This, to me, is hilarious! If I say quit playing while ahead in vp, I'm told it will have NO effect whatsoever on my income, but bj is different? And BTW, I'm also given all the math supposedly showing how misguided I am-mainly because they think I'm a Singer puppet and can't think for myself.
Pretty foolish statement slingshot. I am not quitting because I am ahead or behind. I am quitting because the odds have gotten worse. The game at that point favors the house even more....so why do I want to play when there is a more favorable game nearby?
As I said the odds constantly changing from round to round is one of the differences between blackjack and most other games.
It would be like this comparison. You start playing a video poker game with a 99.5% return. Then all of the sudden the paytables change for the worse and the game now has a 96% return. Would you keep playing with the higher house advantage or move 2 seats down to another 99.5% return game?
Mr Kewlj that is a very good analogy that you just gave Mr Slingshot. I have a related question: how do you measure your edge or advantage in Blackjack? I understand the count is what determines your advantage but can you be specific?
For example, if all of the aces remain in the shoe after X number of hands, what is that worth?
I am a little fuzzy on exactly what you are asking. But I will put it this way. All counts that card counters use to identify house advantage are an approximation or estimate.
As for aces, the most important card because of the 150% blackjack payout, it is worth a lot, which is why many players side counters separately.
I am a little fuzzy on exactly what you are asking. But I will put it this way. All counts that card counters use to identify house advantage for the next round are an approximation or estimate.
As for aces, the most important card because of the 150% blackjack payout, it is worth a lot, which is why many players side counters separately.
If I have misunderstood your question, try to clarify and will try to answer later when I get home if no one else has given a satisfactory answer by then.
You know what my problem with you is Slingshot? I can never tell if you are serious or are yanking my chain. So I always treat you as being serious. But I think most oftentimes you are yanking my chain. At least I hope that for your sake, because if you believe the nonsense you write (usually Singer's beliefs)....then WOW.
Don't have time for that nonsense-yanking one's chain. I love playing vp and have experienced all I believe. Just because Singer has similar experiences has nothing to do with it-save the fact I found merit in two of his strategies, as well as his thinking on win/loss goals.
It would be like this comparison. You start playing a video poker game with a 99.5% return. Then all of the sudden the paytables change for the worse and the game now has a 96% return. Would you keep playing with the higher house advantage or move 2 seats down to another 99.5% return game?[/QUOTE]
Originally Posted by slingshot[/QUOTE]
Exactly! So if I get a good payout from one vp machine and quit THAT machine if play downgrades, and move to another machine I have accomplished the same.[/QUOTE]
Now this is really funny! Slingshot KJ was talking about how you should always be playing the highest upfront percentage (based by the pay tables) video poker machines that are available. I will add, of course based on your bankroll. What you are countering with is that you need to move around and try to find machines that are not cold, or turning cold and are paying out. Not knowing that the machine you just left may be ready to pay a large jackpot. Your way is voodoo thinking royally!
"Voodoo thinking royally" as in Royal flush. Very good Bosox. A+
Slingshot, I think all casinos should flat bet you to play on only one machine lifetime for nickels.
I think we should all lighten up on Slingshot. He has made it clear that he is not trying to be an AP or play with an advantage. he is just there to have fun. And he believes that a progressive betting system allows him to stretch his money and make his money last longer. This of course is a fallacy, but he can believe whatever he wants and play how ever he wants.
I have to admit, I cringe each time I hear him repeat Singer's talking points word for word. But again, he can do and believe what he wants.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)