Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 61

Thread: 4AwK or Royal?

  1. #41
    Originally Posted by RS__ View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    I guess I read it wrong. I still don't understand the argument.

    I will say this. Sometimes there are arguments just for the sake of arguing.
    Rob thinks you should hit 9 times as many straight flushes as you do royals.
    Well, if there are 40 straight flushes and four of them are royals the ratio is 9 to 1. Whether that's the ratio in your play depends on how you play and your strategy.

    The only claim I saw Rob make is something about hitting more royals than SFs.

    I went more than a year without a royal several years ago but I got multiple SFs. I remember one time during that no royal cycle being dealt TJQK of clubs on the Rincon progressive and drawing the 9c. As I got the hand pay I said to the floor person I was lucky... it could have been the two of hearts.

    Anyway...

    Rob makes a statement and you jump all over him for everything he ever said in his life from RVs to losing football picks.

    Carry on.

  2. #42
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Originally Posted by RS__ View Post
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    I guess I read it wrong. I still don't understand the argument.

    I will say this. Sometimes there are arguments just for the sake of arguing.
    Rob thinks you should hit 9 times as many straight flushes as you do royals.
    Well, if there are 40 straight flushes and four of them are royals the ratio is 9 to 1. Whether that's the ratio in your play depends on how you play and your strategy.

    The only claim I saw Rob make is something about hitting more royals than SFs.

    I went more than a year without a royal several years ago but I got multiple SFs. I remember one time during that no royal cycle being dealt TJQK of clubs on the Rincon progressive and drawing the 9c. As I got the hand pay I said to the floor person I was lucky... it could have been the two of hearts.

    Anyway...

    Rob makes a statement and you jump all over him for everything he ever said in his life from RVs to losing football picks.

    Carry on.
    The 9 to 1 ratio is on dealt straight flushes, NOT drawn to straight flushes. Man you people are stupid!

  3. #43
    jbjb what is the purpose of your comment? We all understand that this is about the sequencing of cards. Are you just trying to tell everyone you're hear? Let me do it for you.

    Attention everyone. Captain Obvious aka jbjb is here.

  4. #44
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Alan, these guys are wrestling with the fact that there are four RF combinations and 36 SF combinations, which equates to a 36:4 (aka, 9:1) ratio in favor of the SF.

    Everybody knows that you don't hold a two-card SF or a 3-card SF as often as you would going for a royal--and that obviously holds back on the no. of SF's. But I introduced this point as a "pet peeve" of mine, which to the trained mind means that my experience has not been close to expectation. I in fact have seen more royals than SF's in my lifetime of play.

    Mickey stupidly jumped all over it after he consulted with WOO, but the laugh, as usual, was on him.
    From what you've described of your play over 20 years you would have to be in million+ hands territory. There is no way you seen more royals than straight flushes in that large of a sample space. That is "18 yo's in a row" kind of malarkey.
    Yet I have.

    mickey, I'm trying to picture what it would have been like to have had to go thru the life you've had to endure, and how it's even been capable of devolving into the end-of-life loneliness you suffer through. You try to numb it all by living to post your nonsense about gambling as if it were some kind of declining years goal or something. SF discussions just do not appear to be your bag.

    You obviously know EVERYBODY feels sorry for you, which is why your stupid posts and phony tall tales are met with such mercy.

    We know you have few life experiences. So why not cap your losses and stop making dumb comments about what you don't know how to decipher. You can only retrieve calculations and probabilities information from wizard's site. It does not provide you with intelligence.

  5. #45
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    jbjb what is the purpose of your comment? We all understand that this is about the sequencing of cards. Are you just trying to tell everyone you're hear? Let me do it for you.

    Attention everyone. Captain Obvious aka jbjb is here.
    Attention everyone. Captain Asswipe aka Alan is here

  6. #46
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Alan, these guys are wrestling with the fact that there are four RF combinations and 36 SF combinations, which equates to a 36:4 (aka, 9:1) ratio in favor of the SF.

    Everybody knows that you don't hold a two-card SF or a 3-card SF as often as you would going for a royal--and that obviously holds back on the no. of SF's. But I introduced this point as a "pet peeve" of mine, which to the trained mind means that my experience has not been close to expectation. I in fact have seen more royals than SF's in my lifetime of play.

