Question for APs

[Moses]

A question for the APs: at what point do you concede that you don't have the advantage that you thought you had?.

There are several points. When the advantage leaves? I leave.

Do you make that concession after losing a fixed amount, or a percentage of your bankroll, or after a certain number of losing sessions?.

I play the same amount of sessions every week. I play every session the same way. A life balance is important to maintain IMO. The concessions I make are more concerned with my opponent than myself.

When do you concede that you were wrong?

Many times. I evaluate each session after it ends. Many times I've won and not been happy with the way I played. There have also been times when I lost and felt I played perfectly. I try not to get caught up with terms like "turning pro" or "AP." But I don't think I'm either. I don't worry about math or a unique situation these guys will go on and on about on other forums. It's simply a game of people played with cards. I focus on what is played and what still remains to be played and what the flip I will do about it.

Win today. Play tomorrow, are my primary objectives. My math have already been completed before I ever sit down to play. Therefore, it's a matter of memory, patience, and discipline. Hence, let the game come to me.

Ha. As Moses would have wrote, KJ ducks at all the wrong times.

It appears KJ didn't duck at all last week. I know I've never won a fight beating up a mans fist with my face. It also appears he could be one of the best instigators ever on forums.

[mickeycrimm]

I wasn't asking APs to defend themselves. I asked a specific question: at what point do you concede that you don't have the advantage that you thought you had?

At which point do people give up on the casinos? How far down the chute or up the maze?

You are both idiots. I can't even remember the last time I had a losing month. I think it was 2007. So when am I supposed to start conceding something. Oh, here's a good answer: NEVER!

So when are you guys going to concede that some people just know how to do it? Oh, here's a good answer: NEVER!

Fuck off, idiots.

[mickeycrimm]

A question for the APs: at what point do you concede that you don't have the advantage that you thought you had?

Do you make that concession after losing a fixed amount, or a percentage of your bankroll, or after a certain number of losing sessions?

When do you concede that you were wrong?

Before any of you jump all over me for being anti AP or whatever, let me remind you of one of the greatest about faces in the AP world: Wong on Craps and DI.

He went from advocate of DI and even writing a book with lessons and tips about DI to saying DI was a wish in a matter of weeks.

DI is different than blackjack or video poker. I've never seen anyone express the exact edge they have. What is it, 1%, 2%, 5%, 10% on the action? I know exactly what my edge is at video poker.

[redietz]

I can feel alan's pain.

We recreational gamblers pretty much all lose in the long run, and in the short run as well.

When we read tales of success penned by AP's who play the same casino games we do it is an instinctive reaction to think "Bullshit."

We think we're pretty smart guys, yet we lose: so our brain wants to dismiss APs' claims as "they're not smarter than we are."

Ah, but it is not intelligence at work so much as discipline, theory, and math.

That's how I see it, anyway.

"Different goals require different roles."

Old Wise Jungle Saying

[redietz]

And Native American casinos are really beholden to no one.

This is even stated explicitly in California gambling regulations:
http://www.cgcc.ca.gov/?pageID=complaints


Based on massive UX vulture play (thousands of screens) at both Nevada (state-regulated) and California Indian casinos ("self-regulated" - lmao), I would not argue with someone who takes the position that you're on your own at Indian casinos.

Thanks, tableplay, for posting this.

I wanted to add that if you read any of the tribal magazines, you will get a feel for how independent they can be. If someone, for example, who worked in a tribal casino was aware of shenanigans and wanted to make it public, the tribal counsel could get together and come to the agreement that he should not report it. He would, by tribal law, have to abide by their decision.


Bottom line, and think about this as Native Americans are one step ahead of The Prez: There is no First Amendment on tribal land.

[Moses]

Here is an example of AP intelligence:

I just play, HiLO, I-18 plus a few deviations, DD spread of 1-6 ($25 min tables) and $10-$15 minimum 6 deck tables with a 1 x $10/$15 to 2 x $90 spread. I am not very literate, do not delve into SCORE, NO or other more sophisticated stuff.

