99% chance of losing is the same as a 5% chance of losing and ignore the math?

This willful ignorance of basic mathematics is the reason the casinos are standing and doing brisk business (all mismanagement of resources, aside).

The long run is very important because it indicates the average of what you can expect to lose in a given session.

The higher the average, the more you will lose.

Vegas realized over time that most gamblers don't care about odds or averages, so they are progressively worsening the games year after year, and the public comes back for more.

People don't understand that they will lose 4 times as much at a 96% return than a 99% return machine. All they care is that they see that big hand hit every so often, and they think, "Wow, just a few more of these, and I'll really be kicking ass!"

I just had a similar argument with someone who was insisting that he liked playing 6:5 blackjack, because he has "better luck" at those tables.

Dan I agree that players have to be aware of odds and payback, but I think the point is this: there is no such thing as the long term.

Better if you just said -- play the best games, and make the best bets.

All that being said, I see that Rob's advice to try to just win $5 on bp will probably be necessary with the worsening casino holds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

Alan, we've been over this before. While you never get to the exact long term, you approach it within a range that can be predicted. That's why the amount of edge a person has is important. If the error range is less than the edge you can be highly confident of winning. The question becomes one of probabilities. Do you play when you have a 95% chance of winning or not? Is it worth an effort to give yourself that kind of chance? Or, do you just conclude a 99% chance of losing is the same as a 5% chance of losing and ignore the math?

---

I agree. This is why I said above in a comment to Dan: play the best games and make the best bets. You just cannot bank on the "long term." In other words, if a machine returns 99.98 over the long term you will never be at that machine for the long term to be guaranteed 99.98%. But in your "short term" you might hit 99.98% or do better or worse.

Arc, where have you been? Missed you here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

This willful ignorance of basic mathematics is the reason the casinos are standing and doing brisk business (all mismanagement of resources, aside).

The long run is very important because it indicates the average of what you can expect to lose in a given session.

The higher the average, the more you will lose.

Vegas realized over time that most gamblers don't care about odds or averages, so they are progressively worsening the games year after year, and the public comes back for more.

People don't understand that they will lose 4 times as much at a 96% return than a 99% return machine. All they care is that they see that big hand hit every so often, and they think, "Wow, just a few more of these, and I'll really be kicking ass!"

I just had a similar argument with someone who was insisting that he liked playing 6:5 blackjack, because he has "better luck" at those tables.

---

This post is an excellent example of misguided bias. There is no relationship between the so-called long run and the average expected loss/session. It's nothing but a state of mind from someone who loses because they play bad games at CET casinos that lure him in with a promise of untold freebies that he can value himself in order to create a year-ending "feel good" so all was not lost.

The math favors the casinos. Always has. The success of the player, outside of extreme good luck, rests only in being able to perform exactly the opposite as the casinos want and expect players to perform. The AP concept of playing only +EV games (or more precisely, to concoct positive plays out of the many "reel 'em in" promos casinos continue to offer this group) and that you should approach expectation the more you play, has always been flawed in that, just as there are very, very few of the extremely lucky winners out there because they just happened upon machines at their most giving part of their timeline, it is just as rare for the machines to cooperate for any "grind it out" player that wants to get to any imaginary expectation point somewhere in the future. The idea makes sense in the classroom, but is practically impossible to duplicate in a real setting. Theory regularly gets destroyed by reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I agree. This is why I said above in a comment to Dan: play the best games and make the best bets. You just cannot bank on the "long term." In other words, if a machine returns 99.98 over the long term you will never be at that machine for the long term to be guaranteed 99.98%. But in your "short term" you might hit 99.98% or do better or worse.

Arc, where have you been? Missed you here.

---

Alan, you can't "count on" living another day. Does that man you should just sit around all day eating bonbons? Everything we do has some risk. I managed to "bank-on" the long term probabilities each and every year for over a decade. I found it a decidedly better way to approach gambling.

PS. I have checked in occasionally but none of the topics interested me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

Alan, you can't "count on" living another day. Does that man you should just sit around all day eating bonbons? Everything we do has some risk. I managed to "bank-on" the long term probabilities each and every year for over a decade. I found it a decidedly better way to approach gambling.

PS. I have checked in occasionally but none of the topics interested me.

---

Correct. So we just live for the moment-the short term.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

Correct. So we just live for the moment-the short term.

---

No, you develop a plan based on the best statistical approach and follow it. Sure, it takes a little work but it is well worth it. Do you use short term thinking for everything you do? I developed a plan for my retirement when I was young. I saved and lived within my means. I was able to retire at age 52 and live comfortably. Long term thinking paid off handsomely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

This post is an excellent example of misguided bias. There is no relationship between the so-called long run and the average expected loss/session. It's nothing but a state of mind from someone who loses because they play bad games at CET casinos that lure him in with a promise of untold freebies that he can value himself in order to create a year-ending "feel good" so all was not lost.

The math favors the casinos. Always has. The success of the player, outside of extreme good luck, rests only in being able to perform exactly the opposite as the casinos want and expect players to perform. The AP concept of playing only +EV games (or more precisely, to concoct positive plays out of the many "reel 'em in" promos casinos continue to offer this group) and that you should approach expectation the more you play, has always been flawed in that, just as there are very, very few of the extremely lucky winners out there because they just happened upon machines at their most giving part of their timeline, it is just as rare for the machines to cooperate for any "grind it out" player that wants to get to any imaginary expectation point somewhere in the future. The idea makes sense in the classroom, but is practically impossible to duplicate in a real setting. Theory regularly gets destroyed by reality.

---

This is nonsense, and also why most here don't believe you actually win.

You say a player should "perform exactly the opposite as the casinos want and expect players to perform".

What does that even mean? Give a single tangible example of how a player can turn the tables to beat the casino, aside from "advantage play" tactics (which you constantly deride).

The bottom line is that you will lose more if you play games with a worse pay table. Period. Forget the long term. Even in the medium and short-medium turn, a larger casino edge will take its toll.

There is one exception to this. It's when the expected return hinges upon an event that is unlikely to be achieved in the number of hands/spins you can play.

