Question for the APs about win goals?

[Alan Mendelson]

I want to compliment jbjb for this post in another thread. And I'd like to ask the APs if they have any disagreement with this:

Nothing wrong quitting if up or down a set amount. Our point is that having these predetermined points won't help you get to them.

Again, thanks jbjb.

[mickeycrimm]

I want to compliment jbjb for this post in another thread. And I'd like to ask the APs if they have any disagreement with this:

Nothing wrong quitting if up or down a set amount. Our point is that having these predetermined points won't help you get to them.

Again, thanks jbjb.

I agree with jbjb's statement.

[RS__]

There's nothing wrong with quitting at any point for any reason if you're just playing for fun. There's nothing wrong with using a system, either. Just don't think that using a win-goal or stop-loss system (or really, any kind of system like that) will allow you to be a long term winner. That's just not how it works.


Now, obviously if you're playing with an advantage, it's going to be pretty stupid to quit just because you're up or down some amount (unless that amount is so much that you can't comfortably play anymore, but that shouldn't really be a thing if you're playing within your BR).

[Rob.Singer]

There's nothing wrong with quitting at any point for any reason if you're just playing for fun. There's nothing wrong with using a system, either. Just don't think that using a win-goal or stop-loss system (or really, any kind of system like that) will allow you to be a long term winner. That's just not how it works.


Now, obviously if you're playing with an advantage, it's going to be pretty stupid to quit just because you're up or down some amount (unless that amount is so much that you can't comfortably play anymore, but that shouldn't really be a thing if you're playing within your BR).

Aside from not directly answering Alan's question as mickey did, you're only showing how much you are incapable of understanding the algorithms of gambling mathematics.

You people like to believe you've got the casinos figured out upside down and backside up with all your "long term advantage" nonsense. But where you fall far short is in not understanding that every long term advantage belongs only and forever to the casinos. Can any of you spell NON-STOP LUCRATIVE PROMOTIONS? And as far as any of you not being able to even come close to comprehending the how, what and why of my strategy's success, that's just never having been taught how to use that computer attached to your neck beyond your easy-way-out comfort level. Lazy white man syndrome.

[mickeycrimm]

There's nothing wrong with quitting at any point for any reason if you're just playing for fun. There's nothing wrong with using a system, either. Just don't think that using a win-goal or stop-loss system (or really, any kind of system like that) will allow you to be a long term winner. That's just not how it works.


Now, obviously if you're playing with an advantage, it's going to be pretty stupid to quit just because you're up or down some amount (unless that amount is so much that you can't comfortably play anymore, but that shouldn't really be a thing if you're playing within your BR).

Aside from not directly answering Alan's question as mickey did, you're only showing how much you are incapable of understanding the algorithms of gambling mathematics.

You people like to believe you've got the casinos figured out upside down and backside up with all your "long term advantage" nonsense. But where you fall far short is in not understanding that every long term advantage belongs only and forever to the casinos. Can any of you spell NON-STOP LUCRATIVE PROMOTIONS? And as far as any of you not being able to even come close to comprehending the how, what and why of my strategy's success, that's just never having been taught how to use that computer attached to your neck beyond your easy-way-out comfort level. Lazy white man syndrome.

I've been involved in lots of lucrative promotions but it would be a dream come true if they were non-stop. Most of the time on lucrative promotions the casino see's the error of their ways as we beat the shit out of them and they pull the plug on the promotion. Rob can never admit the truth about this because his whole world will fall apart if he does.

Step 1: Casino puts on poorly designed promotion, poorly designed for the casino but great for advantage players.
Step 2: Joint fills up with advantage players.
Step 3: Casino see's all the money they are losing
Step 4: Two days into the promotion casino announces that promotion that was supposed to last for a week will end in two hours.
Step 5: Two hours later casino turns into a ghost town.

Rinse and repeat. It's happened more times over the years than Carter has pills. Rob's entire narrative is that negative expectation gamblers are smart and positive expectation gambler's are dumb. And that's as stupid and ignorant of an opinion as it gets.