So, the question, what and how should I calculate my success. I just finished my 10th month this year and as of October 31st, I have played 339 hours, had expenses of $7525 and had won $30,750 ($13k over the last 2 months). If I divide $30,750 by the 339 hours, I get around $91 per hour. If I subtract my expenses first and then divide by 339 hours, I get about $68 per hour. If I factor in all the other hours (travel time, drive time, scout time, etc.,) and divide my total wins by the total hours spent getting to the casino and days spent away from home, I get a far less per hour amount. Probably around $25 per hour.

How do you calculate and is it what you call EV?


I'm not a buyer of this BS. Firstly, why would a guy spend so much time on the accounting aspect of his game? Yet, never lift a finger to improve his game?

He has played an average of 34 hours a month and nets over $3k per month. Ya right! He travels all around the country for the poultry amount of table time. To answer your question as to how to evaluate your success is BE HONEST with yourself. How many hours does that leave to improve your game? The "math" says "a ton." Do we really need to break it down?

Also, sims to evaluate SCORE offers the best tool to use. You still have to use it properly. For instance, a cordless drill is a handy item to have around the house. But someone with the mind of a 6 year old is better off with a screw driver. Better yet a 6 year old has no business fixing anything.

[redietz]

I wasn't asking APs to defend themselves. I asked a specific question: at what point do you concede that you don't have the advantage that you thought you had?

AxelWolf mentioned that Wong saw slow motion videos. I think that's a logical answer. I knew I wasn't a DI when I continued to lose and I saw my dice throws did not exhibit what a controlled or influenced roll should exhibit.

It's not an emotional decision. It's a decision based on fact. So what is the fact?

DI is a physical skill, not a math equation. If you cannot do it, you quit. You ascertain whether you can do it with trials on identical equipment. So that has no relationship with machine play at all.


What I do is subjective, so I have to be bottom line oriented. I am aware, in some sense, of winning games that should not have been won and losing games that should not have been lost, but that's all it is -- awareness, not alternative accounting.

I actually have a more or less concrete answer to Mr. Mendelson's questions. If I lose three years in a row, even if negligible amounts, it suggests I should stop. That would be accounting all venues -- straight bets, futures, middles, contests. If I lose significant amounts consecutive years, and do not feel I had an in depth, specific understanding of what errors were made and wrong conclusions drawn, then I should also stop. If I'm taking an awful beating a single season, and have no understanding of what is happening, then that is a red flag also. I almost never take an "awful beating," so that really has not been a concern for decades.

For a further discussion of self-awareness among professional bettors, I recommend "Scientists, Gamblers, and Magicians," published in The Humanist.

What I do also has no relationship with machine play. If mickey gets his numbers, he wins. Period.

[AxelWolf]

I wasn't asking APs to defend themselves. I asked a specific question: at what point do you concede that you don't have the advantage that you thought you had?

AxelWolf mentioned that Wong saw slow motion videos. I think that's a logical answer. I knew I wasn't a DI when I continued to lose and I saw my dice throws did not exhibit what a controlled or influenced roll should exhibit.

It's not an emotional decision. It's a decision based on fact. So what is the fact?

Alan most AP's want to play stuff where they know they have an advantage. They want the math to back that up. There are not too many situations, such as DI, where you can't use math calculations to figure out if you have an advantage or disadvantage. I can never get a DI to tell me what % on avrage his DI will yield. Without that information, it's hard for anyone to come up with a formula that tells them how many rolls they need to be very confident that they have an advantage. If they had a large enough advantage they wouldn't even need to ask since their bankroll would just keep growing( This is assuming their bets sizes are not all over the place and they are not making crazy ass long shot bets).

I might have to take back "not to many situations"

If you take poker, for example, that's a complicated issue, and it depends on that person and different situations. The best way is to track your results over many many hours.

Someome might think a roulette wheel is biased and they have an advantage.

I have been on a number of slot machine plays where it's not 100% certain there's an advantage since it's too complex to track and you don't par sheet. You have to estimate and some things are just obvious.

