Hit and Run report

[arcimede$]

Ya know Arc, I can't fight simulations but it's funny how I walked out of Rincon recently with more money than I had than when I walked in. I guess I must be "due" for a few sessions when I won't even get one paying pair.

Simulations are good. Your own checkbook is better.

I urge everyone to look at their own balance sheets and to use simulations as a guide.

I once sat down a a machine a hit a big winner (1000 credits) almost right away. However, I kept playing and wouldn't you know I hit another one just a little later. While waiting to be paid I sat at the next machine and hit another 1000 credit jackpot. After both were paid I went back to the original machine and hit yet another 1000 credit jackpot. All of these occurred in less than an hour.

By Alan's logic I should expect this to happen every time I play.

[a2a3dseddie]

Ya know Arc, I can't fight simulations but it's funny how I walked out of Rincon recently with more money than I had than when I walked in. I guess I must be "due" for a few sessions when I won't even get one paying pair.

Simulations are good. Your own checkbook is better.

I urge everyone to look at their own balance sheets and to use simulations as a guide.

Someone once told me that the only difference between a winner and a loser is that a winner leaves when he is winning.

The only way for a strategy of "quitting while ahead" coupled with win goals/loss limits would work is if over your lifetime of gambling the value of your wins exceeded the value of your losses. Sounds easy enough. Why hasn't anyone else thought of this?

[Alan Mendelson]

I once sat down a a machine a hit a big winner (1000 credits) almost right away. However, I kept playing and wouldn't you know I hit another one just a little later. While waiting to be paid I sat at the next machine and hit another 1000 credit jackpot. After both were paid I went back to the original machine and hit yet another 1000 credit jackpot. All of these occurred in less than an hour.

By Alan's logic I should expect this to happen every time I play.

You're going to have to explain this. Where did I say if you keep playing you will keep hitting big winners? Pleaae explain in detail.

[Alan Mendelson]

Someone once told me that the only difference between a winner and a loser is that a winner leaves when he is winning.

The only way for a strategy of "quitting while ahead" coupled with win goals/loss limits would work is if over your lifetime of gambling the value of your wins exceeded the value of your losses. Sounds easy enough. Why hasn't anyone else thought of this?

Lots of people talk about it. Few do it. I have also failed at it. We're human. Greed kills.

[Alan Mendelson]

See, in some circles, what Alan just said would be considered either hubris or ignorance.

One's own checkbook is a more valid measure of reality than simulations? Maybe if you're an all-powerful, all-knowing God, but other than that, I think most people are better served with the simulations in terms of predicting what will happen next.

Or maybe, just maybe, Alan has done one too many shows trotting out individuals touting personal experience as a reason to buy a product or service rather than presenting a valid statistical overview.

If one thinks one's personal experience is more representative of overall reality than a broad statistical analysis, well, all I can say is more power to you, and thanks for subsidizing me.

I strongly urge everyone to ignore what Alan said in the previous posting, even though I'd prefer you believe it for my own personal benefit. As Spock said, "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."

Before putting your faith and your money following simulations know the confidence factor of those simulations. If a game returns 100.2% what is the confidence factor that you will get 100.2% return?

Redietz please be specific with your answer.

[redietz]

The "confidence factor," as you call it, is dependent on the size of the simulations. I suggest you consult a mathematician, as I've suggested a dozen times previously.

What, specifically, is your "confidence factor" based on your personal experience? It must be pretty damn high to recommend that people place personal experience ahead of simulations based on thousands of times their personal experience.

[arcimede$]

You're going to have to explain this. Where did I say if you keep playing you will keep hitting big winners? Pleaae explain in detail.

You stated you saw no reason why you can't keep going back to casinos and leaving when you are ahead. This presumes you will get ahead at some point. My comment simply took the idea of presumption to a ridiculous level to show how silly it is.

[Alan Mendelson]

The "confidence factor," as you call it, is dependent on the size of the simulations. I suggest you consult a mathematician, as I've suggested a dozen times previously.

What, specifically, is your "confidence factor" based on your personal experience? It must be pretty damn high to recommend that people place personal experience ahead of simulations based on thousands of times their personal experience.

