Big Casino Wins and Jackpots

[arcimede$]

First of all when you quit when you are ahead you have beaten the expected return of the game -- and that's true. No one can dispute that. If the game has an expected return of 99.2% and you quit with an actual return of 110% you beat the expected return.

And, if you lose money you might have a return of 90% and you didn't achieve the expected return. So what? Why do you continue to make these meaningless statements?

My point is take the profits when you can get them.

No one has a problem with this. However, it is meaningless to your overall results over time. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose.

I also think you have a chance of making more money and hitting more winners later -- otherwise there would be no point in playing again later.

So, you do believe the machines are not random. Why didn't just say so. Of course, if the machines are not random then anything is possible. Everything you are being told is based on a random deal.

I'll tell you what I think is absolutely foolish: letting the clock or the number of tier points deciding how long you play.

That's because you refuse to accept reality.

If you let the clock decide how long you play you could be forced to stop playing when you are at a low point or showing a big loss.
If you let the number of tier points decide when to quit it's the same thing -- you might have scored your 5,000 tier points on the day but you could have lost a lot of money or given back a lot from previous winners to reach 5,000 tier points.

And, you could be as high as you are going to get on that day. You continue to ignore that the machines are random and from any point in time your odds are exactly the same or, as it appears, you don't really believe the machines are random.

Doesn't it make more sense to quit when you are ahead and disregard the amount of time you played and disregard the number of tier points earned?

NO, NO, and NO. There is no difference in any of those points in times. Your odds are exactly the same. You still want to make the game non-random. You want to believe that the odds change. Sorry, but that is simply not true.

Arc tells us his sessions are based on time played. That to me is ridiculous.
Dan you told us that you play to reach certain tier point levels. So be honest: have you ever had big wins and then gave it back just to reach a set tier point level for a day's play? I think you have. But don't feel bad -- I used to do it also. But then I realized just how smart it is to take the money home and damn the tier points.

What is ridiculous is you have been informed numerous times that your opinion is wrong. Yet, you believe that all the mathematicians in the world are idiots and you are smarter. Hilarious and completely delusional.

[Alan Mendelson]

Arc let me make this as simple as I can: my only goal is to leave the casino with more money than I arrived with. My secondary goal is to lose as little as possible when I don't get lucky playing these RANDOM machines. I don't play for comps or tier points but gladly accept them. I don't care about what the next hand or the next thousand hands might be after I cash out.

[coach belly]

Please stick a fork in this already.

55 pages of arci putting words in your mouth, and then arguing over things you didn't say.

Makes one appreciate the closed topics on the TA board.

[arcimede$]

Arc let me make this as simple as I can: my only goal is to leave the casino with more money than I arrived with. My secondary goal is to lose as little as possible when I don't get lucky playing these RANDOM machines. I don't play for comps or tier points but gladly accept them. I don't care about what the next hand or the next thousand hands might be after I cash out.

Once again you obfuscate the issue. You have stated:

"If video poker machines are truly random there is no reason not to think that you can have a winning session each and every time you play even if the pay table is negative."

Do you really believe you WILL win every time you play using your strategy? Everyone already knows anyone can win any time so saying you "can" win is a meaningless claim. We also know we "can" lose. What I want to know is do you believe ...

A. You WILL win every time you play using win goals.
B. You will win more money than you lose over time whether a game is positive or negative using win/loss goals.
C. You will approach the expectation of the game you are playing over time no matter when you choose to cash out.

[Alan Mendelson]

First thanks coach belly for bringing us back to reality.

Let me respond to arc's last three quuestions:

A. I hope that win goals will help me not to lose back that which I do win. Win goals don't control the RNG. Another stupid, argumentative question from arc.

B. Win goals and loss limits do not control the RNG. I can't tell when the big jackpots will come. Every royal I ever hit was on a negative expectation gane. There are eight so far this year. Another stupid question.

C. I have no idea what my actual return will be over time but I am sure going to try to beat it. Otherwise why bother? Why bother playing 100.17% video poker? I'd make more money recycling beer bottles off room service tables in hallways.

[Rob.Singer]

Please stick a fork in this already.

55 pages of arci putting words in your mouth, and then arguing over things you didn't say.

Makes one appreciate the closed topics on the TA board.

This is what happens coach, when self-proclaimed "math guys" crash & burn in one way or another, after being habitual video poker players in their pasts. Frank Kneeland came onto the scene, made one last desperate attempt to earn some money by writing a totally meaningless & unreadable book about supposed "team vp" from the industry he couldn't otherwise make a living from, and has now disappeared. It is not unexpected that someone who never used his own money to play because he never had any, would simply vanish. And the only reason arci keeps trying - and failing - to manipulate Alan's keyboard is because arci's crash & burn has landed him into one of the most unenvied & boring end-of-life retirements imagineable, so he creates arguments using illogic and hatred as a means of extending them for no other reason than to have something to do. In short, no one could make as many mistakes as he does in a good faith discussion.

[arcimede$]

First thanks coach belly for bringing us back to reality.

Let me respond to arc's last three quuestions:

A. I hope that win goals will help me not to lose back that which I do win. Win goals don't control the RNG. Another stupid, argumentative question from arc.

B. Win goals and loss limits do not control the RNG. I can't tell when the big jackpots will come. Every royal I ever hit was on a negative expectation gane. There are eight so far this year. Another stupid question.

C. I have no idea what my actual return will be over time but I am sure going to try to beat it. Otherwise why bother? Why bother playing 100.17% video poker? I'd make more money recycling beer bottles off room service tables in hallways.

Good grief, Alan. Those weren't 3 questions, they were choices. You pick one. But, I can tell by your comment that you are still avoiding taking a stand. There's nothing wrong with that if you don't make silly claims as you've done in the past.

