Short term vs long term and quitting while ahead (continued)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

You can't beat mathematics in long term gambling.

---

Okay. I'd just like to win the next time I play. I have no interest to beat the long term mathematics.

---

The first step is to stop playing craps and other -EV games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

In my case I net profitted in four years playing my strategy. That's hardly "long-term", in fact, it's but a relatively small slice in time. And if anybody doesn't think it's possible to win as much as I did in that amount of time at the limits I played, it is they who do not understand the math.

I took a chance when I chose to play it. I never experienced a complete loss ($57,200 in one session) and it was always possible for it to happen multiple times a year. But it didn't.

---

So what you are now trying to say is you were just lucky. You played a progression system and the way progression systems work is they result in many small wins before that big loss comes along a wipes away all that winning plus some. So you are now saying, you were just lucky not to have had that big win in your 4 years (initially 10 years, but amended to 4 years). That you got "lucky" is quite a bit different than a winning system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

But the fact remains: If I have a pocket with $57,200 stuffed inside and I'm in dire need of an additional minimum $2500, it would be downright foolish if I didn't play my strategy to get the extra funds. Every. Single. Time.

---

You carried a brick of $57,200 on weekly trips for 4 years attempting to win $2500? :confused:

---

I carried $17,200 each trip and if I had to go to the $100 machines (which wasn't too often) I went to BofA to get the $40k.

Many times here I've explained that my strategy does not "beat the math" but does rely on good luck. The way it's played allows for a slight increase in the big hits at the cost of a fair decrease in smaller winners. The relatively large bankroll vs. a small % stop-win goal is very effective in survivability, but you have got to have the stomach for this type play. That's why I always say that I'm sure there are others out there who have these capabilities, but they would be few and far between. If you've played enuf video poker you'd understand that big winning hands always come. The question is, are you able to play it out to get there? I am.

These days the big winners I hit are just dumb luck in the middle of no real strategy. It's all just for enjoyment. I do have good luck especially with my last one, but if I didn't up and leave after each one then I probably would be losing instead of winning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Rob says that no one really knows what is long-term? That simply is not true. There are mathematical formulas to determine this. And there are simulators. Mickey has talked about Video poker simulators in the past few days. I am not familiar with them because I did not play video poker for a living. But if they are anything like blackjack simulators they will tell you just what the "long-term" is for each set of rules and conditions as well as how unlikely any set of results are for that amount of play.....how many standard deviations from expectation any set of results are.

---

After several decades you learn that there are all sorts of opinions as to what constitutes the "long-term" in video poker. There are no formulas to accurately predict this. Simulators simply simulate probable results quickly after specifically input numbers of trials along with other defining parameters.

I believe casinos attain it from the sheer column of VP play they get. For people--even the ones who play multiple times a week for years--I'm with the ones who believe the long-term can be realized only after one's lifetime of play is over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Rob says that no one really knows what is long-term? That simply is not true. There are mathematical formulas to determine this. And there are simulators. Mickey has talked about Video poker simulators in the past few days. I am not familiar with them because I did not play video poker for a living. But if they are anything like blackjack simulators they will tell you just what the "long-term" is for each set of rules and conditions as well as how unlikely any set of results are for that amount of play.....how many standard deviations from expectation any set of results are.

---

After several decades you learn that there are all sorts of opinions as to what constitutes the "long-term" in video poker. There are no formulas to accurately predict this. Simulators simply simulate probable results quickly after specifically input numbers of trials along with other defining parameters.

I believe casinos attain it from the sheer column of VP play they get. For people--even the ones who play multiple times a week for years--I'm with the ones who believe the long-term can be realized only after one's lifetime of play is over.

---

If you have played regularly for income over the course of a couple years you have hit the long term with at least a 99% confidence level.

The big hits are mere blips on the trajectory path up if playing with an advantage or down playing without. Everyone who plays for a living knows this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

After several decades you learn that there are all sorts of opinions as to what constitutes the "long-term" in video poker. There are no formulas to accurately predict this.

---

The only opinions that matter are the one's based on some real math. And there ARE formulas to predict this.

