As consumers of gambling information and advice, we need to know the records.

[Alan Mendelson]

Arc, Im not trying to make a point here. Im just getting mixed up with all of the numbers. I really wish when we talked about results that we make it clear what we are talking about.

So, are you saying that you had a losing streak of eight out of nine sessions but you win 45% over the long haul? If that's it, just say so! Thanks.

[jatki]

Baloney arcimedes. You have constantly popped up in LV A videopoker discussions when criticising others about how they play, and always had to add in how the math always pulls you through the rough times as advertised, after talking about how much you've lost. So go ahead my man, please provide your post here that I "must have missed" identifying how you're in a losing streak as of right now. I said I'd accept it, but with you showing nothing but being upset, I guess that tells me all I need to know about YOU. Sheez!

[arcimede$]

Baloney arcimedes. You have constantly popped up in LV A videopoker discussions when criticising others about how they play, and always had to add in how the math always pulls you through the rough times as advertised, after talking about how much you've lost. So go ahead my man, please provide your post here that I "must have missed" identifying how you're in a losing streak as of right now. I said I'd accept it, but with you showing nothing but being upset, I guess that tells me all I need to know about YOU. Sheez!

Like I said, I often bring up events in my personal history when it is appropriate to a discussion. It must really irk you that I'm a consistent winner. Why else would you jump into a forum without reading all the comments and make nasty statements.

BTW, your claim about what I do at LVA is also a lie. All I've ever done on LVA and here is counter claims that are nothing but nonsense. I've never given a hoot how anyone plays, however, if someone tries to claim that they can overcome the math of the game then I will call them on it. If you think relating the truth is wrong then I have little time for you.

[Alan Mendelson]

if someone tries to claim that they can overcome the math of the game then I will call them on it.

I also asked this in another thread: the bottom line is you think it's impossible to win at a game such as 9/6 jacks or 8/5 Bonus? If that is indeed what you are saying then there is nothing left for me to discuss.

[arcimede$]

I also asked this in another thread: the bottom line is you think it's impossible to win at a game such as 9/6 jacks or 8/5 Bonus? If that is indeed what you are saying then there is nothing left for me to discuss.

Not "impossible" ... improbable.

[Alan Mendelson]

Not "impossible" ... improbable.

Okay, we are now reaching a critical point. It's improbable because the "math" does not account for the human factor which says "Im going to profit the money I have right now." The math only looks at all long term play and removes from it how an individual treats their own session or sessions. It is the difference between someone who thinks on their own and a robot who sits in the seat pushing buttons.

[arcimede$]

Okay, we are now reaching a critical point. It's improbable because the "math" does not account for the human factor which says "Im going to profit the money I have right now."

Sorry, the math accounts for all your play.

The math only looks at all long term play and removes from it how an individual treats their own session or sessions. It is the difference between someone who thinks on their own and a robot who sits in the seat pushing buttons.

Nope, if a robot uses optimal play then over time the robot will likely do better than you will from an "actual % return" point of view. It might lose more money if it plays more hands, but that's a different issue.

[Alan Mendelson]

Okay Arc, thanks. I now fully understand your position and there is nothing left for me to say. Best of luck (oops... that's best of math) in the casino!!

[jatki]

Like I said, I often bring up events in my personal history when it is appropriate to a discussion. It must really irk you that I'm a consistent winner. Why else would you jump into a forum without reading all the comments and make nasty statements.

BTW, your claim about what I do at LVA is also a lie. All I've ever done on LVA and here is counter claims that are nothing but nonsense. I've never given a hoot how anyone plays, however, if someone tries to claim that they can overcome the math of the game then I will call them on it. If you think relating the truth is wrong then I have little time for you.

Please, all you have to do is post where you said you're currently in an 8 out of 9 losing streak and are losing money because of it..is it clear this time? No, I've never believed your stories of always winning every year on LV A because of how upset you get with anyone who talks the slightest bit about their play style being different than yours, just like you're doing here, and how you immediately jump on anyone who ever had anything decent to say about your arch enemy, also just like you're doing here. I've always thought that type of forum behaviour begets a need for building one's image in front of their peers, and such an image is usually built on false representations.

You've got your reply. Please leave it at that, unless you want to HELP the issue by posting what I apparently missed in my readings. One thing I just found out today though, is that the EDIT button doesn't work after about an hour.

[arcimede$]

Please, all you have to do is post where you said you're currently in an 8 out of 9 losing streak and are losing money because of it..is it clear this time?