[Bill Yung]

I know exactly what my edge is at video poker.

Your problem is that you can't get over yourself. Go take some more pictures of empty shithole casinos.

[The Boz]

I can feel alan's pain.

We recreational gamblers pretty much all lose in the long run, and in the short run as well.

When we read tales of success penned by AP's who play the same casino games we do it is an instinctive reaction to think "Bullshit."

We think we're pretty smart guys, yet we lose: so our brain wants to dismiss APs' claims as "they're not smarter than we are."

Ah, but it is not intelligence at work so much as discipline, theory, and math.

That's how I see it, anyway.

Only thing you have in common with Alan is you’re both Rec players. Somehow I doubt you are broke, screwed your kids over and play until you have nothing left until the next check comes in.

And Alan would never admit what you did above.

[Moses]

Here is an example of AP intelligence:

I just play, HiLO, I-18 plus a few deviations, DD spread of 1-6 ($25 min tables) and $10-$15 minimum 6 deck tables with a 1 x $10/$15 to 2 x $90 spread. I am not very literate, do not delve into SCORE, NO or other more sophisticated stuff.

So, the question, what and how should I calculate my success. I just finished my 10th month this year and as of October 31st, I have played 339 hours, had expenses of $7525 and had won $30,750 ($13k over the last 2 months). If I divide $30,750 by the 339 hours, I get around $91 per hour. If I subtract my expenses first and then divide by 339 hours, I get about $68 per hour. If I factor in all the other hours (travel time, drive time, scout time, etc.,) and divide my total wins by the total hours spent getting to the casino and days spent away from home, I get a far less per hour amount. Probably around $25 per hour.

How do you calculate and is it what you call EV?


I'm not a buyer of this BS. Firstly, why would a guy spend so much time on the accounting aspect of his game? Yet, never lift a finger to improve his game?

He has played an average of 34 hours a month and nets over $3k per month. Ya right! He travels all around the country for the poultry amount of table time. To answer your question as to how to evaluate your success is BE HONEST with yourself. How many hours does that leave to improve your game? The "math" says "a ton." Do we really need to break it down?

Also, sims to evaluate SCORE offers the best tool to use. You still have to use it properly. For instance, a cordless drill is a handy item to have around the house. But someone with the mind of a 6 year old is better off with a screw driver. Better yet a 6 year old has no business fixing anything.

So the guy wants to use this as a basis to compare whether he should take a job for $13 an hour? Nothing wrong with working for a living. But who would hire you? Your work ethic is deplorable. You have no ability to weigh your time. You'd rather work for $13 an hour than do anything to improve your game. TAKE THE JOB. PLEASE.

[Bill Yung]

I can feel alan's pain.

We recreational gamblers pretty much all lose in the long run, and in the short run as well.

When we read tales of success penned by AP's who play the same casino games we do it is an instinctive reaction to think "Bullshit."

We think we're pretty smart guys, yet we lose: so our brain wants to dismiss APs' claims as "they're not smarter than we are."

Ah, but it is not intelligence at work so much as discipline, theory, and math.

That's how I see it, anyway.

Only thing you have in common with Alan is you’re both Rec players. Somehow I doubt you are broke, screwed your kids over and play until you have nothing left until the next check comes in.

And Alan would never admit what you did above.

The reason that casinos have many different types and degrees of casino games. All those types of players each reinforce their "chosen" narrative in contrast to the others.

The casinos want gamblers to argue, wherever. Oh, it's recreation; oh, it's a quick road to riches; oh, the food and rooms are nice; oh, it's a good way to vacation and see the country; oh, I entertain out-of-town people from work there; oh, make a little money, everyday, and shout it from the mountaintop.

The problem with MrV's argument is that he contrasts the AP's to the "recreational" players. But he doesn't have to gamble at all. No one has to. If I had to gamble, only then would I be a so-called AP, or recreational gambler, or whatever.

As long as you walk around in a casino, they "own" you. It's a zero-sum, closed system. No player is any better than another. Just replace the word player with sucker.