This is like saying well no one really knows if the earth is flat or round. YES, we do know. :cool: VP is not really my field so I don't know all the formulas and simulations. Even playing part-time or supplementing my main blackjack income, I probably should know more, but I just was never that interested. I wouldn't have gotten into or played VP at all if it hadn't been for the very strong mailers at the time. Local type casinos here in Vegas were literally fighting over the so called "local" players.

Rob, part of the problem is that you have always been very vague with the math as redietz stated. And what math you do reveal is like some kind of strange "singer math" that really doesn't work in the real world.

The problem is that people like Alan believe you. Alan has believed you off and on (much more on than off) for most of what I have gone back and read on this forum. And now he is back on the Singer bandwagon, even after he claims you told him to his face that you made much of it up. :rolleyes: And I know people on these forums have little sympathy for Alan and his gambling so please note that I said "people like Alan". Slingshot that used to post here, also talked about trying to play your "system". God know how many more that just lurk and read on this and all the other forums you have been on, not to mention that column you wrote. Without a doubt there are many people/players that have read your nonsense, been mislead and lost God knows how much trying to duplicate your claims.

Personally, the most I ever got stuck on Dollar 10/7 Double Bonus is just over 16k.
The very next week I had 5 Royals in 5 somewhat short sessions at the 4 Queens.
One of them damn near back to Fucking back.
Call me a Liar you Fucking Rats!
It wasn't long after that a friend noticed the swipe glitch at Binions.
I crushed that place for over a year with that glitch.
Fucking Rat Bastards!

Interesting Note... Binion's was cheating everyone on that swipe and had to give up a bunch of money in the form of a drawing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

After several decades you learn that there are all sorts of opinions as to what constitutes the "long-term" in video poker. There are no formulas to accurately predict this.

---

The only opinions that matter are the one's based on some real math. And there ARE formulas to predict this.

This is like saying well no one really knows if the earth is flat or round. YES, we do know. :cool: VP is not really my field so I don't know all the formulas and simulations. Even playing part-time or supplementing my main blackjack income, I probably should know more, but I just was never that interested. I wouldn't have gotten into or played VP at all if it hadn't been for the very strong mailers at the time. Local type casinos here in Vegas were literally fighting over the so called "local" players.

Rob, part of the problem is that you have always been very vague with the math as redietz stated. And what math you do reveal is like some kind of strange "singer math" that really doesn't work in the real world.

The problem is that people like Alan believe you. Alan has believed you off and on (much more on than off) for most of what I have gone back and read on this forum. And now he is back on the Singer bandwagon, even after he claims you told him to his face that you made much of it up. :rolleyes: And I know people on these forums have little sympathy for Alan and his gambling so please note that I said "people like Alan". Slingshot that used to post here, also talked about trying to play your "system". God know how many more that just lurk and read on this and all the other forums you have been on, not to mention that column you wrote. Without a doubt there are many people/players that have read your nonsense, been mislead and lost God knows how much trying to duplicate your claims.

---

There are no "math formulas" that predict what the long-term is in video poker. Only those that people formulate in order to meet their own personal criteria. Saying there are these formulas without actually pointing to where and what they are is meaningless. It's nothing more than when a certain no. of hands begins to closely approach expectation. As I said, it's arbitrary because no one only plays a single type of game, and no one plays perfectly. I've seen 1million hands, 3million, 10million and more estimates. Dan Paymar said the safest way to define long-term in VP is however long one's lifetime of play is. I agree with him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Rob says that no one really knows what is long-term? That simply is not true. There are mathematical formulas to determine this. And there are simulators. Mickey has talked about Video poker simulators in the past few days. I am not familiar with them because I did not play video poker for a living. But if they are anything like blackjack simulators they will tell you just what the "long-term" is for each set of rules and conditions as well as how unlikely any set of results are for that amount of play.....how many standard deviations from expectation any set of results are.

---

After several decades you learn that there are all sorts of opinions as to what constitutes the "long-term" in video poker. There are no formulas to accurately predict this. Simulators simply simulate probable results quickly after specifically input numbers of trials along with other defining parameters.

I believe casinos attain it from the sheer column of VP play they get. For people--even the ones who play multiple times a week for years--I'm with the ones who believe the long-term can be realized only after one's lifetime of play is over.

---

If you have played regularly for income over the course of a couple years you have hit the long term with at least a 99% confidence level.

The big hits are mere blips on the trajectory path up if playing with an advantage or down playing without. Everyone who plays for a living knows this.