[Rob.Singer]

There's nothing wrong with quitting at any point for any reason if you're just playing for fun. There's nothing wrong with using a system, either. Just don't think that using a win-goal or stop-loss system (or really, any kind of system like that) will allow you to be a long term winner. That's just not how it works.


Now, obviously if you're playing with an advantage, it's going to be pretty stupid to quit just because you're up or down some amount (unless that amount is so much that you can't comfortably play anymore, but that shouldn't really be a thing if you're playing within your BR).

Aside from not directly answering Alan's question as mickey did, you're only showing how much you are incapable of understanding the algorithms of gambling mathematics.

You people like to believe you've got the casinos figured out upside down and backside up with all your "long term advantage" nonsense. But where you fall far short is in not understanding that every long term advantage belongs only and forever to the casinos. Can any of you spell NON-STOP LUCRATIVE PROMOTIONS? And as far as any of you not being able to even come close to comprehending the how, what and why of my strategy's success, that's just never having been taught how to use that computer attached to your neck beyond your easy-way-out comfort level. Lazy white man syndrome.

I've been involved in lots of lucrative promotions but it would be a dream come true if they were non-stop. Most of the time on lucrative promotions the casino see's the error of their ways as we beat the shit out of them and they pull the plug on the promotion. Rob can never admit the truth about this because his whole world will fall apart if he does.

Step 1: Casino puts on poorly designed promotion, poorly designed for the casino but great for advantage players.
Step 2: Joint fills up with advantage players.
Step 3: Casino see's all the money they are losing
Step 4: Two days into the promotion casino announces that promotion that was supposed to last for a week will end in two hours.
Step 5: Two hours later casino turns into a ghost town.

Rinse and repeat. It's happened more times over the years than Carter has pills. Rob's entire narrative is that negative expectation gamblers are smart and positive expectation gambler's are dumb. And that's as stupid and ignorant of an opinion as it gets.

You sidestepped the issue again, and you told a misleading lie.

Very, very, very few lucrative promotions are abruptly ended by the casinos because they're losing money on them. And when that happens, it's not just to the ap's. There's plenty of other regular players out there with at least the same level of gaming-savvy the ap's like to believe they have on these promos.

Next, there are lucrative promos ongoing everywhere, weekly all the time just as there has been for many years and counting. In my interviews with casino execs for GT I found that they do promote these things in order to rope in as many of the self-proclaimed ap's as they can, because it is a known fact that this segment will bring in as much cash as they can possibly get their hands on from any source available. In their confused minds they are "playing with an edge" when casinos know this to be exactly the opposite as these people are simply on a tiny dot on the timeline in the overall long term of the play All one need do is read any Bob Dancer article on all the promotions he runs towards.

Please get an education....and Wise Up.

[mickeycrimm]

Aside from not directly answering Alan's question as mickey did, you're only showing how much you are incapable of understanding the algorithms of gambling mathematics.

You people like to believe you've got the casinos figured out upside down and backside up with all your "long term advantage" nonsense. But where you fall far short is in not understanding that every long term advantage belongs only and forever to the casinos. Can any of you spell NON-STOP LUCRATIVE PROMOTIONS? And as far as any of you not being able to even come close to comprehending the how, what and why of my strategy's success, that's just never having been taught how to use that computer attached to your neck beyond your easy-way-out comfort level. Lazy white man syndrome.

I've been involved in lots of lucrative promotions but it would be a dream come true if they were non-stop. Most of the time on lucrative promotions the casino see's the error of their ways as we beat the shit out of them and they pull the plug on the promotion. Rob can never admit the truth about this because his whole world will fall apart if he does.

Step 1: Casino puts on poorly designed promotion, poorly designed for the casino but great for advantage players.
Step 2: Joint fills up with advantage players.
Step 3: Casino see's all the money they are losing
Step 4: Two days into the promotion casino announces that promotion that was supposed to last for a week will end in two hours.
Step 5: Two hours later casino turns into a ghost town.