For example, say there were a prize of $100 billion on a $1 bet, but you had a 1-in-25-billion chance to hit it.

Let's say that the returns on this machine are otherwise very bad, but the machine is overwise +EV because of the $100 billion return on a 1-in-25-billion chance.

It still wouldn't be worth it, because a human being could never play 25 billion hands to where you would ever expect it to hit.

Of course, this is an extreme example, but it illustrates my points. A lesser example of this is why a player might prefer to play a 99.26% Aces and Faces machine over the 99.40% ACE$ machine, since ACE$ itself will only hit about once every 300,000 hands.

But barring payouts that are very unlikely to ever hit for an individual player, Rob's logic is garbage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Using a single six sided die is the easiest way to explain this:

With one die the long term equal distribution would be getting one roll each of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. But if just one of those digits repeats just once then the long term equal distribution would become:

1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6

And if you get one number to repeat four times, then the long term equal distribution would be:

1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6

Now consider a game like video poker with 52 unique cards and let the distribution of that deck of 52 vary with just one card being dealt twice... and then see how many hands the long term becomes!

---

Alan, what are you trying to say here? If the number 1 was rolled 4 times in a row, the subsequent rolls do not need to be 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6 for the results to be considered an equal distribution. The sample size here is much too small. That pattern looks like anything but random.

If that die was rolled six billion times, (the die and roll was fair) wouldn't you approach results that showed approximately one billion "1's", one billion "2's" etc? The actual order of the numbers rolled cannot be predicted, but the final results can be pretty well approximated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

No, you develop a plan based on the best statistical approach and follow it. Sure, it takes a little work but it is well worth it. Do you use short term thinking for everything you do? I developed a plan for my retirement when I was young. I saved and lived within my means. I was able to retire at age 52 and live comfortably. Long term thinking paid off handsomely.

---

That's still short term. You saved a little here from a check, saved a little there from thrift, etc. which finally added up in the long term. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

This is nonsense, and also why most here don't believe you actually win.

You say a player should "perform exactly the opposite as the casinos want and expect players to perform".

What does that even mean? Give a single tangible example of how a player can turn the tables to beat the casino, aside from "advantage play" tactics (which you constantly deride).

The bottom line is that you will lose more if you play games with a worse pay table. Period. Forget the long term. Even in the medium and short-medium turn, a larger casino edge will take its toll.

There is one exception to this. It's when the expected return hinges upon an event that is unlikely to be achieved in the number of hands/spins you can play.

For example, say there were a prize of $100 billion on a $1 bet, but you had a 1-in-25-billion chance to hit it.

Let's say that the returns on this machine are otherwise very bad, but the machine is overwise +EV because of the $100 billion return on a 1-in-25-billion chance.

It still wouldn't be worth it, because a human being could never play 25 billion hands to where you would ever expect it to hit.

Of course, this is an extreme example, but it illustrates my points. A lesser example of this is why a player might prefer to play a 99.26% Aces and Faces machine over the 99.40% ACE$ machine, since ACE$ itself will only hit about once every 300,000 hands.

But barring payouts that are very unlikely to ever hit for an individual player, Rob's logic is garbage.

---

Unlike you and your thin-skinned approach to virtually any discussion Dan, it only matters that I win to myself and my family. It's certainly no secret why a loser such as yourself moans & groans about slot club "freebie cutbacks" non-stop, why you can't get away from the CET "grip of humiliation", and most of all, why you can't stand to see pictures of my big winners that you'll obviously never be able to experience yourself. Losers absolutely HATE winners....even the mere mention of it, and they will never, ever listen to them because they can't. But, I will answer your question in a "teachable moment" type of gesture. :)

Try to think in terms of Business 101 instead of as a trampled-on gambler. A casino is an entity designed to profit by taking as much of its customers' money as possible, and by any conceivable means possible under the law. They try to get gamblers to open casino credit accounts. Why? For two reasons: first, to be able to look into a player's finances to see if they're worth "stretching" them to the limit; then, to get the customer to tap into their credit line when their pocket cash is gone. Casinos also use this process to dole out more and better of those sacred comps you losers go so goo-goo over. DO THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF THIS AND NEVER FOOLISHLY SIGN UP FOR THIS CASINO TOOL.

Next, always ignore those ATM and cash advance machines so cunninglty scattered around the casino floors. As a loser, you know why. Nuff said.

Some people hit jackpots at their comfortable playing denominations. But what do the majority of players do after hitting them? (And you can ask Alan about this one). Correct--with a fistload of unexpected cash and RIGHT ON CASINO CUE, they waltz right on into those beautiful, alluring high limit rooms, complete with a gutload of confidence and high from the big win. And what overwhelmingly happens (Jason can attest to this in spades). You know the drill. Just as the casino wanted and expected the player to do, all was lost, and more, and the only thing the sucker has to show for such a stupid move is a handful of AGI-busting W2G's. NEVER, EVER MOVE UP IN DENOMINATION AFTER WINNING.

Now onto another typical player weakness: tipping on handpays. This is another of the traits casinos want and expect gamblers to do, because it allows them to pay lower wages to the floor people, fully knowing that the intimated handpaid "winners" will gladly make up the difference in tips....of course, given out in the euphoria of the moment. KEEP YOUR MONEY THAT YOU WON GAMBLING, AND LEAVE SALARY ISSUES TO THOSE IN CHARGE OF SALARY ISSUES. AND NEVER , EVER BE SO WEAK AS TO FEEL OBLIGATED TO GIVE YOUR MONEY AWAY TO CASINO EMPLOYEES BECAUSE OF SMILES, CONGRATULATIONS, OR OTHER STUPID SOCIAL MISGUIDEDNESS. PERIOD.

Set win/loss goals for your casino visit, your day, and/or your trip, and then leave immediately when they're attained. No casino wants or expects any player anywhere to do this. THIS IS THE SINGLE, MOST DIFFICULT, MOST UNPOPULAR TASK IN A WINNING PLAYER'S LINEUP. CASINO AMBIENCE, AND THE INSATIABLE NEED FOR GAMBLERS TO KEEP MORE ACTION COMING BECAUSE THEY JUST CAN'T BEAR TO SEE IT END (Alan will attest to this) IS THE NUMBER ONE REASON FOR CUSTOMERS LEAVING WITH THAT GUT-WRENCHING FEELING OF STUPIDITY AND INCOMPETENCE.

