LUCK is almost EVERYTHING in Video Poker

[Rob.Singer]

Anyone who doesn't admit that every session we play is in the hands of "luck" is in severe denial.

For years I've been saying that the game of video poker is 95% luck and 5% skill--that skill of course being a solid knowledge of how to play your chosen game, the skill to only play in a spot comfortable to you, and the skill to hit the buttons properly. The rest is entirely up to luck. Entirely.

In fact, even the past purveyor of SKILL being 95% of the game--Bob Dancer--is beginning to see & admit that luck plays a much more important part of the game. His most recent article is a somewhat slick, helter skelter adaptation about what he's becoming more and more a believer in, but it's a start. Maybe all those losing promotions he's been roped into playing lately shook some sense into him.

[Vegas_lover]

If that were the case I really don't get why you even "invented" your "system"? There was no use for it. You just should have bought a monkey to press the buttons for you. Your monkey would have been just as lucky as you. A monkey can be trained to push the buttons and you can choose the game it should play. In other words, the most in debt response anybody could give to your next piece of hot air is BLA BLA BLA BLA BLA.

[Alan Mendelson]

Well, Rob, if it's 95% luck I'm just as well off playing conventional video poker strategies as playing your strategies. Thanks for wrapping it up. I can move on now to other things besides video poker.

I think I will pick up my campaign to replace local property taxes with local income taxes. I started that campaign back in the early 1970s when I was appointed Chairman of the Citizen's Advisory Committee on Tax Reform to the Rockland County, New York County Legislature. My proposal to replace the property tax with an income tax wasn't accepted then. But I can try again.

[regnis]

I think you are all missing the point in what Rob is saying and how his system works. You must get lucky--i.e. get a quad or royal or you will lose. What his system does is put you at a denom that, should you get lucky, will result in a win. Of course, the other side of that is what assurance is there that you will get lucky and get the quad rather than exacerbate the loss. Thus---his large bankroll.

[Vegas_lover]

I think you are all missing the point in what Rob is saying

Funny you'd mention that. I think a number of people around here know exactly what Rob's saying here and would disagree with almost everything you've just said. Just an observation

[arcimede$]

I think you are all missing the point in what Rob is saying and how his system works. You must get lucky--i.e. get a quad or royal or you will lose. What his system does is put you at a denom that, should you get lucky, will result in a win. Of course, the other side of that is what assurance is there that you will get lucky and get the quad rather than exacerbate the loss. Thus---his large bankroll.

That is the problem. If you don't get lucky you lose far more than you would otherwise. If you are continually unlucky like he claims Dancer has been, then you go through a huge bankroll in no time at all.

You see that's why math is important. Knowing the math means you won't make claims that are meaningless.

[Alan Mendelson]

Actually regnis summer it up correctly. I was being facetious in my earlier post. Rob's "special plays" make it possible to get the quads and straight flushes by sacrificing smaller wins that have a higher probability of occurring.

But I'm not sure his estimate that the game is 95% luck. Frankly, I think there is skill in any game and with every strategy, and regardless of the game and the strategy it's all luck. You need to be lucky playing conventional strategy just as you need to be lucky playing the Singer strategy.

[Vegas_lover]

Rob's "special plays" make it possible to get the quads and straight flushes

Playing without any strategy gets you quads and straight flushes as well if you're lucky.....so what was the point again?

Regnis summes Singer's earlier statements up pretty well. Only problem is with this new post/statement he basically tells us his system doesn't mean shit and all his babbling about his strategy vs optimal play is good ol BS since everything (ok 95%) is based on luck. Right? now let's rephrase the question again: what has been Singer's point exactly during the last year? Uhhhh Nothing I guess.

[arcimede$]

Anyone who thinks gambling is 95% luck should just play the slots and leave VP to those who choose to use their brains.

[fly2rei]

I disagree Arci. If only winners (AP'ers ?) played Video Poker how long would it be before the casinos took the games out completly. When I see a person playing
badly or playing a bad pay table, I just smile and think to myself the casino needs to make money. Glad it's from them and not me.