---

That's the simple way to say it. You're also saying "a couple years of regular play" is the long-term. That's your opinion. I trust Paymar over you.

Kewlj I believe Rob won big playing high limit VP and using discipline to quit when ahead.

You have frequently said you do not disagree with quitting when ahead at negative expectation games.

Rob plays negative expectation games. Why are you attacking him when he is doing something you agree with?

You shouldn't criticize me either. I also play a -EV game. You should be commending both Rob and me.

I gave an example of a 4% edge at video poker. This is what the payscale was:

RF....................800
SF......................50
4 Aces...............160
Small Quads........80
Generic Quads.....50
FH.......................7
Flush..................11.66
ST........................5
3K........................3
2P.........................1
HP.........................1

What would you consider 30K hands to be? Short term, medium term, long term?

Playing 35K hands a week I rarely had a losing week playing the above payscale. That's because I had a 1.58% edge just up thru the 4 Aces. The Royal and SF were all gravy when I hit them.

But take a look at this Jacks or Better payscale at 103.5%:

RF.................800
SF...................50
4 of a Kind.......25
FH..................10
FL....................8
ST....................4
3K....................3
2P.....................2
HP.....................1

So what would you think about the variance of this payscale?. Could you possibly get beat playing optimal strategy?

With this payscale anyone who bet that a given player would be behind after 30K hands would be a major dog to win the bet.

The chance of a player using optimal strategy having a losing week (30K hands) with this payscale is somewhere between thin and none.

And that is what one has to understand about video poker and the short, medium and long term. The payscale is a major part of the equation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

I gave an example of a 4% edge at video poker. This is what the payscale was:

RF....................800
SF......................50
4 Aces...............160
Small Quads........80
Generic Quads.....50
FH.......................7
Flush..................11.66
ST........................5
3K........................3
2P.........................1
HP.........................1

What would you consider 30K hands to be? Short term, medium term, long term?

Playing 35K hands a week I rarely had a losing week playing the above payscale. That's because I had a 1.58% edge just up thru the 4 Aces. The Royal and SF were all gravy when I hit them.

But take a look at this Jacks or Better payscale at 103.5%:

RF.................800
SF...................50
4 of a Kind.......25
FH..................10
FL....................8
ST....................4
3K....................3
2P.....................2
HP.....................1

So what would you think about the variance of this payscale?. Could you possibly get beat playing optimal strategy?

With this payscale anyone who bet that a given player would be behind after 30K hands would be a major dog to win the bet.

The chance of a player using optimal strategy having a losing week (30K hands) with this payscale is somewhere between thin and none.

And that is what one has to understand about video poker and the short, medium and long term. The payscale is a major part of the equation.

---

Those were the days.

Isn't that the Stray's JoB game, only available in quarters at the time?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

After several decades you learn that there are all sorts of opinions as to what constitutes the "long-term" in video poker. There are no formulas to accurately predict this.

---

The only opinions that matter are the one's based on some real math. And there ARE formulas to predict this.

This is like saying well no one really knows if the earth is flat or round. YES, we do know. :cool: VP is not really my field so I don't know all the formulas and simulations. Even playing part-time or supplementing my main blackjack income, I probably should know more, but I just was never that interested. I wouldn't have gotten into or played VP at all if it hadn't been for the very strong mailers at the time. Local type casinos here in Vegas were literally fighting over the so called "local" players.

Rob, part of the problem is that you have always been very vague with the math as redietz stated. And what math you do reveal is like some kind of strange "singer math" that really doesn't work in the real world.

The problem is that people like Alan believe you. Alan has believed you off and on (much more on than off) for most of what I have gone back and read on this forum. And now he is back on the Singer bandwagon, even after he claims you told him to his face that you made much of it up. :rolleyes: And I know people on these forums have little sympathy for Alan and his gambling so please note that I said "people like Alan". Slingshot that used to post here, also talked about trying to play your "system". God know how many more that just lurk and read on this and all the other forums you have been on, not to mention that column you wrote. Without a doubt there are many people/players that have read your nonsense, been mislead and lost God knows how much trying to duplicate your claims.