You guys all worship those idiotic casino hosts. That's one of the casino's most effective tools they use in systematically taking your money. These people make you feel oh-so-special and pretend to be your trusted friend at your "home away from home". But the ONLY reason they're there is to make you feel just a little bit better about transferring your money from your bank accounts to the casino's...aka, their EMPLOYER'S! Using and having one of those sacred "relationships" with them will also reduce your marketing offers, and they will keep a close eye on your every move while you're inside their casino. Very stupid indeed. NEVER USE THESE PEOPLE FOR ANYTHING. WINNERS DO NOT EVER WANT TO BE ON ANY EMPLOYEE'S RADAR; LOSERS WANT TO BECAUSE THEY FEEL THE "COMPS" HELP MAKE UP FOR SOME OF THE LOSSES WHILE HELPING JUSTIFY THE TRIP, AND WHEN THEY RETURN HOME A LOSER THEY CAN SOOTHE IT ALL OVER BY THINKING THEY HAVE A TRUE FRIEND, INDEED, AT THE CASINOS THAT JUST SURGICALLY SCRUBBED THEM .

Finally--and you fight this losing battle all the time here....I'm sure it keeps you up endless hours of your looong "what-if" laced nights: you and your fellow gamblers are almost all completely controlled by the slot clubs, their mesmerizing offers, all that "free stuff", and you constantly find yourselves roped in by juicy sounding promos, specials, giveaways, point bonanzas, etc. etc. etc. NEVER, EVER BE CONTROLLED BY THIS NONSENSE. IT IS IN PLACE FOR ONE SINGLE REASON: TO KEEP GETTING PLAYERS COMING BACK WITH amazingly high anticipation and WITH FRESH LOADS OF CASH FROM ANY MEANS POSSIBLE, WHILE MAKING THEM FEEL GOOD ABOUT LOSING ALL OF IT BY DAY'S END.

As a bonus helping hand, get rid of that dumb belief that playing positive games means you'll win, and playing negative games means you'll lose. I've disproved that nonsense for 15 years. Play each session like you do each hand--like it is independent of every one that's come before and every one that's yet to come. And shake that BS about 99.1% vs. 101.6% vs. 94.7%. That stuff doesn't matter one way or the other in any given session. You either play with a strategy meant to take complete advantage of the big & other winners that come along, or you don't. And, you either hit them or you don't. And get rid of your silly advantage play belief if you ever expect to be a winner. They only win if they get consistently lucky, just like anybody. Only they don't win much. They want you to believe they win because that's what the math books say will happen in a perfectly controlled environment. And some can't take it when this theory doesn't pan out for real, so they lie about it in order to keep their sanity.

In short, here's your chance: wise up.

When my casino host came-(they now send them on the floor)- all she wanted to know was if I was getting my drinks served. She told me she wasn't there for my play results. Ha!

I think I finally figured Alan out. He was sent here by the Chinese government to teach online math courses and keep our children ranked wherever the hell they are in math. I have no idea what that riff regarding a six-sided die was about. Holy confusion, Batman!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

When my casino host came-(they now send them on the floor)- all she wanted to know was if I was getting my drinks served. She told me she wasn't there for my play results. Ha!

---

Sling, based on all the very inexperienced and sappy posts about "help me!....anybody know where can I get a good host at the Gold Coast, or GVR, or the Orleans?" few will ever get it---and that includes duncecaps like Jean Scott, if you read her delusional posts on the subject on vpFree. The ONLY players who want/need/worship hosts are those who do not understand what their goal as casino workers are, and who do not win. Why would a winner ever want to be on that type of radar. Makes no sense at all. But losers? Of COURSE they want to get host attention and feel wanted by a "friend". And Jean Scott is the leader of that pack, while she thinks she's hiding her losses from everyone with brains. No one here, over there, or anywhere else will want to understand this, because exactly the opposite is planted firmly inside every loser's mind by the casinos. Just ask Dan.

Rob, believe it or not, I agree with MOST of what you posted in your long essay above.

I agree that you should avoid the ATM machines -- they have high fees, and they also stretch people beyond their means.

I agree that you should set win/loss points for leaving, but only for psychological reasons. Win/loss goals do not increase your odds to win.

I agree that overtipping on handpays is throwing away money, though I do tip a small amount on them. I wish handpays didn't exist, and they only do because of legal requirements.

I agree that getting casino credit is a mistake if you can't afford it. However, if it really does increase your comps, maybe I'll get a casino credit account just so my comps can increase (but not actually use the credit). I kinda doubt that this is the case, though.

I agree that hosts are just out to separate you from your money, and they want nothing to do with you once they think your well has run dry (no matter how much you've made them in the past).

However, none of the advice you gave helps people win. It just helps them lose less.

I am still waiting for you to post a viable strategy to beat negative-expectation games.


I actually do just what you advocate -- doing the actions exactly opposite what the casinos want. I play the mininum at the highest expectation machines, and then shut down when I achieve the benefits I am aiming for.

I use each and every benefit to their maximum, while not gambling more in the process. I have already used thousands of dollars worth of benefits and freeplay in 2014 without playing at all.

To prove how much my actions contradict what CET wants, hosts repeatedly refuse to do anything for me, and in fact they always tell me "You would be paying a rate if it weren't for your Seven Stars status. Your play would earn you no comps. You're way overcomped."

Rob: Before you were Seven Stars, did you pay a rate for your rooms at CET properties, or were you comped? If they were comping you, guess what? It means you were doing exactly what they wanted, and that's why they wanted you back. And that's what's so ironic here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a2a3dseddie

Alan, what are you trying to say here? If the number 1 was rolled 4 times in a row, the subsequent rolls do not need to be 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6, 6 for the results to be considered an equal distribution. The sample size here is much too small. That pattern looks like anything but random.