[Will Player]

All of the words around this issue tend to get away from the point. a "Random Number Generator", nowhere, actually generates a random number. The whole idea of the "random" number is not real. Oddly enough, the whole casino approved AP strategy is built around this false notion. It is not difficult to take advantage of non-randomness by building a system of play and variant bets (changing denominations) when your system detects favorable conditions. The problem is most people have been conditioned not to think. They look to the websites, books and experts (adult people) for all of the answers. The only thing I needed to understand was the architecture and behavior of a device called a "random number generator" inside a computer. I took programming classes, have a close family member who designed integrated circuits (read" processors, memory and other computer internal parts) as a PhD., and exhausted this issue from a technical standpoint. Then, I developed a system, programmed it into excel (where there also exist these pseudo random number generators) and adjusted my system until i came out ahead. I then went to the casinos and applied the system until I could actually do it in practice (this took years and was still is the challenge). I've come out ahead.

Am I think only person who thinks for themselves? I mean, the whole idea that a "random number generator" isn't random should be a HUGE light bulb in every intelligent machine player's mind. At this moment, they should question every idea of advantage play and find a rational option. It's my experience from reading this site and others that VERY FEW people actually use this valuable information to create a system that makes money over time. I will say this, even when you devise a profitable system, that's not the whole thing. Applying that systems, by the rules, in the casino environment is the other half of the battle. Casinos have two real advantages in the mainstream : 1. promoting the fallacy that the machines are random (they might not even know this themselves) and 2. the design of the casino itself and how it's designed to affect your behavior (so it would be very difficult to follow even a working system to take money away from said casino). These are the two main ideas that a successful gambler explores. Unsuccessful gamblers understand these concepts but are unwilling to explore the solutions to these two main casino created advantages.

[Vegas_lover]

All of the words around this issue tend to get away from the point. a "Random Number Generator", nowhere, actually generates a random number. The whole idea of the "random" number is not real. Oddly enough, the whole casino approved AP strategy is built around this false notion. It is not difficult to take advantage of non-randomness by building a system of play and variant bets (changing denominations) when your system detects favorable conditions. The problem is most people have been conditioned not to think. They look to the websites, books and experts (adult people) for all of the answers. The only thing I needed to understand was the architecture and behavior of a device called a "random number generator" inside a computer. I took programming classes, have a close family member who designed integrated circuits (read" processors, memory and other computer internal parts) as a PhD., and exhausted this issue from a technical standpoint. Then, I developed a system, programmed it into excel (where there also exist these pseudo random number generators) and adjusted my system until i came out ahead. I then went to the casinos and applied the system until I could actually do it in practice (this took years and was still is the challenge). I've come out ahead.

Am I think only person who thinks for themselves? I mean, the whole idea that a "random number generator" isn't random should be a HUGE light bulb in every intelligent machine player's mind. At this moment, they should question every idea of advantage play and find a rational option. It's my experience from reading this site and others that VERY FEW people actually use this valuable information to create a system that makes money over time. I will say this, even when you devise a profitable system, that's not the whole thing. Applying that systems, by the rules, in the casino environment is the other half of the battle. Casinos have two real advantages in the mainstream : 1. promoting the fallacy that the machines are random (they might not even know this themselves) and 2. the design of the casino itself and how it's designed to affect your behavior (so it would be very difficult to follow even a working system to take money away from said casino). These are the two main ideas that a successful gambler explores. Unsuccessful gamblers understand these concepts but are unwilling to explore the solutions to these two main casino created advantages.

red flag, red flag, red flag. Here we have a topic that hasn't been touched in over 6 months. Out of nowhere comes a member who has two posts, has been a member for over a year, humoring us with an extremely vague post about how obvious it is random games are not random, supporting aspects of Singer's strategy. By all means, carry on

[Alan Mendelson]

All of the words around this issue tend to get away from the point. a "Random Number Generator", nowhere, actually generates a random number. The whole idea of the "random" number is not real.

Thanks for being a member and for your post. Essentially, what you are saying is that RNGs are not random. If they are not random, how do you know and what is your proof? If you have it, please provide it. If you are making the allegation that the machines are not truly random but you cannot back up your claim all I can say is that we fought that war before.

I am always interested in seeing new information and proof to substantiate such claims and reports. Thank you.

[Rob.Singer]

At least we have some decent discussion, even if some of it is misguided.