---

There are no "math formulas" that predict what the long-term is in video poker. Only those that people formulate in order to meet their own personal criteria. Saying there are these formulas without actually pointing to where and what they are is meaningless. It's nothing more than when a certain no. of hands begins to closely approach expectation. As I said, it's arbitrary because no one only plays a single type of game, and no one plays perfectly. I've seen 1million hands, 3million, 10million and more estimates. Dan Paymar said the safest way to define long-term in VP is however long one's lifetime of play is. I agree with him.

---

Keep arguing that the earth is flat....RIP

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Kewlj I believe Rob won big playing high limit VP and using discipline to quit when ahead.

You have frequently said you do not disagree with quitting when ahead at negative expectation games.

Rob plays negative expectation games. Why are you attacking him when he is doing something you agree with?

You shouldn't criticize me either. I also play a -EV game. You should be commending both Rob and me.

---

Kew is only trying to cause chaos because that's what drives his life.

People win by getting lucky. They win big by getting super lucky. In mickey's example of Flush Attack and the 10/8 JoB games, winning big by hitting royals were being super lucky. He did not need them to win.

If someone who doesn't play multiple times a week gets one or more of these big hits and then quits for the trip immediately afterwards thereby locking up a sizeable amount, there is no law that says they HAVE to give it all back and more, simply because they're playing a 99.2% game. And there is no law stating that they must keep playing at that high a level.

People win by getting lucky and by cheating on their taxes....wait, I mean by cheating on their girlfriends! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxPen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

The only opinions that matter are the one's based on some real math. And there ARE formulas to predict this.

This is like saying well no one really knows if the earth is flat or round. YES, we do know. :cool: VP is not really my field so I don't know all the formulas and simulations. Even playing part-time or supplementing my main blackjack income, I probably should know more, but I just was never that interested. I wouldn't have gotten into or played VP at all if it hadn't been for the very strong mailers at the time. Local type casinos here in Vegas were literally fighting over the so called "local" players.

Rob, part of the problem is that you have always been very vague with the math as redietz stated. And what math you do reveal is like some kind of strange "singer math" that really doesn't work in the real world.

The problem is that people like Alan believe you. Alan has believed you off and on (much more on than off) for most of what I have gone back and read on this forum. And now he is back on the Singer bandwagon, even after he claims you told him to his face that you made much of it up. :rolleyes: And I know people on these forums have little sympathy for Alan and his gambling so please note that I said "people like Alan". Slingshot that used to post here, also talked about trying to play your "system". God know how many more that just lurk and read on this and all the other forums you have been on, not to mention that column you wrote. Without a doubt there are many people/players that have read your nonsense, been mislead and lost God knows how much trying to duplicate your claims.

---

There are no "math formulas" that predict what the long-term is in video poker. Only those that people formulate in order to meet their own personal criteria. Saying there are these formulas without actually pointing to where and what they are is meaningless. It's nothing more than when a certain no. of hands begins to closely approach expectation. As I said, it's arbitrary because no one only plays a single type of game, and no one plays perfectly. I've seen 1million hands, 3million, 10million and more estimates. Dan Paymar said the safest way to define long-term in VP is however long one's lifetime of play is. I agree with him.

---

Keep arguing that the earth is flat....RIP

---

It's not an argument when I am right and an empty suit shows up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

I gave an example of a 4% edge at video poker. This is what the payscale was:

RF....................800
SF......................50
4 Aces...............160
Small Quads........80
Generic Quads.....50
FH.......................7
Flush..................11.66
ST........................5
3K........................3
2P.........................1
HP.........................1

What would you consider 30K hands to be? Short term, medium term, long term?

Playing 35K hands a week I rarely had a losing week playing the above payscale. That's because I had a 1.58% edge just up thru the 4 Aces. The Royal and SF were all gravy when I hit them.

But take a look at this Jacks or Better payscale at 103.5%:

RF.................800
SF...................50
4 of a Kind.......25
FH..................10
FL....................8
ST....................4
3K....................3
2P.....................2
HP.....................1

So what would you think about the variance of this payscale?. Could you possibly get beat playing optimal strategy?

With this payscale anyone who bet that a given player would be behind after 30K hands would be a major dog to win the bet.

The chance of a player using optimal strategy having a losing week (30K hands) with this payscale is somewhere between thin and none.

And that is what one has to understand about video poker and the short, medium and long term. The payscale is a major part of the equation.

