Rigged machines, programmed cold cycles, and server based technology??

[quahaug]

I get it Rob. Whether your facts are actual I don't know but Alan is just impossible to deal with. On another note, I'm blown away by that Frank Kneeland character. I never thought anyone could be more self absorbed and totally full of himself as "Rob Singer" but this jerk makes you look like a real piker.

[Rob.Singer]

Okay Rob, I give up. Now you say "As far as cold or hot cycles go, there are statistically close to as many in the first 100,000 hands as there are in the final 100,000 of the 2.7 billion hands." Well, Rob, in all of 2011 I played about 170-thousand hands. And while you say a cold cycle might come about within 100 hands, even within the cold cycle you could still have big winners including quad Aces. I admit it Rob-- I'm totally baffled. But from now on I am going to hope that I keep getting cold cycles that deal me quad Aces. I'm finished with this discussion. The floor (and the continuation of this subject, if you like) is yours.

Yikes! Where did I ever say you could get four aces in a cold cycle? Here's what I said, & please pay attention: IT IS POSSIBLE THAT FOUR ACES COULD HIT WHILE YOU ARE WITHIN THE APPROXIMATELY 100 HANDS THAT SERVE AS AN INDICATOR THAT A COLD CYCLE IS IMMINENT. Again, those 100 hands only indicate that you are entering a cold cycle.

Do you remember me telling you how when you decide not to listen to me and instead choose to throw up you play results, that automatically leads you down a confused path? So why keep talking about 170,000 hands when you're only blocking a teachable moment? I'll try this: YOU COULD SEE THE SAME NUMBER OF COLD CYCLES WITHIN YOUR FIRST 170,000 HANDS, YOUR NEXT 170,000 HANDS, AND YOUR LAST 170,000 HANDS OF THE LIFETIME 2.7 BILLION HANDS YOU MIGHT PLAY.

Before we go on, do you understand those statistics?

[Rob.Singer]

I get it Rob. Whether your facts are actual I don't know but Alan is just impossible to deal with. On another note, I'm blown away by that Frank Kneeland character. I never thought anyone could be more self absorbed and totally full of himself as "Rob Singer" but this jerk makes you look like a real piker.

Alan does have a block up, but at least he let's enough of it thru so we can keep it as an important discussion instead of a true argument. I've always been an impatient teacher because I only teach that which I'm an expert at and have the facts on, and usually those who ask the questions are not nearly as prepared for the answers they get.

I'm full of myself because I've earned it. Nuff said.

[slingshot]

I just saw a discussion of this on vpFREE between the geniuses, and as usual most of them guess wrong.

A multi-game machine has multiple RNG's running multiple programs. It depends on the games and paytables. You can have one program running for 7/5 BP on 25c & 50c, and another for 8/5 BP $1/$2/$5. Then you'll have another for JoB, etc. It's very simple. If there were just one RNG/program dealing all the numbers (cards) then the last hand showing on JoB would automatically be the last hand showing on all games. Since the "deck" is constantly shuffling whether in play or not, all final hands would continuously change based on the game that's being played. DW and JW have different seeds, and they have nothing to do with the other games just as none of the other games have anything to do with one another--with the exception I gave on the denominational differences.

So if you run into a cold cycle on 25c 7/5BP, it is not going to be part of the 8/5 game or any other except the 50c BP game.

Interesting! So a player could maybe play 3-4 DIFFERENT games on ONE machine short term and have a better chance of hitting if a cold cycle was imminent on another game?

[Rob.Singer]

Possible, just as it's possible--albeit much less likely--to see a hot cycle.

[quahaug]

Alan does have a block up, but at least he let's enough of it thru so we can keep it as an important discussion instead of a true argument. I've always been an impatient teacher because I only teach that which I'm an expert at and have the facts on, and usually those who ask the questions are not nearly as prepared for the answers they get.

I'm full of myself because I've earned it. Nuff said.

Rob, your cred is well established and your rep certainly precedes you. What I want to know is who the hell does this punk Kneeland think he is being all self righteous and condescending and looking down his nose at everyone kinda like obama.

[Rob.Singer]

Frank is an off-the-wall character in the vp world, and thinks 180 degrees differently than me. He rubs people the wrong way because he can't think at the lower level most regular players do. He is very book-intelligent without much real world experience or beliefs. I don't see him fitting in anywhere in the vp community because his high intelligence level puts him outta touch with the very people he's trying to communicate with.

[quahaug]

I've known a few of those types in my time. Just can't seem to think outside of the box. They know a great deal about very little.

[Rob.Singer]

That is a very good way to put it.

[arcimede$]

Another good laugh. I see Robbie is still pushing is hot/cold cycle nonsense. Of course, there's always a few suckers around that will believe any BS. The fact is people will always experience hot and cold streaks playing a random game. It has nothing to do with machines. In fact, if people did not experience these streaks the machines would not be random.

Only a con man tries to take a perfectly normal situation and make people believe he has some special inside knowledge. A perfect "tell" on a con man is this very behavior.