If that die was rolled six billion times, (the die and roll was fair) wouldn't you approach results that showed approximately one billion "1's", one billion "2's" etc? The actual order of the numbers rolled cannot be predicted, but the final results can be pretty well approximated.

---

My point is that there really is no "long term" because the long term is not "fixed" and the long term changes with each subsequent play.
The return that is posted on a machine is not a long term result, it is the expected return based on one play given the pay table that is available.

There is no "long term return." Every time you play one hand the long term return will change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

why you can't stand to see pictures of my big winners that you'll obviously never be able to experience yourself.

---

Rob, I will never be able to match your pictures of big winners because I don't play at your high denominations. But I can probably match you -- picture for picture -- with "great wins" if you included my play at 25-cent and $1 games -- not to mention my dealt royal on a 50-play machine at 5-cents.

The point is -- you are not such a big winner. There are plenty of casino players at 25-cent games who have had more royals than you've had, and more big winning hands. Just on my last trip to Rincon I sat by a lady who hit two royals just ten minutes apart. I'm not sure what denomination she was playing but her machine started at 25-cents and went up to $1 and even the 25-cent royals need a hand pay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

When my casino host came-(they now send them on the floor)- all she wanted to know was if I was getting my drinks served. She told me she wasn't there for my play results. Ha!

---

She wasn't there for your play results. She doesn't care if you win or lose. She is paid based on your coin-in and not if you win money or lose money. The casinos do not fear winning players because they know they will get the money back and if not from you than from another player. What is important to them is that you are having a "good time" and getting your drinks so you keep playing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

My point is that there really is no "long term" because the long term is not "fixed" and the long term changes with each subsequent play.
The return that is posted on a machine is not a long term result, it is the expected return based on one play given the pay table that is available.

There is no "long term return." Every time you play one hand the long term return will change.

---

Alan, that is partially true, but the long term indicates what your odds are for winning for each hand played. And that's what's important. Sometimes you'll beat the odds, sometimes you will fall behind the odds, but as you play more, you will get closer and closer to the expected return.

You can't ignore the per-hand odds and say, "Well, I'll never reach the true long term, so who cares?"

That's like saying mountain climbing and spending the day at the library don't have a considerable difference in danger, as a few people have died in library fires over the years, and most people survive mountain climbing, so each instance of library visitation and mountain climbing each carry their own chance of death, and you shouldn't worry about the long-term odds of dying in either of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

She wasn't there for your play results. She doesn't care if you win or lose. She is paid based on your coin-in and not if you win money or lose money. The casinos do not fear winning players because they know they will get the money back and if not from you than from another player. What is important to them is that you are having a "good time" and getting your drinks so you keep playing.

---

Alan, maybe you can answer this one. I agree with the above assessment, but there's something I've always wondered regarding host compensation.

When they pay hosts a commission on your play, do they subtract the comps you're redeeming?

I ask this because I play irregularly, but still enough to hit Seven Stars (which, as you know, is a minimum of $500,000 VP coin-in). However, if I make a few trips without play, my hosts get very frustrated. In fact, I got "fired" from my host recently and transferred to another one (this host is still there, btw, so it's not a matter of her quitting). Also, hosts tend to want to do NOTHING for me, to the point where it is clear they would really prefer I don't come at all.

This leaves me perplexed, as I do put $500k of coin-in through by the end of the year, and others who play less get treated better.

I don't think I am being persecuted or singled out. I think that it has to do with the number of comps I'm redeeming, and that it absolutely destroys any commission the hosts can get from me.

Any insight on this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

but the long term indicates what your odds are for winning for each hand played.

---

Read what you wrote because that is the essence of the confusion.

You wrote "the long term indicates what your odds are for winning for each hand played." That is not correct.
The long term has nothing to do with the odds for winning each hand played. The odds of winning each hand played is only the odds for that hand.

The "long term" payback is actually nothing more than an extrapolation of the overall payback on each hand based on the pays. And it is not correct to make that extrapolation. Let me explain:

Let's take a 9/6 Jacks game with a "theoretical return" of 99.6%. On each and every hand the theoretical return is 99.6% but that doesn't mean over the long term I will have a return of 99.6% does it?

In fact, if I had a million dollar bankroll and kept playing a 99.6% return game I would be left with ZERO money. This is because if you keep losing 0.4% hand after hand eventually your money will all be gone.

So, to say that the long term of a 9/6 Jacks game is 99.6% is absolutely wrong. In fact, the "long term" of playing a 9/6 Jacks Game is zero.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Alan, maybe you can answer this one. I agree with the above assessment, but there's something I've always wondered regarding host compensation.

When they pay hosts a commission on your play, do they subtract the comps you're redeeming?

I ask this because I play irregularly, but still enough to hit Seven Stars (which, as you know, is a minimum of $500,000 VP coin-in). However, if I make a few trips without play, my hosts get very frustrated. In fact, I got "fired" from my host recently and transferred to another one (this host is still there, btw, so it's not a matter of her quitting). Also, hosts tend to want to do NOTHING for me, to the point where it is clear they would really prefer I don't come at all.

This leaves me perplexed, as I do put $500k of coin-in through by the end of the year, and others who play less get treated better.

I don't think I am being persecuted or singled out. I think that it has to do with the number of comps I'm redeeming, and that it absolutely destroys any commission the hosts can get from me.

Any insight on this?

---

I don't really know if "comps" are used to figure a host's bonuses or pay. My guess is that it's not. However, hosts also have to follow the guidelines of the company and if the company says you don't give "extra comps" to lower level players then it makes sense that the host doesn't offer extra comps.

Hosts want to keep their jobs more than make players happy. Many casinos have cut the number of hosts and assigned more players to each remaining host making the job of being a host even more difficult.

I once had a "problem" at Caesars and I wrote about it before:

My sister-in-law was at Caesars and told her host (not mine) that I was staying with her in her room and because she said that her host tapped my comp account to cover some of her room charges. When I discovered my comp credits were missing I started asking questions and discovered what happened.

