Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 41

Thread: How do you define "Advantage Play" for casino games such as blackjack and craps?

  1. #21
    Originally Posted by arcimede$ View Post
    Silly nonsense. The casino where I played recently took out the +EV machines because they were losing money. Singer once again provides us with verifiable lies.
    That's funny....you previously stated they told you the reason was because the machines were old and they couldn't get replacement parts. Now because all these phony ap's are getting undressed, you decide to change the story around.

    Get your lies straight arci and try again. Casinos have always swiftly removed machines, regardless of their pay tables, that lose money. How long were those "positive" machines on the floor again?

  2. #22
    Rob lies again. The inventory of the machines kept diminishing because they needed to cannibalize machines to get parts. However, they could have continued this process and kept a few machines around. What happened is when they got down to 8 machines, the better players produced a higher and higher percentage of play (we actually scheduled shifts on the machines). According to one player who talked to the slot director, the machines were now losing money. That is why they were all pulled out.

  3. #23
    It's unconfirmed but I hear the lines were so long for those one eyed jacks machines that you had to go to Open Table for a reservation.

  4. #24
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    It could be a very smart marketing move for a casino to be sure that Dancer is part of its events and is seen playing there.
    Bingo. It doesn't mean He wins.

  5. #25
    Just the fact that arci had to scramble back on to double down on his lie after getting caught yet again, makes me miss him every time the ambulance takes him away from us.

  6. #26
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Just the fact that arci had to scramble back on to double down on his lie after getting caught yet again, makes me miss him every time the ambulance takes him away from us.
    Ahhh, more projection. Singer feels like a real doofus now after being shown that what I said was perfectly consistent. So what does he do? "Doubles down" on his lie. Hilarious.

  7. #27
    Arci, about the OEJ play. Did you keep track of the total take from the machines only, and if so how close to the EV did you come over time. Just curious.

  8. #28
    Give him some time qua. Combined with the struggles he's created for himself at home, every time he gets rocked by my exposing his lies & BS in multiple threads, it takes him some time to shake off the cobwebs and collect enuf thought to spin another one.

  9. #29
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Give him some time qua. Combined with the struggles he's created for himself at home, every time he gets rocked by my exposing his lies & BS in multiple threads, it takes him some time to shake off the cobwebs and collect enuf thought to spin another one.
    I wasn't talking to you. Your lies have been well documented you VP hack. Where's the sch-c a-hole. I once had a good friend who was a pathological liar just like you, but He didn't define lie in the same way normal people do. Just like you!

  10. #30
    Originally Posted by quahaug View Post
    Arci, about the OEJ play. Did you keep track of the total take from the machines only, and if so how close to the EV did you come over time. Just curious.
    I don't have my old files available but for 2013 I returned 99.2% for 110K hands, 2012 was 99.1% for 246K hands, 2011 was 98.4% for 235K hands and 2010 was 102.1% for 280K hands.

    Only 8 RFs over the last 3 years when I should have had 15 was a big problem. I had 11 royals in 2010 so it's not quite as bad overall. Had I had the proper number of royals the last 2 years I would have been right about where I should have been.

  11. #31
    Arci, or anyone else, correct me if I'm wrong as I may be mathematically challenged. But I took Arci's 246,000 hands, at $1.25 per hand (if quarters) and he wagered $307,500. If he returned 99.1%, that is a return of $304,733, for a loss of $2,767. Now I understand there are some comps but the claim is that he made significant profits playing VP (I dont feel like looking for the thread with the exact amounts). In 2013, the loss would be $1100. If he played dollars--you do the math.

    Now before you have a coronary Arci, I'm not saying this to attack you. I simply assume I am doing something wrong in the math or am missing something. So explain if you would as I am obviously confused.

  12. #32
    Originally Posted by regnis View Post
    Arci, or anyone else, correct me if I'm wrong as I may be mathematically challenged. But I took Arci's 246,000 hands, at $1.25 per hand (if quarters) and he wagered $307,500. If he returned 99.1%, that is a return of $304,733, for a loss of $2,767.
    If I recall -- based on previous posts Arc said the game he played had a payback of greater than 100% but I am not sure if that was just the paytable or paytable plus comps.

  13. #33
    Originally Posted by arcimede$ View Post
    Had I had the proper number of royals the last 2 years I would have been right about where I should have been.
    Me too. Funny how we don't get those royals when we are supposed to.

  14. #34
    Originally Posted by regnis View Post
    Arci, or anyone else, correct me if I'm wrong as I may be mathematically challenged. But I took Arci's 246,000 hands, at $1.25 per hand (if quarters) and he wagered $307,500. If he returned 99.1%, that is a return of $304,733, for a loss of $2,767. Now I understand there are some comps but the claim is that he made significant profits playing VP (I dont feel like looking for the thread with the exact amounts). In 2013, the loss would be $1100. If he played dollars--you do the math.

    Now before you have a coronary Arci, I'm not saying this to attack you. I simply assume I am doing something wrong in the math or am missing something. So explain if you would as I am obviously confused.
    The key is to understand that cashback was 1% and freeplay was around .8%.

  15. #35
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Me too. Funny how we don't get those royals when we are supposed to.
    Who is we? I knew several players that were way over-royaled. I also knew a couple that were down like me. Fortunately, the game I was playing was still profitable even without many royals.

  16. #36
    Originally Posted by arcimede$ View Post
    Who is we? I knew several players that were way over-royaled. I also knew a couple that were down like me. Fortunately, the game I was playing was still profitable even without many royals.
    Originally Posted by arcimede$ View Post
    The key is to understand that cashback was 1% and freeplay was around .8%.
    I don't know of any games that give less than 2% of the payback to royals. I can't imagine cash back or comps that offset not getting royals. Do you know of any such situations, Arc?

  17. #37
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    I don't know of any games that give less than 2% of the payback to royals. I can't imagine cash back or comps that offset not getting royals. Do you know of any such situations, Arc?
    I just showed you one. OEJs returns 100.28%, CB+FP = 1.8%. Total return 102.08%. Assuming 2% for RFs it is still positive. BTW, I didn't include other comps and promotions that add even more to the return.

  18. #38
    Here again is my question, Arc:

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    I don't know of any games that give less than 2% of the payback to royals. I can't imagine cash back or comps that offset not getting royals. Do you know of any such situations, Arc?
    And here's what you wrote:

    Originally Posted by arcimede$ View Post
    I just showed you one. OEJs returns 100.28%, CB+FP = 1.8%. Total return 102.08%. Assuming 2% for RFs it is still positive. BTW, I didn't include other comps and promotions that add even more to the return.
    So again, your cash back and free play = 1.8%. What is the value of the royal flush in One Eyed Jacks?

  19. #39
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Here again is my question, Arc:



    And here's what you wrote:



    So again, your cash back and free play = 1.8%. What is the value of the royal flush in One Eyed Jacks?
    2% is assumed

  20. #40
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    What is the value of the royal flush in One Eyed Jacks?
    The frequency is around 39K hands which gives 2.05%.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •