Warning to Forum Readers -- Gambling Credentials

[arcimede$]

Oh, and please tell me what logic tells you not to embrace win goals and loss limits?

The logic used in the proof that covers any betting system and demonstrates betting systems provide no improvements in expected return over time. You can embrace them all you they just don't make any difference.

[Rob.Singer]

That whole "true believer" statement made by Alan was pretty dishonest. In fact, it's the so-called AP's who are most aware of risk of ruin and plan accordingly in terms of having appropriate bankrolls. That's one reason win goals and such are relatively meaningless to people who know what they're doing and are playing positive games -- the amounts that can be won/lost in one session represent a very small percentage of their overall bankroll.

An interesting day on the forum. I see once again that redietz wants to be an anonymous gambling authority who says he's written some paper on something for a conference. Then he goes on to assert those who write or wrote gaming columns or self-published books (which I did not do of course--any gaming authority would know that) don't know a much about gambling as an AP. Confusing stuff, at best. Or perhaps it's the writing?

This is almost as funny as when arci tried to develop a program for that stupid one eyed jacks game he says he plays to try and keep up with Dancer & Zamzow....and failed! Yup, genius AP's at work once again

[Rob.Singer]

The logic used in the proof that covers any betting system and demonstrates betting systems provide no improvements in expected return over time. You can embrace them all you they just don't make any difference.

....or so says a guy stuck in a retirement rut who was forced to leave LV like many of the rest of the vp "experts"--or lose it all

(psst....he makes this SOOOO easy, doesn't he)

[Alan Mendelson]

The logic used in the proof that covers any betting system and demonstrates betting systems provide no improvements in expected return over time. You can embrace them all you they just don't make any difference.

This is your failure, arcimedes. Win goals and loss limits are primarily personal decisions based on various things that I don't think you can figure only by a math formula. There are primarily comfort decisions of the individual player. Do you have a formula to figure comfort levels?

[redietz]

I'm afraid my modest resume pales before the forum's resident gambling expert, whose volume of published material in Gaming Today is exceeded only by Keno Lil's expert commentaries.

And last I checked, anonymous gambling authorities are anonymous (um, that means no real name attached), but no need to quibble over details.

Alan, to be clear, my paper was back when the conference was still called "National" and it rotated sites around the country.

While not as prolific as Rob (or Keno Lil), I had quite a few articles published or posted in Playbook.com and Picksworld.com, and back when Playbook was print. That stretched over decades, and numbered well over a hundred -- not sure how many. May be quite a bit more than that. If you dig up old copies of The McCusker Report, I'll be in there quite a bit, and I'm sure my bio is out there in the internet ether.

But I repeat the main point -- having articles published or books published is no indication of expertise. My uncle could be publishing a gambling newsletter, and Whitley Strieber was a best-selling author. The case is made either by the math or by the results, and the results should be reproducible.
.
It appears Alan has a bit more respect for the Gambling Conference than Rob, probably because he realizes it's the preeminent conference of its kind.

[arcimede$]

....or so says a guy stuck in a retirement rut who was forced to leave LV like many of the rest of the vp "experts"--or lose it all

(psst....he makes this SOOOO easy, doesn't he)

You can always count on another lie from Singer when he feels threatened. I've still never moved to Vegas and hence could never have been forced to leave there. Only in Singer's world could a winter home qualify as moving. Of course, we can all check back at Singer's comments in the past and see where he stated he would never move to a gambling town. Chuckle, chuckle. One can only wonder what happened in Phoenix that forced him to run away. The truth will eventually come out.

[Alan Mendelson]

Well redietz, with all of that experience you still knock the value of win goals and loss limits? Wow

[redietz]

Alan, if you play a negative game, win goals are great if they reduce your play. Anything that reduces play is helpful -- as Arci says, rub the rabbit foot every hand. If you play a positive game, win goals make no sense. None.

To quote Penn from the opening of his show, "Las Vegas!! What a place! The casinos advertise 99% return! And PEOPLE THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING!!"

[regnis]

Redietz--didn't I see you on an episode of "To Tell The Trusth" 50 years ago? I knew I recognized you.

[redietz]

And Alan, don't forget your stock market/vp analogies are completely flawed regarding win goals. Video poker is a closed system -- it cannot be affected by the outside world in non-predictable ways. The math describes the vp system -- unlike the stock market.

[regnis]

And Alan, don't forget your stock market/vp analogies are completely flawed regarding win goals. Video poker is a closed system -- it cannot be affected by the outside world in non-predictable ways. The math describes the vp system -- unlike the stock market.

The math--subject however to the ebbs and flows of the RNG

[Alan Mendelson]

redietz, what I can see and apparently you cannot either see or accept is that playing a positive expectation game does not give you a license to win. You can lose. It's still gambling and bad things can happen that go against the math and the expectation.

I cannot put risk ahead of the math because I don't have the bankroll, or the time, that the casinos have. If you do, more power to you. I also suggest that with the exception of the professional gamblers there are few casino-goers who do not value loss limits and win goals. And over the years I have met plenty of professional gamblers. Many of them sleep in their cars at the local poker houses here in LA hoping someone will help them out with buy-ins to small tournaments.

Quote the math all you want when you are talking to the casinos -- but the math has to be taken with a big block of salt when it comes to we players. It's really a different ball game. Let me put it this way: we individual players can't afford your "math." But we certainly can afford win goals and loss limits.