I was presented with two options:
1. Say nothing and let it slide.
2. Complain and the host would have been fired, but I would have had my comps restored.

I decided to say nothing and let it slide. The comp dollars meant little to me. And I got a chance to "chew out" my sister-in-law.... and that was "priceless."

But there was another concern which I discussed with my host: by allowing my comps to be used, I was also charged with a visit which hurt my daily theoretical average. Because I had ZERO play (since I wasn't there). My host said to me that yes, it would affect my theo, but one time would not do any damage. My host said there were times when a player would show up, become ill, and never go down to the casino.

The question is how many times do you do this?

If you use a casino hotel as a place to sleep and a place to take advantage of comped meals but don't play -- and do it several times -- YES you will get a big red flag. If it happens once and otherwise you are a "good player" then it's not a problem.

About two months ago I started to cut down on my play at Rincon -- and now my weekly offers have been cut from my previous $150 down to $75. And I don't use any other comps at Rincon... never stayed in the hotel. These offers are generated by computer.

So the bottom line is that you get your offers by the computer, and a host is not going to risk his job for a player who doesn't play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Rob, I will never be able to match your pictures of big winners because I don't play at your high denominations. But I can probably match you -- picture for picture -- with "great wins" if you included my play at 25-cent and $1 games -- not to mention my dealt royal on a 50-play machine at 5-cents.

The point is -- you are not such a big winner. There are plenty of casino players at 25-cent games who have had more royals than you've had, and more big winning hands. Just on my last trip to Rincon I sat by a lady who hit two royals just ten minutes apart. I'm not sure what denomination she was playing but her machine started at 25-cents and went up to $1 and even the 25-cent royals need a hand pay.

---

Oh Alan, when will you ever come to the realization that I train people to win at any combination of denominations, pennies on up.

I know there are many many more winners out there than me, but I won a net $200,000 in 2013, not counting any slot club fluff. The amount is what's important, not how many royals someone gets. And sure, there's players who've won more than me in 2013. The question then is, have they been consistent big winners for at least 10 straight years?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Read what you wrote because that is the essence of the confusion.

You wrote "the long term indicates what your odds are for winning for each hand played." That is not correct.
The long term has nothing to do with the odds for winning each hand played. The odds of winning each hand played is only the odds for that hand.

The "long term" payback is actually nothing more than an extrapolation of the overall payback on each hand based on the pays. And it is not correct to make that extrapolation. Let me explain:

Let's take a 9/6 Jacks game with a "theoretical return" of 99.6%. On each and every hand the theoretical return is 99.6% but that doesn't mean over the long term I will have a return of 99.6% does it?

In fact, if I had a million dollar bankroll and kept playing a 99.6% return game I would be left with ZERO money. This is because if you keep losing 0.4% hand after hand eventually your money will all be gone.

So, to say that the long term of a 9/6 Jacks game is 99.6% is absolutely wrong. In fact, the "long term" of playing a 9/6 Jacks Game is zero.

---

The expectation isn't to win $0, it's to LOSE everything. Big difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quahaug

The expectation isn't to win $0, it's to LOSE everything. Big difference.

---

This is why Rob has said we should do the opposite of the casino's expectation so we can win!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

My point is that there really is no "long term" because the long term is not "fixed" and the long term changes with each subsequent play.
The return that is posted on a machine is not a long term result, it is the expected return based on one play given the pay table that is available.

There is no "long term return." Every time you play one hand the long term return will change.

---

Not relevant. All that matters is your probable return. While the pay table provides information about the long term, it also provides information about your most probable future results no matter how much you play. If you don't like the words "long term" then don't use them. The fact remains the same. The pay table provides the best information to determine your future results.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

The "long term" payback is actually nothing more than an extrapolation of the overall payback on each hand based on the pays. And it is not correct to make that extrapolation. Let me explain:

Let's take a 9/6 Jacks game with a "theoretical return" of 99.6%. On each and every hand the theoretical return is 99.6% but that doesn't mean over the long term I will have a return of 99.6% does it?

In fact, if I had a million dollar bankroll and kept playing a 99.6% return game I would be left with ZERO money. This is because if you keep losing 0.4% hand after hand eventually your money will all be gone.

So, to say that the long term of a 9/6 Jacks game is 99.6% is absolutely wrong. In fact, the "long term" of playing a 9/6 Jacks Game is zero.

---

You are misusing or confusing terms. A return of 99.6% means the game will return .996 dollars for every dollar bet. To lose a million dollars also means you would have winning hands totaling 249 million dollars. So, both claims are true. You will receive 99.6% of bets and you could lose a million dollars if you gamble a large amount of money. Once again you are confusing bankroll with amount gambled.

PS. In some venues that amount of play could produce more than a million dollars worth of comps/cashback/etc.

Arc, if I lose .004 of every dollar bet, bet after bet after bet after bet... I'm eventually not going to have any dollars left to bet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Arc, if I lose .004 of every dollar bet, bet after bet after bet after bet... I'm eventually not going to have any dollars left to bet.

---

Of course, which is why without an infinite bankroll you will eventually lose everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Arc, if I lose .004 of every dollar bet, bet after bet after bet after bet... I'm eventually not going to have any dollars left to bet.

---

Only if you have a static bankroll. If you have a job then that .004 might be .001% of your income and simply part of your recreational expenses. Once again, bankroll and return are two different things. I've told you before that anything less than 100% is a losing proposition, so we in agreement on that issue. However, the less negative a game, the less money you will likely lose for the same amount of gambling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

Only if you have a static bankroll. If you have a job then that .004 might be .001% of your income and simply part of your recreational expenses. Once again, bankroll and return are two different things. I've told you before that anything less than 100% is a losing proposition, so we in agreement on that issue. However, the less negative a game, the less money you will likely lose for the same amount of gambling.

---

That's just funny. Tell that to the guy who just hit the 5c royal flush. Tell that to me every time I leave the casinos with tens of thousands of their former money after hitting large winners on "-EV" machines. I'd like to see a video of you saying all that nonsense while trying to keep a straight face. Oops! I guess that's why you're stuck in retirement nightmare. Everything's in a virtual reality loop from here on out. It's gotta be all theory, because you can't handle the taste of reality. Come to think of it, even theory hasn't been that kind to you :)

Rob, just curious if you ever use your methods on slot machines instead of video poker? It seems slots would work much better with many more denom options and obviously -EV doesn't matter so don't have to worry about that.