[Bill Yung]

MrV has the mental wherewithal or equipment to kiss and make up even in a gambling environment, but that only gets you into it deeper, on another level.

He understands where some of his casino feelings or urges may be coming from, but not that there is no need for any of those, or such an understanding. A false feeling of mental security within the casinos by knowing there are AP's "out there".

[mickeycrimm]

I know exactly what my edge is at video poker.

Your problem is that you can't get over yourself. Go take some more pictures of empty shithole casinos.

Your problem is you are just a punk ass troll. You add nothing here, psychobabbler. And casinos are usually empty at 7 AM, dumbfuck.

[Bill Yung]

Why is it that the so-called AP's can't fit into any gambling forum, but have to always cause trouble?

Forum owners lay out their forum rules, from day one. But the AP's seem to think that they have to change everything, complain excessively about the other posters, every other little thing, and, then, end up making threats to the owners. Pout.

Could it be an over-compensating reaction to "getting the gears" from the casinos, all day long?

[mickeycrimm]

You find the same slot games at Indian casinos as you do corporate casinos. The paybacks are pretty much the same in both. Penny slots are generally around 90%. There's nothing on the machines that tell players what the paybacks are. So do the Indians put a 90% chip in the machine, then gaff it? What for? They could just to put an 85% chip in the machine and forget about it.

I'm not just in Indian casinos. I'm in the corporate ones as well. I do just as well at both.

[Bill Yung]

You find the same slot games at Indian casinos as you do corporate casinos. The paybacks are pretty much the same in both. Penny slots are generally around 90%. There's nothing on the machines that tell players what the paybacks are. So do the Indians put a 90% chip in the machine, then gaff it? What for? They could just to put an 85% chip in the machine and forget about it.

I'm not just in Indian casinos. I'm in the corporate ones as well. I do just as well at both.

What the heck are you talking about? Perhaps, you put this in the wrong thread on the wrong forum.

[redietz]

I can feel alan's pain.

We recreational gamblers pretty much all lose in the long run, and in the short run as well.

When we read tales of success penned by AP's who play the same casino games we do it is an instinctive reaction to think "Bullshit."

We think we're pretty smart guys, yet we lose: so our brain wants to dismiss APs' claims as "they're not smarter than we are."

Ah, but it is not intelligence at work so much as discipline, theory, and math.

That's how I see it, anyway.

Only thing you have in common with Alan is you’re both Rec players. Somehow I doubt you are broke, screwed your kids over and play until you have nothing left until the next check comes in.

And Alan would never admit what you did above.

The reason that casinos have many different types and degrees of casino games. All those types of players each reinforce their "chosen" narrative in contrast to the others.

The casinos want gamblers to argue, wherever. Oh, it's recreation; oh, it's a quick road to riches; oh, the food and rooms are nice; oh, it's a good way to vacation and see the country; oh, I entertain out-of-town people from work there; oh, make a little money, everyday, and shout it from the mountaintop.

The problem with MrV's argument is that he contrasts the AP's to the "recreational" players. But he doesn't have to gamble at all. No one has to. If I had to gamble, only then would I be a so-called AP, or recreational gambler, or whatever.

As long as you walk around in a casino, they "own" you. It's a zero-sum, closed system. No player is any better than another. Just replace the word player with sucker.

This is pretty banal stuff. Same language applies to walking into shopping malls or car dealerships or your local place of worship that requests donations. Or getting on the internet. "Just replace the word shopper with sucker." Or "Just replace the word surfer with sucker."

See how banal? Hardly worth typing. Not even original psycho-babble.

[Bill Yung]

Another weak argument, another characteristic of gamblers. Psychology applies to just about everything sentient, in some way. But this doesn't mean that shopping has anything to do with gambling. How many persons have lost their homes because of shopping? Get real, there, Redietz.

[Bill Yung]

Hey, I can see it now, that headline: Crazed sniper shopper shoots up shopping center because of heavy losses at Walmart on aisle two.