[Alan Mendelson]

There was never a silly claim. I simply said that by using win goals and loss limits I could control my losses, and leave with a profit without taking the risk of putting it back in the machine.

Secondly this does not read as a multiple choice question which is further proof to me that you do not read nor comprehend the English language.

What I want to know is do you believe ...

A. You WILL win every time you play using win goals.
B. You will win more money than you lose over time whether a game is positive or negative using win/loss goals.
C. You will approach the expectation of the game you are playing over time no matter when you choose to cash out.

You've wasted too much time here trying to prove a point that need not be proven. As was said at the very beginning this was never a challenge about math but only a way to manage your money.

And for your comrades please understand that while you CAN win every time you play a negative expectation game it does not mean you WILL win every time you play. Try harder to understand simple English.

[arcimede$]

There was never a silly claim. I simply said that by using win goals and loss limits I could control my losses, and leave with a profit without taking the risk of putting it back in the machine.

Secondly this does not read as a multiple choice question which is further proof to me that you do not read nor comprehend the English language.

So, given 3 choices after asking a question you don't see that as multiple choice ..... alrighty then. I'll have to remember your comprehension capabilities and make it simpler for you in the future.

You've wasted too much time here trying to prove a point that need not be proven. As was said at the very beginning this was never a challenge about math but only a way to manage your money.

Alan, you stated several times that you believed you could do better than expectation using win goals. If you hadn't made such silly claims then there never would have been any discussion. There's only one person responsible for wasting all this time ... You.

And for your comrades please understand that while you CAN win every time you play a negative expectation game it does not mean you WILL win every time you play. Try harder to understand simple English.

Why didn't you say that to begin with? Why continue this nonsense?

[Rob.Singer]

Even I win slightly less than 90% of my sessions along with a healthy cumulative profit, and while I don't ever expect to win them all and spot on predictions are irrelevant, actual "long-term" historicals point in the direction of continued similar success. That's why I continue to play, and in no way do I ever expect the "math" to get revenge by snatching everything back just because my sessions were played in the short term at a long-term theoretical miniscule "disadvantage. And this has not been accomplished by "beating the math" or laughing at geeky mathematicians wherever they may be. It's simply been done by cashing out when ahead in the majority of my sessions--and never losing more than a pre-set amount in the losing sessions. IE, doing things exactly the opposite as the casinos want and expect any player to do, while the math, theories, and hurt "math guys" jumping up & down and screaming like arci, never have had anything to do with any of it.

[Alan Mendelson]

One more time arc: yes using win goals and loss limits your ACTUAL return CAN be better than the EXPECTED return if you get lucky.

[arcimede$]

One more time arc: yes using win goals and loss limits your ACTUAL return CAN be better than the EXPECTED return if you get lucky.

Playing blindfolded your ACTUAL return CAN be better than the EXPECTED return if you get lucky. So what? The only issue is whether they (or any other strategy method) improves your chances of doing better than the expected return. The answer to that question is NO. That is the entire point of the discussion, Alan. No one has ever had an issue with you cashing out whenever you wanted. If you want to use win/loss goals that is perfectly fine. If you want to play blindfolded please be my guest. Just don't claim they will improve you results over time.

[Alan Mendelson]

Arc YOU have had sn issue with when I cash out.

[arcimede$]

Arc YOU have had sn issue with when I cash out.

Nope, in fact I've told you I don't care many, many times. The fact you think anyone cares when you cash out is actually a little strange.

[Alan Mendelson]

Sorry arc. When you don't cash out it's very strange.

[arcimede$]

Sorry arc. When you don't cash out it's very strange.

I always cash out when I'm done. Strange that you would think anyone would leave their money in the machines. How do you think I won over 6 figures?

[Alan Mendelson]

I always cash out when I'm done. Strange that you would think anyone would leave their money in the machines. How do you think I won over 6 figures?

I am sure that this was a wise ass remark. Of course you cash out when you're done. But if you weren't such a wise ass you would pay attention to the word "when" because it is "when" you cash out which can determine your ACTUAL return. Of course LUCK will determine the credits on your meter but if you seem to think more big winners are ahead and you are willing to risk those credits on your meter be my guest.

And now, since you have no dispute about when I choose to cash out, what other ridiculous and argumentative comment will you come up with next? Are you going to argue that there is no such thing as an "actual return" and my results must meet the "expected return"?

[arcimede$]

I am sure that this was a wise ass remark. Of course you cash out when you're done. But if you weren't such a wise ass you would pay attention to the word "when" because it is "when" you cash out which can determine your ACTUAL return. Of course LUCK will determine the credits on your meter but if you seem to think more big winners are ahead and you are willing to risk those credits on your meter be my guest.

Every bet you make is risking credits. Doesn't matter if it is today or next week. How anyone cannot understand something so simple is beyond me.

And now, since you have no dispute about when I choose to cash out, what other ridiculous and argumentative comment will you come up with next? Are you going to argue that there is no such thing as an "actual return" and my results must meet the "expected return"?

Your results will approach the expected return over time .... just like I've always told you. You're not going to start claiming you can control the output of the RNG again, are you?

[Alan Mendelson]

Your results will approach the expected return over time .... just like I've always told you. You're not going to start claiming you can control the output of the RNG again, are you?

It has nothing to do with controlling the RNG. You've been told that a hundred times. You are hopeless.

[arcimede$]

It has nothing to do with controlling the RNG. You've been told that a hundred times. You are hopeless.

If you believe you can improve your "actual return" over and above the expected return over time, then the only way to do that is to receive better than average hands. After all, your final result is simply the sum of your individual hands. This then requires you to have some control over the RNG to provide you with those better hands. Most reasonable folks assume they will have a normal distribution of hands over time like the mathematicians state.