Rinse and repeat. It's happened more times over the years than Carter has pills. Rob's entire narrative is that negative expectation gamblers are smart and positive expectation gambler's are dumb. And that's as stupid and ignorant of an opinion as it gets.

You sidestepped the issue again, and you told a misleading lie.

Very, very, very few lucrative promotions are abruptly ended by the casinos because they're losing money on them. And when that happens, it's not just to the ap's. There's plenty of other regular players out there with at least the same level of gaming-savvy the ap's like to believe they have on these promos.

Next, there are lucrative promos ongoing everywhere, weekly all the time just as there has been for many years and counting. In my interviews with casino execs for GT I found that they do promote these things in order to rope in as many of the self-proclaimed ap's as they can, because it is a known fact that this segment will bring in as much cash as they can possibly get their hands on from any source available. In their confused minds they are "playing with an edge" when casinos know this to be exactly the opposite as these people are simply on a tiny dot on the timeline in the overall long term of the play All one need do is read any Bob Dancer article on all the promotions he runs towards.

Please get an education....and Wise Up.

I would say that you are lying here but I don't believe you are. I think you believe your ignorant bullshit. Why don't you interview the owner of the Plaza and ask him how the tax day promotion worked out for him. Ask him if he's going to do it again this year. APs will pack the place. Tell him he can make a killing then watch the look on his face.

[mickeycrimm]

Aside from not directly answering Alan's question as mickey did, you're only showing how much you are incapable of understanding the algorithms of gambling mathematics.

If by understanding the algorithms you mean you can predict hot cycles you should have no problem beating electronic craps and roulette. They would be much shorter and sweeter plays.

Could you give us a clinic in the algorithms of gambling mathematics? Would you tell us what an algorithm is?

[Alan Mendelson]

RS, do you agree with jbjb's post or not? Keep it simple.

[RS__]

RS, do you agree with jbjb's post or not? Keep it simple.

Context matters. But in general, yes, I agree with his post.

[mickeycrimm]

If you want an idea of how poorly designed a promotion can be just think of the tax day promotion at the Plaza last year. Every AP in town was there and dude lost hundreds of thousands. According to Rob's theories this guy will be chomping at the bit to get at those AP's again this year. Let's see if he comes with the same promotion again this year. I predict he won't.

[RS__]

It’s best not to engage with Rob. He’s already demonstrated and admitted that he just posts to troll.

[Moses]

I take care of my money so my money will take care of me. My victory to the upside is in correlation to pit tolerance. My loss to the downside is opposite of pit tolerance to the upside.

I can't win if I'm not allowed to play. I don't get caught up in my bankroll because my tolerance levels exceed my opponents. I win, I lose, I tie, I get interrupted. But through it all my job is recognizing value. If I DO my job I will win today and play tomorrow.

I'm not going to suggest anyone set a certain amount. But don't suggest to me I can't win if I don't.

[kewlJ]

I don't like the game Alan is playing here. He is "shystering". And as such, I really shouldn't even dignify with an answer but I will.

I don't know the context that this quote was made by jbjb. Was he referring to AP play, or someone like Alan?

Regardless, I disagree with the statement. Stop limits have no place in what I do except for one very unique situation.

I do have exit triggers, but they have nothing to do with how much I have won or loss, but rather designed to limit the information I have shown, to preserve longevity. Some of these exit triggers are 1.) I exit at the shuffle after showing my full spread and max bet (rather than revert back to a smaller bet). 2.) I exit predetermined negative counts. Usually one or the other of these will occur, but if neither do, 3.) I will exit after 45 minutes for a shoe game, 30 minutes for double deck. These triggers have nothing to do with winning or losing. I employ these exit triggers whether I am winning or losing.