Regnis had the best description of the how and why of my strategy, and how it uses luck as a major part of being successful.

Arci saying what he said about 95% luck is common amont those who think it was skill that drew that fifth card to the royal, or in his case, a oej for 5-of-a-kind. What he's missing is that ANY winning hand is the result of good luck, and any losing hand is the result of bad luck. Thus, the 95% is not all good luck.

Vegas_lover was writing out of emotion rather than what his sense is telling him. His comment about using a monkey to play ignores the strategy, which is partly a combination of optimal play (mostly simple common sense), and special plays that deviate from optimal play. In other words, knowing the math is very important, but that alone will not make you a winner. Otherwise, these "authors of advantage play" who all sell us their videos, books, strategy cards, and time, would all be lining up offering to prove that they've won and that they will continue to win. They have never done anything close to that of course and never will, because perception based on principles is as good as any smoke & mirrors presentation.

fly2rei, based on my years of looking into what AP's really mean to casinos--as in my discussion with the casino manager recently about that Palms promotion being played by every AP in town and others from other states--they COUNT on these people to flock to their +EV specials because these are mainly the people who finance the prizes they "give away". For instance, for many years we've read about Dancer playing big promos for cars etc. at the Palms, and he's won a few vehicles if I remember correctly. The perception is that he rapes them every which way, YET THEY CONTINUE TO HAVE ZERO PROBLEM WITH HIM COMING IN FOR THE PROMOS, WRITING ABOUT THEM, AND EVEN HAVING THE CASINO MANAGER ON HIS RADIO SHOWS TO TALK ABOUT THEM! Common wisdom suggests that if he were using them as his personal ATM, he wouldn't be allowed within 50' of the place. And this makes perfect sense, given that my own experience in being banned from places was for winning consistently (or, as they all have said in one way or another, not being able to figure out how to make a profit off of me).

[Vegas_lover]

Vegas_lover was writing out of emotion rather than what his sense is telling him. His comment about using a monkey to play ignores the strategy, which is partly a combination of optimal play (mostly simple common sense), and special plays that deviate from optimal play. In other words, knowing the math is very important, but that alone will not make you a winner. Otherwise, these "authors of advantage play" who all sell us their videos, books, strategy cards, and time, would all be lining up offering to prove that they've won and that they will continue to win. They have never done anything close to that of course and never will, because perception based on principles is as good as any smoke & mirrors presentation.

I'm wasn't writing out of emotion I was pointing out (once again) that your posts are based mostly on complete and utter BS. Here you go again about your strategy and how it's all based on optimal play and yadayadayada while you just said that winning is 95% luck. So your system only brings the other 5% to the table. NONSENSE. Nothing more nothing less

[Rob.Singer]

I'm wasn't writing out of emotion I was pointing out (once again) that your posts are based mostly on complete and utter BS. Here you go again about your strategy and how it's all based on optimal play and yadayadayada while you just said that winning is 95% luck. So your system only brings the other 5% to the table. NONSENSE. Nothing more nothing less

VL, at least for me it is not any more than a few percent of the game to have a good, winning strategy.

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob, you've stated (and the videos are online here) that your special plays all have a lower expected value, BUT if you get lucky then you will win more by drawing to a bigger winning hand. So what you are saying is that you NEED more luck than a conventional strategy needs.

[Rob.Singer]

Rob, you've stated (and the videos are online here) that your special plays all have a lower expected value, BUT if you get lucky then you will win more by drawing to a bigger winning hand. So what you are saying is that you NEED more luck than a conventional strategy needs.

No. When I play I have the same amount of luck as anyone else. The fact that I give good luck more of an opportunity to appear is what the special plays are all about.

[Vegas_lover]

Alan, please read the 2 posts above this one (#14 and #15). Please don't tell me that anything Singer says makes sense because this is the biggest bullhockey match I've ever seen. He's actually contradicting himself completely (and that's nothing new either). For your info, this has nothing to do with the AP vs Singer method but has everything to do with Singer talking out of his rear end.

[Rob.Singer]

You're not being clear VL, except for your being irritated. Please explain what the contradiction is. I'm not seeing any. Or maybe arci can explain when he gets home from his "bowling for falsies" tournament.