BS AP's

[mickeycrimm]

I damn sure ain't going to shell out for travel, meals and lodging when the most I can win is $100.

You can win any amount that you are willing to cover. Your sycophants will probably extend hospitality and take care of your room & board, they get all that comped anyway. What do estimate your travel expenses will be? We can work something out. I'll give you a rebate on your losses that will boost the EV for you.

You are not getting out of hitting the deal button 1 million times. I said a million hands, not ten thousand hands. You're the one that agitated for a bet. So put up or shut up. One million hands, duflus, like I originally said. And in Montana like I originally said. Do it or you're chickenshit like Rob. I once offered him a 10K bet that I could start at 8 in the morning and produce a $500 win by midnight. He chickenshitted out and ran for the hills.

[redietz]

It's very distressing watching the AP spin being put on here. Face-saving at its finest.

The ER of playing one million hands does not change no matter how many hands are being dealt. You get what you get, and the final result is what this is all about. One deal or a million deals--it makes no difference in the expected result. Or are the APers getting nervous here?

The argument about variance is irrelevant. Mickey only brought it up because it's what he does when bets and challenges start to take shape. Notice how he, a self-proclaimed always-winning "AP". first danced his way out of going to Nv. or NJ, but when that didn't work he started the 100-play "variance" kick. Pure cowardice....and redietz would naturally side with him because he's still sore over Alan's two $100k jackpots that he'll never experience because he doesn't really gamble.

Alan, out of curiosity, do you remember me being sore over your 100K jackpots? I swear I congratulated you. I honestly don't remember expressing being sore about it. I think I'd remember that. See, the thing is, the last time I was sore over someone winning something was back circa 1980 when a guy who claimed he was an astrologer won the World Series of Handicapping. He had a tux with stars and planets on the lapels. His name was Edmund Slick. I was sore about it.

But I do not remember being sore vis-a-vis your jackpots. I remember thinking, "Stick it to the conglomerates, baby," which is pretty much what I always think. Do you remember me being sore, or is Rob just making stuff up? Boy, I wish he wouldn't do that.

[coach belly]

[QUOTE=mickeycrimm;49815][QUOTE=coach belly;49812]And in Montana like I originally said. /QUOTE]

You didn't say it had to be in Montana until after I took the bet...you wiggly wormm.

Your travel, room and board will be covered to play this out in LV.

I'll tell you what...we can go double-or-nothing on whether you can stomp a mudhole in my ass.

So what's your excuse now you spineless slimeball ?

[Alan Mendelson]

Alan, out of curiosity, do you remember me being sore over your 100K jackpots? .

No.

[Alan Mendelson]

You are not getting out of hitting the deal button 1 million times. I said a million hands, not ten thousand hands.

We have a problem here.

Hitting the deal button 1-million times is not necessarily the same thing as 1-million hands. It could be the same thing, but it isn't necessarily the same thing.

If I recall, the original wager required one million HANDS but not hitting the deal button one million times.

Suppose the contest involved three line video poker instead of 100-line video poker? Would Mickey still be so opposed to the condition?

Well, there is no difference in the EV whether its one line or 3 line or 5 line or 10 line or 100 line. But NEVER before did I see anything that required that the deal button be hit one million times.

[redietz]

The problem here lies in definitions. These are different games, but the language has not evolved to differentiate them. A three-line game, for example, is not really three different hands until you hit deal, so that is completely different from three actual different starting hands.

We discussed this a little on this very forum a year or two ago -- the language hasn't kept up with the tech.

We need some kind of hybrid language to differentiate three truly different hands with different pre-draw cards from three hands that had the same pre-draw cards. These are two different things.

I'm gonna suggest "clone draw" for the multi-line action. I'm sure someone can do better. But we need to start thinking of the actions as different because they are.

[coach belly]

But NEVER before did I see anything that required that the deal button be hit one million times.

I recall that you originally questioned this one million hand VP challenge as being unrealistic...it had something to do with Dancer.

When the wormm wrote that he would have "no problem" (that's a quote) laying 100-1 that nobody could be ahead after one million hands of 7/5BP I accepted his bet, believing that I had a strategy to be ahead after one million hands, and a way to play one million hands in a week.

The wormm panicked...he immediately placed all kinds of conditions that made the bet impractical.

As it turns out, one million single-line hands are equivalent to ten thousand 100-play hands, so that condition is bogus.

Since his travel, room & board will be covered to play this out in Vegas...what is his excuse?

Just look at the title of this thread...BS APs.

[coach belly]

We need some kind of hybrid language to differentiate three truly different hands with different pre-draw cards from three hands that had the same pre-draw cards.

we need to start thinking of the actions as different because they are.

Who is "we"? Do you have a mouse in your pocket ?...do you want to cover some action in this bet?

[Alan Mendelson]

The problem here lies in definitions.

I'm not sure there is a problem with definitions. We all know what a hand of video poker is. We also all know there are machines that are single-hand, or triple-hand, or ten-handed, or 50 or 100 handed.

Right now the dispute centers around Mickey's fear about the variance and what would happen if Coach gets dealt a couple of big hands on the bottom line of a 100-hand machine.

Taking Mickey's side: this is a problem for him if Coach is dealt a couple of big hands such as royals. But on the flip side, what if he's not? Then the variance might work in Mickey's favor.

Now, taking Coach's side: the experts (Dancer, Growchowski, Wizard) all tell us that if the paytables are the same then the EV (expected value) of playing one million single line hands, or playing 10,000 100-line hands are the same.