How could I say a streak is "current" if it hasn't completely yet? What nonsense? And, as I stated, I rarely make any claims of any streaks either good or bad. Why haven't I told you what my results are right now? What does that do to your silly theory?

No, I've never believed your stories of always winning every year on LV A because of how upset you get with anyone who talks the slightest bit about their play style being different than yours, just like you're doing here, and how you immediately jump on anyone who ever had anything decent to say about your arch enemy, also just like you're doing here.

More lies. You do realize that when you makes claims and don't back them up you look pretty foolish. Show evidence that supports your claims or quit lying.

I've always thought that type of forum behaviour begets a need for building one's image in front of their peers, and such an image is usually built on false representations.

Which shows what's really bothering you. You are envious of people who have been successful. This is what it usually gets down to. You don't like me because I have been successful. You turn your dislike into a belief system where I must be lying and then add to that belief system some nonsense that I am critical of others when all I do is explain the simple facts. This allows you to accept your own gambling beliefs. Sorry, but it is you with the problems.

Why am I not surprised.

You've got your reply. Please leave it at that, unless you want to HELP the issue by posting what I apparently missed in my readings. One thing I just found out today though, is that the EDIT button doesn't work after about an hour.

Seems to work for everyone else. (EDIT: I just remembered this used to happen to me also. It means the software automatically signed you off. All you need to do is sign on again and check the box that says to keep you signed on.)

And, don't look for me to do your homework for you. If you haven't done the necessary work then maybe you should consider not making claims you don't know anything about.

[jatki]

Arcimedes, Lets see if you can keep your word and really have little time for me.

Please stop your attempts at slick-wording your 8 out of 9 claim and relate it to where you said you were currently behind or losing money because of it. From what I've seen here and on LV A, you have no problem searching and searching archives until you find something that you can make the slightest spin with to help make your points. So why not do that here and show how you have said your are behind or losing because of the bad streak? We all have them you know, and some of us don't need to be seen as hopping along to the math. Is it that embarrassing a chore for you? And let me relate your own words above to your to-date failure to provide an answer to this: Do you realize when you make these claims and don't back them up that you look pretty foolish?

I don't envy anyone who says they are winning. I would like to see proof of it once in a while, that's all. But please don't condemn others for not thinking like you do, whether they lose like Alan and me or they win like Singer. You seem to make a career out of jumping on others who don't believe what you do. That's unnecessary.

[jatki]

Let's try something unique here and stop the bickering. How about somebody, anybody, get back to supplying the information that Alan brought up in his original post here. That's a very interesting point of view and one that many videopoker players deserve an answer to but may never get, at least we haven't so far.

I agree in that something like bowling involves skill and only skill, and results can only be altered by mistakes. You cannot get lucky in bowling, as you either make your shot or you don't. I also cannot think of any other profession besides gambling that has a rng in it. That's why I believe in luck so much and why skill is a factor but not much of a one. All the skill in the world cannot change the path of the rng, whatever that means, while luck can move videopoker mountains.

Then why can't the videopoker biggies provide anything for our comfort before selling or telling? I know Bob Dancer teaches his math related videopoker classes, but has anyone ever asked him to submit either backup results somehow or play with the class as his witness? You can't expect anyone to be confident about something because of as open and wide an explanation as "the math says so" because there's so much losing going on that something much more solid is needed. What do you think?

[Alan Mendelson]

I know Bob Dancer teaches his math related videopoker classes, but has anyone ever asked him to submit either backup results somehow

I attended one of Bob Dancer's lectures -- and it goes back quite a few years. Maybe 7 or 8 years ago. I was just getting started with video poker.

In the class Dancer said his annual income from video poker (not books, endorsements, etc) was $250,000 per year but half of that came from "cash back." He said his game of choice back then was $25/coin, three line deuces for $375 per push of the button. I've always wondered and questioned whether that was a good risk/reward ratio?

I have never seen anything else about "results" or even testimonials from players. Has anyone besides Arc and Singer earned a substantial return from video poker? I'm not talking about the "royal flush count" on LVA -- because I know for a fact that the leaders of that royal flush count may have hit a lot of royals but they were not making much money (or any money) doing it.

[arcimede$]

I agree in that something like bowling involves skill and only skill, and results can only be altered by mistakes. You cannot get lucky in bowling, as you either make your shot or you don't. I also cannot think of any other profession besides gambling that has a rng in it. That's why I believe in luck so much and why skill is a factor but not much of a one. All the skill in the world cannot change the path of the rng, whatever that means, while luck can move videopoker mountains.

