Where can 99.54% JoB be found at the $5 denomination at CET properties for full tiers

[Alan Mendelson]

You think it's absolutely irresponsible of math guyes to state there is no reason to quit playing positive EV games. I think it is highly irresponsible of YOU to state that people can consisantly beat -EV games (or let me rephrase that: consistantly win at -EV games) with win goals and loss limits. Good luck with your forum. This is the point where I'm going to say goodbye and follow Vegas Vic's example.

I never said that you will consistently win. I asked you several times to keep track of the number of sessions that you played when you were ahead at some point in each of those sessions. I think if you did that you would find that most of the time if not all of the time, you were ahead at least one bet playing video poker. My point was to illustrate that even at a negative expectation game you can be ahead of the expected return.

You, however, have continued to twist and turn the things I say and while there is no reason to prevent you from posting (ban you, suspend you) I think it's better that you don't post here. Your misinformation can be costly to the people who come here for helpful information. It is dangerous to have anyone here who advocates continued gambling once a player has converted the casinos money into his own money.

In another thread I said in a comment to redietz that once you win a bet the money you have won is now your money. It is not the house's money that you are playing with -- it is your money that you are playing with. Even at a positive expectation machine (game) there is still a significant risk of losing your money -- whether it came out of your pocket or was just won from the casino. So I say take the money and run.

As I also pointed out in the other thread, the average Vegas gambler has a budget of less than $600. (See http://www.reviewjournal.com/busines...get-five-years ) so your preaching of big money gambling statistics and deep pocket statistics is inappropriate for this forum.

You deep pocketed professional gamblers should have a meeting in a suite at the Wynn drinking cognac and champagne to discuss your deep pocket theoretical math. The rest of us have to deal with reality. And the reality is we can't sit at a video poker machine expecting a royal flush to give us the return that the pay table says we should expect. We have to take what luck gives us in the short time we play with the available budget we have. In short, we have to adapt theory to the reality we are facing.

Sure we should all be playing the best pay tables available -- but even at a positive pay table there is no guarantee we will win. So... we take the money and run.

[Alan Mendelson]

The only thing I'll say, sort of in Alan's defense, is that responsibility for many lies in loyalty to who is buttering your bread. Alan's advice may be irresponsible for a general population or readership, but they aren't paying his bills. It could be considered responsible if he's juggling occasional contracts for CET or others in the casino industry.

I sent you a private message about a week ago asking you not to make references to my business. While I have done some work for some casino companies and while I have met and consulted with various executives of casino companies in Vegas and elsewhere, my comments here are my own and have nothing to do with my business relationships or with my business providing advertising and marketing information.

If you want to debate my position about gambling then debate what I say and the issue. This comment you made is irresponsible.

[Rob.Singer]

Think about WHY casinos PAY Dancer to teach optimal play INSIDE CASINOS. That ought to undress the mystique about the long-term method that should shake every savvy gambler out there. But why doesn't it? Because of THEORY. And that's exactly how the casinos want and expect every player to react. Then they throw continuous, constant super duper slot club promos at all players every day of the year and all over the state, that they KNOW will be descended upon by mostly AP's, and whom they know will bring in as much cash as they can get their hands on. It's as if they're just GIVING it away, is it not?

It is all such simple common sense.

[Alan Mendelson]

I attended one of Dancer's in-casino seminars some years back and it was clear (and even discussed) why the casino had him there giving away gambling info for free: the more players banging away and the longer that they banged away at the machines the more the casinos raked in. I recall Dancer's seminar was given in part of the video poker area where there was a row of 9/6 jacks or better machines with a big card mounted on top with Dancer's picture saying these were machines/games he endorsed. Of course the casino wanted the signs -- the casino had an edge on every dollar played. Which is why you can't beat the casinos with extended play. The only chance you have is to get ahead of the casinos as much as you can in each session and quit that session -- and when you can't get ahead you know when to cut your losses.