Gee Mickey... are you going to pass up the chance that the variance will be in your favor?

[Rob.Singer]

Alan's on the right track--it all has to do with fear....fear of LUCK taking over for theory. And since it goes both ways, mickey fears that too many lucky deals--even though the math is greatly against it--could happen. Of course, the same could happen while playing a million hands of BP. I've probably played over a million hands of 7/5 & 8/5 BP, and I'm ahead of that game.

Next we'll hear about how "unfair" it is because there's only 10,000 draws.

[Rob.Singer]

Alan, out of curiosity, do you remember me being sore over your 100K jackpots? .

No.

It's very easy reading redietz. That's where the truth lies. Just as he has kept up his charade of dodging proving who he is and the resume' he boasts about, his posts radiate feelings he cannot cover up, even as he tries to mask them with his corny rambles.

Of course mickey never mentioned "one million deals". Just go back and look at it. Changing the challenge parameters--and coach made them out to be VERY simple from the start--is a mickey trademark. And wouldn't it be interesting to see how he gets around his now not having to pay a dime to get to LV! In fact, I'll even pay his "lost income from gambling in Montana" assuming he could actually prove he does anything but lose his government "entitlements".

[coach belly]

Alan's on the right track--it all has to do with fear....fear of LUCK taking over for theory.

Wise up, Rob & Alan.

These keyboard APs fear the bets, yes...but even more they fear facing the person (me, Alan, Rob, Blackhole).

That's really what it's all about...no bet, no edge would stop these groundhogs from scurrying back into their holes and hiding.

[redietz]

Rob, if you want my PR packet, just PM me with a physical address. Easy peasy.

[mickeycrimm]

The problem here lies in definitions.

I'm not sure there is a problem with definitions. We all know what a hand of video poker is. We also all know there are machines that are single-hand, or triple-hand, or ten-handed, or 50 or 100 handed.

Right now the dispute centers around Mickey's fear about the variance and what would happen if Coach gets dealt a couple of big hands on the bottom line of a 100-hand machine.

Taking Mickey's side: this is a problem for him if Coach is dealt a couple of big hands such as royals. But on the flip side, what if he's not? Then the variance might work in Mickey's favor.

Now, taking Coach's side: the experts (Dancer, Growchowski, Wizard) all tell us that if the paytables are the same then the EV (expected value) of playing one million single line hands, or playing 10,000 100-line hands are the same.

Gee Mickey... are you going to pass up the chance that the variance will be in your favor?

Alan, whether it's single play or 100 play has nothing to do with it. Would I lay 100 to 1 that a person would not be at breakeven or ahead through 1 million DEALS on either single line or 100 play? Absolutely. Would I lay 100 to 1 that a person would not be at breakeven or ahead on single line or 100 play through 10,000 deals? Absolutely not. I figure the person would have about a 1 in 40 chance there. If I layed 100 to 1 on a 1 in 40 shot I would be making a negative expectation bet. I don't make negative expectation bets.

If you think the number of hands involved don't have anything to do with it then take a look at that screenshot on 7/5 Bonus that I put up in another thread. It shows that you will make a nothing hand every 1.8 hands or 54% of the time. That means you have a 46% chance to be at breakeven or ahead playing just one hand. Do you think I would be stupid enough to lay even 2 to 1 in that spot? The number of hands involved has everything to do with your chances to be at breakeven or ahead. It's a sliding scale of odds depending on the number of hands involved.

[Alan Mendelson]

So Mickey you're simply saying "no bet" right?

I wonder what your buddies on WOV would say? Would they say Mickey did not have a good bet, or would they say "what was he worried about with a 7/5 Bonus game?"

[quahaug]

They would say what Mickey said.

[Alan Mendelson]

Can someone please post the original bet/challenge so we can see the actual wording, and what was accepted as the terms and when they were accepted?

[coach belly]

Can someone please post the original bet/challenge so we can see the actual wording, and what was accepted as the terms and when they were accepted?

I would have no problem laying someone 100 to 1 that they won't be ahead on a 98% game after 1 million hands.

Last edited by mickeycrimm; 02-03-2017 at 06:24 AM.

Bob Dancer is willing to accept this challenge from any casino. I've already discussed it with him on vpFREE.

They give him $25 denom 9/6 Jacks with 1% cashback.
He will place his bankroll in the cage and play with vouchers everyday.
All money, including cashback to be placed back at the cage when each day's session has ended.
The challenge will last for 1,000,000 hands.
A surveillance camera will be placed on him while he is playing.

At 800 hands per hour, that's 1,250 hours or a little more than 52 days of non-stop play.

If someone were to play for 8 hours a day, it would now become a project that would take more than 150 days to complete.

I am not including "pauses" for royals, quads, straight flushes, which would lock up a $25 JOB game, nor am I including breaks for the restroom, water, food, stretching legs, or being distracted by skirts.

This was a real challenge?

[regnis]

Good idea. I still want to see Coach win the bet, whether against Mickey or anyone else, just because he is going against the "math".

[Alan Mendelson]

Does Mickey agree that those were the original terms? "I would have no problem laying someone 100 to 1 that they won't be ahead on a 98% game after 1 million hands."

Because if there were no other terms, I can't understand why he's objecting to the play on a 100-hand machine? And I would think that if the WOV guys would agree with Mickey, I can't understand why those smart fellows wouldn't have stipulated from the start that it had to be on a single line machine. I would think that as smart as they all are, these details would not be left till later.