I think Rob recognizes the reality of negative expectation machines, but Rob's strategy is that if you cash out after you win on a negative expectation machine that it is then possible to "go home" a winner. The basics of this strategy is that even on neg expectation machines you can having winning hands or winning plays.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HKMHORNS

Rob, just curious if you ever use your methods on slot machines instead of video poker? It seems slots would work much better with many more denom options and obviously -EV doesn't matter so don't have to worry about that.

---

First, what Alan says is pretty much correct.

I have never played slots outside of the occasional couple hundred dollars when passing by a very high Megabucks progressive hoping for insane luck to strike. Slots don't come in any more denoms. than vp, except for the mostly for-show $500 & $1000 machines I've seen. Their frequency of hits aren't compatible with what I started out to do, and besides, I don't really know a lot about them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HKMHORNS

Rob, just curious if you ever use your methods on slot machines instead of video poker? It seems slots would work much better with many more denom options and obviously -EV doesn't matter so don't have to worry about that.

---

Since my wife loves the penny machines, we play if I have a big vp day-she loves the sounds and entertainment. I have hit some really nice ones using a simular strategy and the idea came to me as I was studying the machines and their seemingly apparent programs. The only problem I had was the casino action at the time and here we go back to cold and hot cycles. On some days it just doesn't happen. But as far as strategy, on days the action seems to be there I may progress from 50/$1/$2 AFTER every five spins. On so-called normal days, I just go 50/$1 and progress every 10 plays. Since I'm there for the short term,I've had the best luck leaving after 20 spins. Once we only had $20 free play so I came up with this: 5 spins and take whatever was won or lost. If enough won for 5 more spins then take them If bonus round hit, leave with whatever was won.We had played for 2 hours and We were down to $3 whenever we put the remainder in a 30 cent machine and her first spin blanked out the whole screen with wildies? and we left with over $100. As for the regular slots, I found them more akin to playing a megabucks machine-you just have to be there at the right time-and they're boring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

That's just funny. Tell that to the guy who just hit the 5c royal flush. Tell that to me every time I leave the casinos with tens of thousands of their former money after hitting large winners on "-EV" machines. I'd like to see a video of you saying all that nonsense while trying to keep a straight face. Oops! I guess that's why you're stuck in retirement nightmare. Everything's in a virtual reality loop from here on out. It's gotta be all theory, because you can't handle the taste of reality. Come to think of it, even theory hasn't been that kind to you :)

---

The vast majority of gamblers don't stop when they hit a big winner, eventually they will lose all that royal and more. Unlike you, they are more than willing to admit this reality. The fact you keep spewing your idiotic nonsense only makes you look foolish.

The one thing that I really like about Rob's strategy... and I think Arc will agree with this... is the idea about stopping when you hit a big winner. BUT as Arc and everyone else has pointed out... after that big winner do you really stop? If you come back to the casino the next week or the next month you haven't "stopped" have you?

So let's move to part #2 of Rob's strategy (as I understand it): you can have "a profit" within sessions even if you don't have a big winner and if you stop playing once you have that "profit" (however small it is) you can still come out ahead over the long run. And there are those who will disagree with that -- and they'll say there are sessions when you never have even a one-dollar profit and you just lose from the get-go. And yes, I have had sessions where I lost from the first play and never caught up, but I think there have been more sessions where at some point I had some kind of a profit -- even a tiny profit. Unfortunately, we only know about those "profit points" and "highest profit points" when we look in the rear view mirror. The machine's don't have a message screen that flash "you are at your high point, cash out now."

Alan, our results are determined by the frequency of the various hands we see over time. With random games the expected frequencies are easy to compute. Over time we should approach the expected frequency of each particular result. So, the question becomes, how can starting and stopping at any given time change those frequencies? In order to win on a negative game you need to hit winning hands at a frequency that is higher than expected from a random distribution. Why would this happen simply because you decided to stop when you were ahead on a given day?

You have posted results in the past where you didn't stop when you were ahead and went on to win even more. You seem to forget about those days. While they must happen less often than days you lose after being ahead simply because of game variance and return, they still happen and compensate for those days where you got ahead and then lost.

It all gets down to basic randomness. If you play enough you will approach the expected frequencies of each result and that will determine your overall results. The precise time you end any particular session is not going to change this reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

In order to win on a negative game you need to hit winning hands at a frequency that is higher than expected from a random distribution.

---

This is where timing the DEAL/DRAW button comes into play. The lower the %'age return of a game, the more skillful you must become at those button presses over the long term. Are you up to the challenge?

I can't believe you guys can't comprehend the strategy but yet you're sure you can control dice, count cards, and push the button on a machine at just the right time. Rob's strategies are so simple and adaptable to any bankroll. How about this? You play 200 credits of the required 400 and hit 4 J's. You've won 50 credits and a win goal. This happens again but maybe you only win 30 credits. BUT, on the 3rd session 4 2's w/kicker and suddenly 800 credits appear and you're on the way home. And you didn't have to GUESS when to stop.

A couple of things:

First, about the "skills" of gambling...

Card counting is a true skill.

Dice control, at least theoretically, is a skill (I doubt anyone can really do it with much consistency).

Button pushing at video poker is impossible because there is no way to judge when is the right time to push the button -- because we can't see the cards zipping by in order to decide when to push.

And what happened with me Sunday night?

So, I had $250 of free play at Rincon and a friend wanted to know what "advantage play" was all about, so my friend went with me to Rincon to watch me run my $250 of free play ONCE through an 8/5 Bonus game. (By the way, half of the Nash family was at the machine next to me, and I was not on my favorite machine which was occupied.)

I played my $250 on the $1 game through one-time and cashed out $435 thanks to quad 10s for $125, plus one full house for $40, and a lot of pairs and trips.

Question for Arc: what were the odds that running $250 through a $1 machine once that I would do this well? As I said to my friend... I didn't expect such a great result. I expected perhaps a $200 cash-out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

A couple of things:

First, about the "skills" of gambling...

Card counting is a true skill.

Dice control, at least theoretically, is a skill (I doubt anyone can really do it with much consistency).

Button pushing at video poker is impossible because there is no way to judge when is the right time to push the button -- because we can't see the cards zipping by in order to decide when to push.

And what happened with me Sunday night?

So, I had $250 of free play at Rincon and a friend wanted to know what "advantage play" was all about, so my friend went with me to Rincon to watch me run my $250 of free play ONCE through an 8/5 Bonus game. (By the way, half of the Nash family was at the machine next to me, and I was not on my favorite machine which was occupied.)

I played my $250 on the $1 game through one-time and cashed out $435 thanks to quad 10s for $125, plus one full house for $40, and a lot of pairs and trips.

Question for Arc: what were the odds that running $250 through a $1 machine once that I would do this well? As I said to my friend... I didn't expect such a great result. I expected perhaps a $200 cash-out.

---

Yeah, on blackjack. I used to play with a couple of guys at the golf course. EVERYBODY wanted to be the banker because they usually wound up with most of the money. There were no hard and fast rules about betting, so I took a bunch of loose change and waited until the 10 count was most promising and piled on the change and ended up breaking the bank. Of course, there was only one deck and the guys weren't aware enough to change the deck more frequently.:cool:

Alan, there are no meaningful "odds" of hitting a certain cash out figure with $250 in freeplay run thru once on a dollar machine. That's the same thing as asking how you can expect do on a dollar machine for 10 minutes with $250. It's all short term stuff, and long term theory does not apply to short term stuff. That's why I came up with my strategy to play in the short term only, where each and every session ends when you leave with an attained pre-determined win or loss goal, and you leave. And when you return, you begin a new session all over again, which just like individual hands, is 100% unrelated to or affected by any that have come before, or any that are yet to come.

Short term play equates to reality; long term relies upon theory. When players finally comprehend that truth and accept that playing video poker is a real event with real results TODAY because that is the only outcome aspect every player really cares about, they will become better players because of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

A couple of things:

Button pushing at video poker is impossible because there is no way to judge when is the right time to push the button -- because we can't see the cards zipping by in order to decide when to push.

---

This is negative thinking, Alan. If we're going to try to elevate our negative EV game into positive EV, shouldn't we at least have some initial positive thinking that the button can be pushed at the right time more often?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Count Room

This is negative thinking, Alan. If we're going to try to elevate our negative EV game into positive EV, shouldn't we at least have some initial positive thinking that the button can be pushed at the right time more often?

---

Before I can even consider that this is a legitimate question, would you please tell me how you could possibly determine when it is best to push the button?

Since there is no "window" to see the RNG "shuffling" the cards, are you relying on psychic skills?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Alan, there are no meaningful "odds" of hitting a certain cash out figure with $250 in freeplay run thru once on a dollar machine. That's the same thing as asking how you can expect do on a dollar machine for 10 minutes with $250. It's all short term stuff, and long term theory does not apply to short term stuff. That's why I came up with my strategy to play in the short term only, where each and every session ends when you leave with an attained pre-determined win or loss goal, and you leave. And when you return, you begin a new session all over again, which just like individual hands, is 100% unrelated to or affected by any that have come before, or any that are yet to come.

Short term play equates to reality; long term relies upon theory. When players finally comprehend that truth and accept that playing video poker is a real event with real results TODAY because that is the only outcome aspect every player really cares about, they will become better players because of it.

---

Again, you make no sense. How do you determine a short term win goal (or loss limit) without theory? In other words, you must look at the payback (paytable) on a machine to give yourself a chance at what to pick as your win goal or loss limit. You cannot dismiss long term theory even in the short run.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Before I can even consider that this is a legitimate question, would you please tell me how you could possibly determine when it is best to push the button?

Since there is no "window" to see the RNG "shuffling" the cards, are you relying on psychic skills?

---

I was admittedly half-kidding here, Alan, and I'm not currently sure how or even if such a feat can be done. I do think it's wise to keep an open mind towards new possibilities, though.

Just because we can't now see or know that it can be done doesn't preclude the possibility that such a feat could be done in the future. For instance, even though Neanderthal Man couldn't envision cars being built or the internet being used, it didn't mean those advancements wouldn't occur.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Count Room

I was admittedly half-kidding here, Alan, and I'm not currently sure how or even if such a feat can be done. I do think it's wise to keep an open mind towards new possibilities, though.

Just because we can't now see or know that it can be done doesn't preclude the possibility that such a feat could be done in the future. For instance, even though Neanderthal Man couldn't envision cars being built or the internet being used, it didn't mean those advancements wouldn't occur.

---

I would rather we deal with reality here, and leave psychic abilities to a different discussion/forum. Since there is no way that is now known to determine the random shuffle of a continuous shuffle machine it must be a psychic or supernatural ability and perhaps with the exception of one poster here, the rest of us are mere mortals without that skill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Again, you make no sense. How do you determine a short term win goal (or loss limit) without theory? In other words, you must look at the payback (paytable) on a machine to give yourself a chance at what to pick as your win goal or loss limit. You cannot dismiss long term theory even in the short run.

---

Because you simply won't allow yourself to understand it. Here's a common REAL example of me playing a session of 25c thru $2 ARTT. My required bankroll for a session is $800 which is also my loss goal; my win goal is $100 minimum. I need 2 games--one being BP, the other an advanced BP game such as SDBP. Many times the PAY TABLES are different, BUT THE WIN & LOSS GOALS ALWAYS REMAIN EXACTLY THE SAME! Paytable theory means absolutely nothing. The loss goal is simply a function of the starting bankroll, while the win goal is a function of how often two pair occur in BP, and/or how soon winner of trips or greater might hit in the ABP game. Do you get this yet? Long term theory is irrelevant. Do you get THAT yet??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I would rather we deal with reality here, and leave psychic abilities to a different discussion/forum. Since there is no way that is now known to determine the random shuffle of a continuous shuffle machine it must be a psychic or supernatural ability and perhaps with the exception of one poster here, the rest of us are mere mortals without that skill.