I am very confident in my checkbook and the chips I count in my rail and the credits on the meter. In fact I have 100% confidence.

How can you possibly suggest to people that their return will match the long term return?

Besides I don't want the long term return even at 100.2% ... I want better.

[Alan Mendelson]

You stated you saw no reason why you can't keep going back to casinos and leaving when you are ahead. This presumes you will get ahead at some point. My comment simply took the idea of presumption to a ridiculous level to show how silly it is.

Yes Arc. It is ridiculous. Don't fabricate my logic.

[Rob.Singer]

It's the continuing argument of theory vs. reality. The theorists live on a constant diet of make-believe and dreamworld statistics. It is far, far easier to talk a big game than actually participate in it, and of those who buck the trend and dost times play, by and large they've found themselves broke, moving away from the machines, dead, and/or their personal lives reduced to sickening rubble.

I'll take a real account, a real vp session, a real checkbook, and a REAL LIFE.

[redietz]

Rob, if you're going to go on and on about your real life, you should probably drop the "Singer" alias and just post as Argentino. I mean, if you're gonna get real and all that, take the first step.

[Rob.Singer]

Theoretically, it makes no difference.

[Vegas_lover]

And the same endless bs continues. The title of this forum should be changed from "Las Vegas" to "How To Beat a Dead Horse Forum". You guys will never find a solution in your theory vs reality battle. Simply because those who rely on reality just have a hard time to understand theory/science/math.

This constant talk about vp and results is getting pretty boring. Anybody heard about that Australian Billionaire who just bought the New Frontier lot? Good development for the North Side of the Strip. It will be booming again with SLS, Resorts World Las Vegas, a new resort at the old New Frontier site. Then there's alot of development going on at The Quad, The Cromwell, Ballys (new bazaar), Monte Carlo, New York New York, the entire Linq project. Nothing to really mention though. Beating that awful dead horse over and over again is way more interesting. So please do continue

[Alan Mendelson]

I think the back and forth about math and theory is beneficial. There are some who read the forum and send me emails saying they are interested in BOTH sides.

But Rob, I and some others are tired of your same old self back slapping. I'm going to ask you to stop. We all know your history because you've told us too many times.

I do welcome factual responses as well as personal experiences. But stick to the fundamental details. I want the meat and not the fat.

[Alan Mendelson]

Anybody heard about that Australian Billionaire who just bought the New Frontier lot? Good development for the North Side of the Strip. It will be booming again with SLS, Resorts World Las Vegas, a new resort at the old New Frontier site. Then there's alot of development going on at The Quad, The Cromwell, Ballys (new bazaar), Monte Carlo, New York New York, the entire Linq project. Nothing to really mention though. Beating that awful dead horse over and over again is way more interesting. So please do continue

Please start another thread. Good topic. No need to bury it here.

[arcimede$]

Yes Arc. It is ridiculous. Don't fabricate my logic.

I duplicated your logic. You just don't like it when the silliness of your claims becomes so obvious.

[Rob.Singer]

Problems, problems, problems.....

[Alan Mendelson]

I duplicated your logic. You just don't like it when the silliness of your claims becomes so obvious.

You didn't duplicate anything. You fabricated.

[regnis]

This thread started as a post of big wins. Since I almost never have them in VP, I was kind of left out. Yesterday, in a little over 3 hours of VP, I had aces with a kicker 7 times.

4 on DDB at $1.00 ( $2,000 each); 2 unfortunately on Bonus for 50 cents ($200 each); and the best one on $2.00 TDBP (that's $8,000).

While I haven't been playing nearly as much as I used to, I have never been a winner at VP. My royals are rare, and the other big hands pretty rare as well. Since September of 2013, I have had only 1 signer before last night.

Probably should have bought a lottery ticket.

No photos allowed at Horseshoe Indiana--although I didn't have my cell phone with me anyway as the whole reason for going there yesterday was to avoid my clients for a few hours.

[arcimede$]

You didn't duplicate anything. You fabricated.

The situation I described really happened. Nothing has been fabricated. What I duplicated was a presumption that simply because something has happened in the past, it will occur in the future. That is what you have been claiming.