All sports have a luck factor. If you were watching the golf tournament yesterday you saw a good example on the 18th hole. Luck was a major factor in deciding the eventual winner. And bowling, that's got be one sport where luck comes into play continually. However, over time the luck in sports averages out and we end up with a golf handicap or a bowling average that is a good indicator of our skills.

When I talk about results over time playing VP it is exactly the same. The good times and bad times tend to average out and we are left with our own personal results. Those results give a good indicator of the skill of the VP player just like a bowling average or a golf handicap gives a good indicator of those skills.

Then why can't the videopoker biggies provide anything for our comfort before selling or telling? I know Bob Dancer teaches his math related videopoker classes, but has anyone ever asked him to submit either backup results somehow or play with the class as his witness? You can't expect anyone to be confident about something because of as open and wide an explanation as "the math says so" because there's so much losing going on that something much more solid is needed. What do you think?

What the math tells you is ... if the games are random then the results are predictable. The math involved is very simple. I don't blame people for not accepting it immediately. However, all it takes is a little effort to understand the issues and no one should doubt what I'm saying.

So, it really gets down to ... if the games are random. If you don't believe they are then I question why anyone would play at all. If you do believe it, then the rest of it is easily understood mathematical principles and those that might doubt it should take the time to educate themselves.

[arcimede$]

I have never seen anything else about "results" or even testimonials from players. Has anyone besides Arc and Singer earned a substantial return from video poker? I'm not talking about the "royal flush count" on LVA -- because I know for a fact that the leaders of that royal flush count may have hit a lot of royals but they were not making much money (or any money) doing it.

I knew several folks in LV that made much more money than I have. I even helped some of them in understanding the strategies of new games and yes, I even helped Dancer.

Dancer and Scott are the two "names" but there was a good 50-100 other folks who were successful.

[Alan Mendelson]

All sports have a luck factor.

I'll bet my two Varsity letters that thee is no luck in sports. The ball goes in the hoop because of the way you shot it or dunked it or bounced it. You aced the other guy because you hit the corner of the box because you judged he was out of position, or he tripped because he was clumsy or his shoelace was untied.

That's not luck. Those are real events and real factors that can include how the grass was cut on the green, whether there was a divot or not, how the wind caught your drive-- all are real factors.

I am really surprised that you, Arc, who lives by the math in video poker, would use a term called "luck" in sports.

[arcimede$]

I'll bet my two Varsity letters that thee is no luck in sports. The ball goes in the hoop because of the way you shot it or dunked it or bounced it. You aced the other guy because you hit the corner of the box because you judged he was out of position, or he tripped because he was clumsy or his shoelace was untied.

That's not luck. Those are real events and real factors that can include how the grass was cut on the green, whether there was a divot or not, how the wind caught your drive-- all are real factors.

I am really surprised that you, Arc, who lives by the math in video poker, would use a term called "luck" in sports.

Well, I have participated in sports my entire life. I know when I make a horrible shot bowling and the ball crosses over and strikes that it was not "skill". I also know when I throw an absolutely great shot and hit the pocket perfectly only to leave a stone 8. Those are all part of the game and they are pure luck.

On the 18th hole yesterday the golfer who lost hit a ball a little off line. It skipped over a bunker and left him an almost impossible chip shot from a horrible lie. Had the ball gone in the bunker it would have been an easy shot for someone of his skill. That was all luck. BTW, the person that did win had his ball go into that very bunker. If anything he was less accurate because he was closer to the green.

I really can't believe that anyone thinks there is no luck in sports. That doesn't mean that skill does not win out over time, it simply means there are times where a simple bounce can make the difference between winning and 2nd place. It took a great deal of skill by both players to be in position to win.

[Alan Mendelson]

The "bounce" happened because you rolled the ball, hit the ball, threw the ball in such a way. If you scored because of the bounce then sure, call it luck. But if you start to claim that the bounce robbed you of a score then you're making an excuse because youre a klutz.

[Vegas_lover]

Seriously????????? You all must be kidding. Are you really trying to say that there is no luck factor involved in sports? If some of you are really saying this then I can only see one reason for it: you want the bickering between you and Arci to continue. You need it to continue! Completely ludacris to state that luck isn't a factor in sports. No luducris is not the right word, actually I can't even find the right word to express how far from reality this whole discussion is.

[arcimede$]

The "bounce" happened because you rolled the ball, hit the ball, threw the ball in such a way. If you scored because of the bounce then sure, call it luck. But if you start to claim that the bounce robbed you of a score then you're making an excuse because youre a klutz.

Alan, how do you explain the difference in skill when two players missed the green in almost the exact same way yet one had a reasonable shot and the other had an almost impossible shot? What was the difference in skill?