The one exception. If run out of funds to play with. This may sound like a stop limit but it is not. I simply don't carry my entire 6 figure bankroll with me for security reasons. I carry a portion, call it a daily playing bankroll, or trip bankroll if on a several day trip. So occasionally, not often but occasionally, I will run out of funds when playing. Usually it is a case of I have had a couple losing sessions and start a session with just barely the funds necessary to start a session, and then continue to lose. So maybe I end the shoe, not having hit any of my 3 exit triggers, but I just don't have enough funds to safely continue playing.

I suppose some may call that a loss limit. It really isn't. Most times when this occurs, I will simply replenish funds and continue to play for the day. It is simply a function of safety, in limiting the funds that I carry.

There just is no reason for a player playing with an advantage to stop playing because he has hit some sort of monetary limit. Whatever is going to happen in the next round or session is going to happen whether that round or session is in 2 minutes or two weeks. Playing with an advantage is about getting in the play at +EV and letting the math take over. Stopping for some artificial monetary reason, is just cutting short your total play, ie, it reduces your earnings.

So have at it Alan. Do your thing and attempt to pick apart what you do not understand.

[Moses]

I suppose some may call that a loss limit. It really isn't. Most times when this occurs, I will simply replenish funds and continue to play for the day. It is simply a function of safety, in limiting the funds that I carry..

A loss limit is like a timeout in basketball. A short period to regroup, access, and refocus.

There just is no reason for a player playing with an advantage to stop playing because he has hit some sort of monetary limit. Whatever is going to happen in the next round or session is going to happen whether that round or session is in 2 minutes or two weeks. Playing with an advantage is about getting in the play at +EV and letting the math take over. Stopping for some artificial monetary reason, is just cutting short your total play, ie, it reduces your earnings.

Unless, of course getting banned is going to happen in the next deck or session. But driving/flying to play and then walk away from a positive deck out of fear of losing? That person shouldn't be playing at all. Let alone call themselves a Pro.

[kewlJ]

And by the way, my comments are for advantage play and advantage players. Non-Advantage players should employ stop limits. That is a responsible thing to do.

[Alan Mendelson]

So kewlj... did I read your post correctly? Did you really mean that you'd be willing to lose your entire bankroll if you were able to bring it to a casino?

"The one exception. If run out of funds to play with. This may sound like a stop limit but it is not. I simply don't carry my entire 6 figure bankroll with me for security reasons. I carry a portion,...."

[MaxPen]

So kewlj... did I read your post correctly? Did you really mean that you'd be willing to lose your entire bankroll if you were able to bring it to a casino?

"The one exception. If run out of funds to play with. This may sound like a stop limit but it is not. I simply don't carry my entire 6 figure bankroll with me for security reasons. I carry a portion,...."

He plays well within the limits of his bankroll. It is mathematically impossible for him to lose it all. That is the part you are not understanding.

[kewlJ]

He plays well within the limits of his bankroll. It is mathematically impossible for him to lose it all. That is the part you are not understanding.

Thank you MaxPen. This is quite simply beyond Alan's comprehension. And I don't even mean that as a slight. It is simply math and Alan doesn't believe in or understand the mathematics in relationship to gambling and advantage play.

[kewlJ]

So kewlj... did I read your post correctly? Did you really mean that you'd be willing to lose your entire bankroll if you were able to bring it to a casino?

"The one exception. If run out of funds to play with. This may sound like a stop limit but it is not. I simply don't carry my entire 6 figure bankroll with me for security reasons. I carry a portion,...."

If THAT is what you think I said.

It's not btw.


Quite simply I go by the math. I play at a fraction of Kelly wagering. That means I have 0% RoR (Risk of Ruin). It technically is .000something. For all intensive purposes ZERO RoR. The chances of me losing my 100k bankroll are about the same as 18 y.o's in a row. NOT you thinking you saw 18 y.o.'s in a row, but 18 y.o.'s in a row. Someone (maybe Dan Druff) laid out what those odds really are.


AND if somehow, I did loss my BR, I now have the ability to simply replenish and begin again with another 100k bankroll. And even a third time, although I would have to liquidate some things. THAT takes away the even .000 something chance of RoR and actually makes it zero.