[bigfoot66]

When you play 8-5 JoB instead of 9-6 JoB, the casino is keeping an extra credit every time you hit a flush or full house. If you're playing a $5 machine, that's $5 each time you get either of those. So if you hit 5 flushes and 3 full houses in that session, the casino kept $40 that should have been yours. Even if you hit a $20,000 royal that session as well, you are still short another $40. And that's the point here. That adds up over time. It adds up a lot.

Actually its worse than that. If you are playing a $5 machine at max credits it is costing you $25 every time you hit a flush or a full house, $200 in your example.
And if you are looking for a $5 JoB machine in the west that gives full tier points try Phoenix. I'll even meet you out there for a beer.

[Alan Mendelson]

If you are playing a $5 machine at max credits it is costing you $25 every time you hit a flush or a full house, $200 in your example.

9/6 Jacks $5 flush pays 6X25 = $150
8/5 Bonus $5 flush pays 5X25 = $125

9/6 Jacks $5 full house pays 9X25 = $225
8/5 Bonus $5 full house pays 8X25 = $200

Even if you hit a $20,000 royal that session as well, you are still short another $40. And that's the point here. That adds up over time. It adds up a lot.

I got a chuckle out of this, because one royal is the equivalent of the difference of a full house or flush in an 8/5 game 800 times.

But what makes 8/5 Bonus (or Aces and Faces) so appealing is that:

Quad Aces which pays $2,000 on a $5 machine is the equivalent of the difference of a full house or flush 80 times.
The other "bonus quads" which pay $1,000 is the equivalent of the difference of a full house or flush 40 times.

[Dan Druff]

Actually its worse than that. If you are playing a $5 machine at max credits it is costing you $25 every time you hit a flush or a full house, $200 in your example.
And if you are looking for a $5 JoB machine in the west that gives full tier points try Phoenix. I'll even meet you out there for a beer.

Oops, you're right. I knew what I meant when I wrote that, but I typed it wrong.

Yes, at a 9/6 $5 JoB machine, you are losing $25 on every flush or full house versus an 8/5 JoB machine. This is why pay tables matter so much.

Of course, it's a lesser difference at 8-5 bonus (because of the extra pay on quads), but you are still losing more overall between royals than you are at 9/6 JoB, even with the extra credits for AAAA or the other bonus quads.

[Dan Druff]

Alan, your advice to quit after a big win is only good if you aren't going to play VP again for awhile.

If you are a regular VP player, you will eventually give back that win, so it doesn't matter so much if you run those extra hands just moments after the big win, or 2 weeks later. You will still lose the money.

So let's say I have a friend named Joe, who visits Vegas once every 2 years, and will run $5-per-credit VP for an hour or so. He hits a quick royal and he's up $20k. I would say, "Joe, don't keep playing. You've hit what you came for. Quit and go home with your $20k", and that would be great advice because Joe will not play again for 2 years, and even when he does at that point, it's not likely to result in much of a loss.

However, if Joe is a weekly VP player, his quitting now will be negligible. He will return in subsequent weeks and lose it anyway, and in fact will likely have lost it all back by the time a year has passed. So quitting today will mean very little for Joe's bankroll in this case.

That's why "session based" quitting is so dumb for regular players. It makes zero sense.

Your advice is like pressuring a habitual smoker to stop smoking for the day for health reasons, yet having no problem with them lighting up tomorrow and smoking regularly again.

Quitting something harmful/unhealthy only works when you aren't going to regularly do it again soon.

With that said, I think everyone is getting too emotional over this.

I hope that Vegas_Vic, Vegas_Lover, and whoever else doesn't quit the forum.

I don't think any of this discussing is harming anyone, though I definitely disagree with Alan & Rob here.

[Alan Mendelson]

Alan, your advice to quit after a big win is only good if you aren't going to play VP again for awhile.

If you are a regular VP player, you will eventually give back that win, so it doesn't matter so much if you run those extra hands just moments after the big win, or 2 weeks later. You will still lose the money.

Who says you are going to give it back? Where is it written that you will give it back?

You'll give it back if you let yourself give it back. But if you get lucky, you will never give it back.