    Mickey stupidly jumped all over it after he consulted with WOO, but the laugh, as usual, was on him.
    From what you've described of your play over 20 years you would have to be in million+ hands territory. There is no way you seen more royals than straight flushes in that large of a sample space. That is "18 yo's in a row" kind of malarkey.
    Yet I have.

    mickey, I'm trying to picture what it would have been like to have had to go thru the life you've had to endure, and how it's even been capable of devolving into the end-of-life loneliness you suffer through. You try to numb it all by living to post your nonsense about gambling as if it were some kind of declining years goal or something. SF discussions just do not appear to be your bag.

    You obviously know EVERYBODY feels sorry for you, which is why your stupid posts and phony tall tales are met with such mercy.

    We know you have few life experiences. So why not cap your losses and stop making dumb comments about what you don't know how to decipher. You can only retrieve calculations and probabilities information from wizard's site. It does not provide you with intelligence.
    All that garbage you write about me ain't going to do you any good, Robocchio. You got busted. And you did it to yourself. It was clear by what you wrote that you thought SF's occur 9 times as often as royals. So then you scrambled to cover your ass by saying you were talking about dealt SF's and royals. There was nothing in the thread about that so if you were talking about dealt hands you would have said so. But then you did something stupid again by saying you've had more dealt royals than dealt SF's. That could never happen to someone who is purported to have played millions of hands. It's about as fantastical as 18 yo's.

    Face it. You screwed the pooch. And you are not man enough to admit it.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  7. #47
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Axel, can you say without reservation that you actually get nine times the number of SF's as you do royals? Not in theory, but actually. I never have. Not even close.
    Is this the post that created the latest sandbox brawl?

    It seems to me Rob is asking Axel a question. I don't see this post as Rob believing SFs hit at a ratio of nine to one.

  8. #48
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Axel, can you say without reservation that you actually get nine times the number of SF's as you do royals? Not in theory, but actually. I never have. Not even close.
    Is this the post that created the latest sandbox brawl?

    It seems to me Rob is asking Axel a question. I don't see this post as Rob believing SFs hit at a ratio of nine to one.
    That’s cuz you can’t read
    #FreeTyde

  9. #49
    Alan these idiots just can't see when they're being punked or taken to task. I've never had so much fun blistering the little people of the world....in this case, a clueless bunch of self-proclaimed "AP's" who are so consumed in their armchair gaming theory realms that they are completely unable to distinguish between who's trying to chop off their peepees and who's just trying to yank them off.

    Wise up people.

  10. #50
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Alan these idiots just can't see when they're being punked or taken to task. I've never had so much fun blistering the little people of the world....in this case, a clueless bunch of self-proclaimed "AP's" who are so consumed in their armchair gaming theory realms that they are completely unable to distinguish between who's trying to chop off their peepees and who's just trying to yank them off.

    Wise up people.
    Face it, Bozo. You exposed yourself. That's whats so hilarious about it. The smoke and mirrors won't work for you, except maybe with Sling and Alan.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  11. #51
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Alan these idiots just can't see when they're being punked or taken to task. I've never had so much fun blistering the little people of the world....in this case, a clueless bunch of self-proclaimed "AP's" who are so consumed in their armchair gaming theory realms that they are completely unable to distinguish between who's trying to chop off their peepees and who's just trying to yank them off.

    Wise up people.
    Face it, Bozo. You exposed yourself. That's whats so hilarious about it. The smoke and mirrors won't work for you, except maybe with Sling and Alan.
    Just another one of your tall tales mickey. You should be thanking me that I gave you something to do. I know I'm thankful. You could have treated us to yet another one of your phony "blast from the past" stories about that fatass idiot "Tuna" who was so great he killed himself.

    Meaningful life simply passed you by mickey.....and I'm seriously laughing at you.

  12. #52
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Axel, can you say without reservation that you actually get nine times the number of SF's as you do royals? Not in theory, but actually. I never have. Not even close.
    Is this the post that created the latest sandbox brawl?

    It seems to me Rob is asking Axel a question. I don't see this post as Rob believing SFs hit at a ratio of nine to one.
    Alan, you are playing dumb or you really are dumb, take your pick. It's not just the one post, it's the post prior to that added to his post to me that make it clear as day he thought STF's should come up 9 times more often than Royals.