[Rob.Singer]

I'm afraid my modest resume pales before the forum's resident gambling expert, whose volume of published material in Gaming Today is exceeded only by Keno Lil's expert commentaries.

And last I checked, anonymous gambling authorities are anonymous (um, that means no real name attached), but no need to quibble over details.

Alan, to be clear, my paper was back when the conference was still called "National" and it rotated sites around the country.

While not as prolific as Rob (or Keno Lil), I had quite a few articles published or posted in Playbook.com and Picksworld.com, and back when Playbook was print. That stretched over decades, and numbered well over a hundred -- not sure how many. May be quite a bit more than that. If you dig up old copies of The McCusker Report, I'll be in there quite a bit, and I'm sure my bio is out there in the internet ether.

But I repeat the main point -- having articles published or books published is no indication of expertise. My uncle could be publishing a gambling newsletter, and Whitley Strieber was a best-selling author. The case is made either by the math or by the results, and the results should be reproducible.
.
It appears Alan has a bit more respect for the Gambling Conference than Rob, probably because he realizes it's the preeminent conference of its kind.

I assume those are sports betting entities? I know of no professional gambler or otherwise, including people like Mike Shackleford and that "luminary" Fezzik, who hasn't said they were unsuccessful in vp but did very well in sports betting.

[Rob.Singer]

You can always count on another lie from Singer when he feels threatened. I've still never moved to Vegas and hence could never have been forced to leave there. Only in Singer's world could a winter home qualify as moving. Of course, we can all check back at Singer's comments in the past and see where he stated he would never move to a gambling town. Chuckle, chuckle. One can only wonder what happened in Phoenix that forced him to run away. The truth will eventually come out.

Hahahahaha!!! I did it to him again Hit that nail SQUARELY on the head, get under his skin clear thru to the nerves, THEN WATCH THE LIES & DENIAL BY A THOUSAND WORDS flow like gold! No one told me life would be so sweeeeeet!! (now just wait'll he gets up in the morning and rushes to see how many zingers he had to take)

YEAH!

[Alan Mendelson]

Thanks for pointing out the sports connection, Rob. I didn't pick that up. Of course this changes everything. There is no RNG in sports betting. Sports betting is more like the stock market and the commodities markets -- it's based on information with a little luck thrown in. Video poker? Well it's luck and then you use your information to help manage your luck -- and that's a lot different from stocks, commodities and sports.

[Rob.Singer]

Alan, if you play a negative game, win goals are great if they reduce your play. Anything that reduces play is helpful -- as Arci says, rub the rabbit foot every hand. If you play a positive game, win goals make no sense. None.

To quote Penn from the opening of his show, "Las Vegas!! What a place! The casinos advertise 99% return! And PEOPLE THINK THAT'S A GOOD THING!!"

You should recognize that what your idol was REALLY saying was that ER means nothing to the player and everything to the casino. Only AP's turn those pre-game numbers into the main topic for the next meeting of Neurotics Anonymous.

[redietz]

I'm working hard here -- I believe Rob's point is that success in sports betting doesn't translate into success playing video poker. I'm not sure how to address that other than to say that the two people Rob mentioned are high-profile dudes, but are not going to make most lists of top 10 feared sports bettors. So maybe their vp play was lousy. It's possible.

Do I think there is some magic formula Rob has uncovered that makes him a better vp player than, say, me? No.

[redietz]

I will say this: Other than Rob, the only people I know who are ahead lifetime playing video poker would be AP's. And that would include me, with my modest amount of play.

Now we come to the conundrum. Since I'm ahead lifetime, and by Rob's definition I'm an AP, then all AP's must not lose. And since I don't play a lot, then all AP's must not be addicted.

Hmmmm, what can we do to correct this?

[regnis]

I'm working hard here -- I believe Rob's point is that success in sports betting doesn't translate into success playing video poker. I'm not sure how to address that other than to say that the two people Rob mentioned are high-profile dudes, but are not going to make most lists of top 10 feared sports bettors. So maybe their vp play was lousy. It's possible.

Do I think there is some magic formula Rob has uncovered that makes him a better vp player than, say, me? No.

I see no connection between VP and sports betting. The thought processes are not even the same. So if Rob is saying that I would agree.I also don't see the relevence to this overall debate as the sports betters never claimed to be APs or VP pros as far as I know, and their skills don't have the intervening factor of the RNG. For the same reason, my 45 years of playing horses has no benefit when it comes to VP.

[redietz]

I now see the problem here -- there is an assumption that everything I've written has to do with sports and therefore when it comes to video poker, Rob somehow outranks me in expertise. Awwww -- well, that's a good theory. Actually, I write about a lot of things other than sports, and my conference paper had nothing to do with sports.

Now let's get back to my personal history. I'm ahead lifetime playing as an AP. Rob says I shouldn't be. In fact, I'm ahead having played for more than 20 years, which may be longer than Rob has played. Now -- who has logged more hours? I don't know -- but Rob prides himself on not playing much, so maybe it's pretty close.

So the reason Rob has more expertise in vp is what? He won more money? That may be true, but that means what? He played for higher stakes? And that means he has more expertise? Let's be precise here. Exactly why is it that Rob Singer is an expert?

1) Because he won money?
2) Because he wrote columns for Gaming Today?
3) Because he says so?
4) Because Alan says so?
5) Because he came up with convoluted systems involving denomination changes, special plays, and win goals?

Let's take a poll. Why is Rob Singer a video poker expert? And yes, some people will notice that none of the five reasons listed above measures expertise in any way. So try to come up with your own.