This is the problem: there are no absolutes. It is not absolute that if you only play negative expectation games that you will lose. It is not an absolute if you only play positive expectation games that you will win.

[Rob.Singer]

Alan, give him some time--maybe a few more years and maybe even this year. When he finally wins money by the end of a year from playing negative machines, he'll finally realize that you actually CAN win--and keep it AND add to it--on ANY machines if you do something other than to sit and play for the points.

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob let me also add that playing for a certain amount of time is also dangerous. If you say you will play for five hours per day you are opening the door to disaster. Instead play but stop when you've won. And yes you will win again on a future trip and stop then too. And between the wins learn to control your losses.

Dan's plan to reach 7 Stars in ten sessions is only asking for trouble. He won't be able to leave with a profit unless he made his 15-thousand tier points.

[Rob.Singer]

He's also always planning on hitting at least one Royal, when that's a tall order for ANY amount of play.

[redietz]

That's my plan: Go play vp, get ahead, then quit. Do it every day for three years. Maybe twice a day for three years. Hell, three times a day for three years. May as well retire with some extra cash.

[Alan Mendelson]

That's my plan: Go play vp, get ahead, then quit. Do it every day for three years. Maybe twice a day for three years. Hell, three times a day for three years. May as well retire with some extra cash.

You make fun of it, but you have to try it. Then let us know what happens.

As I've said before: go to a casino and keep track of how many days you play VP when you are ahead at some point by at least 5 credits. I think I have been ahead at least 5 credits at least 90% of the time I've played VP.

Try it and let us know.

[Rob.Singer]

They won't do it Alan, mainly because they can't play a short period and even if they could, there's no way any of them would want to spoil their "theories". Reality is a real killer, you know.

[redietz]

I have no problem doing it. VP ain't my schtick, so I'll be more than happy to be the guinea pig for this nonsense once football is over.

Unless, of course, Rob thinks I'm a member of "they," in which case my soul-robbing addiction to pushing buttons will prevent me from doing so. Anybody want to wager on the likelihood of that? Of course, the fact I'm probably not playing until football is over kind of puts the lie to the idea that "APs" and vp addiction are somehow irrevocably intertwined. Oh well, I guess that's the sort of reality some folks do not like to acknowledge.

[Dan Druff]

Rob let me also add that playing for a certain amount of time is also dangerous. If you say you will play for five hours per day you are opening the door to disaster. Instead play but stop when you've won. And yes you will win again on a future trip and stop then too. And between the wins learn to control your losses.

Dan's plan to reach 7 Stars in ten sessions is only asking for trouble. He won't be able to leave with a profit unless he made his 15-thousand tier points.

Again, there is nothing "dangerous" about my plan unless you believe I psychologically can't handle a terrible session while earning 5,000 base tiers in one day. I guess you could also say it would be "dangerous" if I couldn't afford to lose in the worst-case scenario, but I could afford it (I just wouldn't like it).

If I put $500,000 of coin-in at the same machine (Aces and Faces) as you put $1.5 million in coin-in during the same year (2015), then I am likely to lose exactly 1/3 as much as you, regardless of how our sessions are broken down, or when we quit at particular times.

I don't see why you aren't understanding this.

[redietz]

People understand what they prefer to understand.

[Rob.Singer]

Putting either of those amounts thru a machine while expecting to lose, is completely stupid, so no, there is no difference. The available difference that goes over AP and wannabee AP heads, is expecting to win (wow....what a concept!) every time you play. It's absolutely amazing that this concept escapes nearly every vp player, and almost always because of a half of a per cent..

[Alan Mendelson]

If I put $500,000 of coin-in at the same machine (Aces and Faces) as you put $1.5 million in coin-in during the same year (2015), then I am likely to lose exactly 1/3 as much as you, regardless of how our sessions are broken down, or when we quit at particular times.

That's what the theoretical math says. In reality, this past year I made 7 Stars again with a profit because I hit a royal. So far this year I have eight royals. Does the math account for 8 royals for the amount of play I did so far this year? Of course not.

And that's the point: your results might vary.