    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    A pet peeve of mine is the SF. There's 36 of them, and some years I get more royals than SF's. And in the years I see more SF's it's no where near 9:1 in favor of the SF. Plus, they should pay more than 250 in every game.

    Let the insults begin!
    Originally Posted by AxelWolf View Post
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    A pet peeve of mine is the SF. There's 36 of them, and some years I get more royals than SF's.!
    That's what happens when you only play a few hundred hands per year.
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Axel, can you say without reservation that you actually get nine times the number of SF's as you do royals? Not in theory, but actually. I never have. Not even close.

  13. #53
    Yeah, 7000 posts with no math. Then, a miraculous math outburst consisting of the SF ratio and a "4% to 7% edge" when betting sports. Both wrong. Then the explanation that, "I'm so smart, I'm punking people by pretending to be an idiot."

    I'm a great fan of anyone so smart as to punk people by pretending to be an idiot. Sasha Cohen, Andy Kaufman, and Rob Argentino -- all legendary comedians.

  14. #54
    What yanks my chain is Mr. Mendelson, on the shoulders of his past work for major media and as a respected journalist, continually serves as Argentino's apologist, even when he has to commit mental contortions to try to pull it off. Mr. Mendelson is also punking us for fun, one must assume. Playing the maroon.

  15. #55
    Again, to both Axel and RS and the rest of you. Rob is discussing straight flushes vs royals. He asked Axel a question. Rob stated the correct number of cards in sequence that are called SFs or Royals. He is correct that SFs are underpaid. What did he say that's wrong?

    Help me out here and quote the lines that are in error.

    I'm open to see an error but I just don't see it.

  16. #56
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    What yanks my chain is Mr. Mendelson, on the shoulders of his past work for major media and as a respected journalist, continually serves as Argentino's apologist, even when he has to commit mental contortions to try to pull it off. Mr. Mendelson is also punking us for fun, one must assume. Playing the maroon.
    Who ever said he was respected??....you don’t just turn into an idiot at 65, you’ve always been one

  17. #57
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Again, to both Axel and RS and the rest of you. Rob is discussing straight flushes vs royals. He asked Axel a question. Rob stated the correct number of cards in sequence that are called SFs or Royals. He is correct that SFs are underpaid. What did he say that's wrong?

    Help me out here and quote the lines that are in error.

    I'm open to see an error but I just don't see it.
    These clowns are exactly like the ones on CNN who are obsessed with Trump, you know, the guy who just keeps winning. They want it to be that I said vp expectation is there are 9x SF's vs. the royal. Unbiased people see it exactly the way it was written. Again, you got it right, and by saying so it riles up the idiots no end.

    And I like it!

  18. #58
    Just quit responding to Rob. He's already said countless times all he does is troll on the forums and enjoys people's reactions to him. Let him waste his time trolling truck drivers or whatever the hell he does the other 12 hours of his day he's not on VGT. By responding, you're just playing right into his game. And this is what he does. He has no interest in an actual discussion, just trolling. If you're trying to have an actual discussion with him, that's never going to happen.

    Alan's not far behind.
    #FreeTyde

  19. #59
    RS__ here's your chance to make your valid point. Telling me I can't read and Rob is a troll doesn't make any points here. You and the others jumped all over Rob only because you wanted to.

    Once again, someone point out what Rob said in error.

  20. #60
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    RS__ here's your chance to make your valid point. Telling me I can't read and Rob is a troll doesn't make any points here. You and the others jumped all over Rob only because you wanted to.

    Once again, someone point out what Rob said in error.
    When did I jump all over Rob in this thread?

    It’s simple: You’re not supposed to get 9x as many SFs as RFs. Rob’s posts indicate he thinks you’re supposed to. That’s it.
    #FreeTyde

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Finally hit a royal...
    By slingshot in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-07-2017, 08:40 AM
  2. Doggie Royal
    By Count Room in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-29-2014, 08:30 PM
  3. Yes, a royal after being dealt four.
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 06-15-2012, 04:33 PM
  4. At last... a royal flush!
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-06-2012, 03:29 PM
  5. Progressive Royal
    By Rob.Singer in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-16-2012, 11:09 AM

Posting Permissions

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