---

Those were the days.

Isn't that the Stray's JoB game, only available in quarters at the time?

---

The Strats full pay Jacks games were 10/6 (100.7%) and 9/7 (100.8%).

The payscale I put up is fictitional but a good example of what happens according to exactly what the full house and flush pay.

When the flush pays 7 for 1 or more it changes the odds on the royal because the 4-card flushes become more valuable than the 3-card royals. It will change the odds on the royal from around 40K to 48K. And that means the royal represents much less payback in the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

I gave an example of a 4% edge at video poker. This is what the payscale was:

RF....................800
SF......................50
4 Aces...............160
Small Quads........80
Generic Quads.....50
FH.......................7
Flush..................11.66
ST........................5
3K........................3
2P.........................1
HP.........................1

What would you consider 30K hands to be? Short term, medium term, long term?

Playing 35K hands a week I rarely had a losing week playing the above payscale. That's because I had a 1.58% edge just up thru the 4 Aces. The Royal and SF were all gravy when I hit them.

But take a look at this Jacks or Better payscale at 103.5%:

RF.................800
SF...................50
4 of a Kind.......25
FH..................10
FL....................8
ST....................4
3K....................3
2P.....................2
HP.....................1

So what would you think about the variance of this payscale?. Could you possibly get beat playing optimal strategy?

With this payscale anyone who bet that a given player would be behind after 30K hands would be a major dog to win the bet.

The chance of a player using optimal strategy having a losing week (30K hands) with this payscale is somewhere between thin and none.

And that is what one has to understand about video poker and the short, medium and long term. The payscale is a major part of the equation.

---

Those were the days.

Isn't that the Stray's JoB game, only available in quarters at the time?

---

The Strats full pay Jacks games were 10/6 (100.7%) and 9/7 (100.8%).

The payscale I put up is fictitional but a good example of what happens according to exactly what the full house and flush pay.

When the flush pays 7 for 1 or more it changes the odds on the royal because the 4-card flushes become more valuable than the 3-card royals. It will change the odds on the royal from around 40K to 48K. And that means the royal represents much less payback in the game.

---

You also hold more three card flushes, right? I do that in the UX game I started playing earlier this year. Flushes and FH's for some reason yield the higher multipliers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

People win by getting lucky. They win big by getting super lucky.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

So I had about 14k on me but wasn't really planning on playing.
I thought I might stop off afterwards but I was kind of tired.
I pushed through the tiredness and got stuck 4 dimes on spin poker.
Decided to give up and go to another Casino.
Walked in and in about ten minutes hit a 10 dollar Royal for 40k.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Kewlj I believe Rob won big playing high limit VP and using discipline to quit when ahead.

You have frequently said you do not disagree with quitting when ahead at negative expectation games.

Rob plays negative expectation games. Why are you attacking him when he is doing something you agree with?

You shouldn't criticize me either. I also play a -EV game. You should be commending both Rob and me.

---

You'd believe their are craps tables on Jupiter if Rob told you so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Kewlj I believe Rob won big playing high limit VP and using discipline to quit when ahead.

You have frequently said you do not disagree with quitting when ahead at negative expectation games.

Rob plays negative expectation games. Why are you attacking him when he is doing something you agree with?

You shouldn't criticize me either. I also play a -EV game. You should be commending both Rob and me.

---

You'd believe their are craps tables on Jupiter if Rob told you so.

---

Can you prove there isn't?

Just like max, all you do is pretend you know a lot because you both "say" you're AP's (which is somehow supposed to impress us?) yet you NEVER offer anything up that supports anything you claim.

I take that back: max has proved he has an insignificant package based upon the cheap small toilet seat he installed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

We're back for our own reasons for a few weeks goofbutt. I stopped in LV for some Hi-limit VP entertainment with a friend. I actually won just over $165k on that machine--just my 2nd time playing UX because of his tutelage. Negative ev for sure, but I'm not a pro player any more so who cares?

Boz, I tried the W2G route before. All they do is claim I photoshopped them. I'll try the cash picture this time. Watch what they say....:)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

You also hold more three card flushes, right? I do that in the UX game I started playing earlier this year. Flushes and FH's for some reason yield the higher multipliers.

---

At least have the courtesy of keeping your lies in your stories straight. Thanks in advance :)