[Alan Mendelson]

arcimedes I'm really curious about this last post of yours. First, let me say that I also agree that video poker machines are random and I have faith that they are, and there is no hanky panky with the government, the casinos and the game makers. And until I see proof to the contrary, I will continue to believe that. But I am open to seeing the proof if anyone has the proof that the machines are rigged or programmed to have hot and cold cycles.

With that said, arc, would you mind explaining this comment:

The fact is people will always experience hot and cold streaks playing a random game. It has nothing to do with machines. In fact, if people did not experience these streaks the machines would not be random.

Please explain why this is true? Why can't you play a random game that doesn't have hot and cold streaks and is just "choppy" with even amounts of wins and losses?

[redietz]

Alan,

It might be helpful to get a stat course DVD and take a look at "random walks." The results that can be generated by sheer randomness are sometimes really surprising and out there. What happens due to actual randomness can be pretty wild compared to our expectations of what randomness "should look like."

[Rob.Singer]

Arci is swallowing pretty hard right now. Give him a little more time and he'll reply.

[Alan Mendelson]

I would like an answer to my question. I believe that in a random game anything can happen. But arc states that in a random game "people will always experience hot and cold streaks."

Well, how can he say that if a game is random?? How can he say there will ALWAYS be hot and cold streaks? Perhaps he meant to say that in random games you can experience hot and cold streaks? A random game is a random game.

[Rob.Singer]

Alan, he's only saying that because he gets so tongue-tied when he's making up lies about me. Of course players will not always experience such streaks--random or not--unless the machine is cooperating with those phenomena while they are playing.

[slingshot]

Alan, he's only saying that because he gets so tongue-tied when he's making up lies about me. Of course players will not always experience such streaks--random or not--unless the machine is cooperating with those phenomena while they are playing.

That can be the ONLY explanation I can think of whenever I go on different days and one day NO machine cooperates, or if so with only a moderate win and other days I CANNOT seem to pick the wrong machine to play as they all are at least giving small paying quads.

[arcimede$]

I would like an answer to my question. I believe that in a random game anything can happen. But arc states that in a random game "people will always experience hot and cold streaks."

Well, how can he say that if a game is random?? How can he say there will ALWAYS be hot and cold streaks? Perhaps he meant to say that in random games you can experience hot and cold streaks? A random game is a random game.

Alan, you are right that anything can happen. So, you could experience a fairly even distribution over a short term. However, if it is truly random then the probability of any particular pattern continuing is very low. Hence, it is more likely you will eventually see a hot streak or a cold streak. Of course, the same applies to them. The probability of getting on a permanent hot/cold streak is also very low so eventually you are likely to see something different.

The bottom line is we are all likely to see variations of hot/cold/mild spells over time if we play regularly. When I used "always" above it was simply meant to highlight the much higher probabilities. There is always a non-zero probability that someone could hit a RF on every hand they ever play. But, the probability is so small it can be ignored. The same is true of experiencing even results over a long period of time. Possible ... yes, probable ... no, and essentially can be ignored.

[arcimede$]

As long as I'm highlighting probabilities I saw a comment on the (now locked) thread to the effect that playing optimal play required a long time to win. Of course, that is pure nonsense. The chances of doing better than the median result is exactly the same for optimal players as it is for any system. 50% will do better than the median result by definition. For any VP game the median result will generally be a couple tenth of a % below the ER of the player.

I've seen this silly statement many, many times and it usually can be traced back to one source. Just happens to be a person pushing his own worthless systems.

PS. I also noticed Singer is asking me to provide proof that his special plays don't do what they claim. Already done, dufus:

http://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/showth...in-Limitations

[Rob.Singer]

First arci, how about you try to be a little more pleasant and stop the namecalling? Everyone makes their own bed, as they say.....

I asked you to provide evidence you claim to have where making a special play means you will lose. That's what you said. Not an 11 page thread that you think it' s buried in--and not some long-term meaningless mumble-jumbo that says if the plays are made into eternity then it will be a net loser. A one time play please, because that is how they are made.

[arcimede$]

First arci, how about you try to be a little more pleasant and stop the namecalling? Everyone makes their own bed, as they say.....

I asked you to provide evidence you claim to have where making a special play means you will lose. That's what you said. Not an 11 page thread that you think it' s buried in--and not some long-term meaningless mumble-jumbo that says if the plays are made into eternity then it will be a net loser. A one time play please, because that is how they are made.

Well now, dufus, is this the pot calling the kettle back, or what. You've been telling so many lies about me it's getting hysterical and now you don't like being called a dufus. If you don't want that name which you've earned, then stop with all the lies. Of course, I know that's impossible for you so there's no doubt I'll continue to call you a dufus.

And, in the analysis I did a person making correct plays earns just a few more hands. Probably take no more than a minute or two at most to play them, usually less. But hey, if you think that's an eternity why am I not surprised. In fact, since they provide an improved chance of going home a winner quickly, they might reduce the session length.