---

Alan: It may be nothing supernatural or involving psychic powers at all, but rather certain transient biological conditions as a result of body movement or diet or other factors (which would seem more realistic, anyway). No one knows enough at this point.

Obliging your request to drop this off-topic discussion after this posting...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Count Room

Alan: It may be nothing supernatural or involving psychic powers at all, but rather certain transient biological conditions as a result of body movement or diet or other factors (which would seem more realistic, anyway). No one knows enough at this point.

Obliging your request to drop this off-topic discussion after this posting...

---

I have psychic abilities. I sense that Alan leads the pack of those vp "enthusiasts" who are unteachable, do not want to be taught, and will forever remain in a utopia of justifying their losses because of "recreational" type play. You can't compete with indifference. I'm also sensing that he's caught up in a "casino fever" that will stay with him for as long as he continues to breathe, and he will forever remain firmly in the grips of these places because he is the poster boy for doing EXACTLY what and how the casinos want and expect their customers to be....and sadly, there is nothing he or anyone with sensible advice can do for him.

However, there is hope! Next winter I hope to be able to take him to that dinner in LV, whereby he can finally be enlightened if he so chooses. Until then, because we choose to have a very active life of travel and enjoying many things that do not include casinos (a teachable moment for Alan if there ever was one) I will not write another word on this forum. And just think: Dan finally can lose like a man and exhale, Vic can perform his social engineering experiments here unabated, and arci can finally relax 24/7 in his home-turned-medical facility. Until I knock on his door later this year, that is :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Until then I will not write another word on this forum.

---

Thank GOD!! But somehow I don't believe we're going to be that lucky. Anybody want to take a bet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

A couple of things:

First, about the "skills" of gambling...

Card counting is a true skill.

Dice control, at least theoretically, is a skill (I doubt anyone can really do it with much consistency).

Button pushing at video poker is impossible because there is no way to judge when is the right time to push the button -- because we can't see the cards zipping by in order to decide when to push.

And what happened with me Sunday night?

So, I had $250 of free play at Rincon and a friend wanted to know what "advantage play" was all about, so my friend went with me to Rincon to watch me run my $250 of free play ONCE through an 8/5 Bonus game. (By the way, half of the Nash family was at the machine next to me, and I was not on my favorite machine which was occupied.)

I played my $250 on the $1 game through one-time and cashed out $435 thanks to quad 10s for $125, plus one full house for $40, and a lot of pairs and trips.

Question for Arc: what were the odds that running $250 through a $1 machine once that I would do this well? As I said to my friend... I didn't expect such a great result. I expected perhaps a $200 cash-out.

---

I won't go into any detail but just give you a estimate. Since $250 is 50 hands and quads occur about every 425 hands, that means this should occur once ever 8.5 times you played (about 12%). Not saying you might not come out ahead at other times since hitting extra FHs, flushes or straights can also tip the scale just enough to produce a winner. In fact, out of the last 28 free play trips I took I had winning sessions 9 times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Alan, there are no meaningful "odds" of hitting a certain cash out figure with $250 in freeplay run thru once on a dollar machine. That's the same thing as asking how you can expect do on a dollar machine for 10 minutes with $250. It's all short term stuff, and long term theory does not apply to short term stuff. That's why I came up with my strategy to play in the short term only, where each and every session ends when you leave with an attained pre-determined win or loss goal, and you leave. And when you return, you begin a new session all over again, which just like individual hands, is 100% unrelated to or affected by any that have come before, or any that are yet to come.

Short term play equates to reality; long term relies upon theory. When players finally comprehend that truth and accept that playing video poker is a real event with real results TODAY because that is the only outcome aspect every player really cares about, they will become better players because of it.

---

This is the typical nonsense Singer spews to try and sucker in the mathematically challenged. What he is claiming is the probability of various hands is suspended during short periods of time and only when you first sit down during a day. Hilarious. Only in some alternate universe. Anyone who would fall for this con is simply beyond help. Might as well answer those Nigerian emails. Same logic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Because you simply won't allow yourself to understand it. Here's a common REAL example of me playing a session of 25c thru $2 ARTT. My required bankroll for a session is $800 which is also my loss goal; my win goal is $100 minimum. I need 2 games--one being BP, the other an advanced BP game such as SDBP. Many times the PAY TABLES are different, BUT THE WIN & LOSS GOALS ALWAYS REMAIN EXACTLY THE SAME! Paytable theory means absolutely nothing. The loss goal is simply a function of the starting bankroll, while the win goal is a function of how often two pair occur in BP, and/or how soon winner of trips or greater might hit in the ABP game. Do you get this yet? Long term theory is irrelevant. Do you get THAT yet??

---

Yeah, I get all that Rob except that your "win goals" and "loss limits" won't make you win. What makes you "win" is your ability to hit more winning hands and to get larger winning payoffs. And if you play a pay table with better pays, you will have more chances to hit winning hands. And that's why long term theory is very relevant. Did you get THAT yet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Yeah, I get all that Rob except that your "win goals" and "loss limits" won't make you win. What makes you "win" is your ability to hit more winning hands and to get larger winning payoffs. And if you play a pay table with better pays, you will have more chances to hit winning hands. And that's why long term theory is very relevant. Did you get THAT yet?

---

Sometimes the word "dense" just doesn't seem to do some of the things you say, justice.

A 9/5 SDBP pay table will indeed give me a few more chances to hit a winning hand than an 8/5 table. But....and please read this with your best comprehension....that is only TODAY. There is no "long term" associated with a single session's results. If I start a new session tomorrow on a 9/5 or 7/5 table and I win or lose, it has nothing to do with the profit I locked up yesterday. By saying something so hollow you're on the same blank page arci and his ilk are forever stuck on: trying unsuccessfully to apply long term theory to short term play.

Please wise up and rise above that nonsense.

I am also neutral in the back and forth, but, welcome back Rob!