Page 1 of 9 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 176

Thread: Putting your faith in "the math." Really???

  1. #1
    I have to wonder how you could really put your faith into "the math" when playing video poker. There is nothing exact about the math. Sure, 2 + 2 exactly equals 4, and when dealt four to the royal you have exactly 1/47 chances of drawing the fifth royal card in a 52-card game.

    But that's about where the "excactness" ends.

    Consider John Grochowski's latest column from Aug 16, 2012: http://grochowski.casinocitytimes.com/

    And this line in particular: "Given expert play in 9-6 Jacks or Better, royals occur an average of once per 40,391 hands. For your amount of play, the average expectation is two royals, but it’s within normal probability to draw one or none, just as it’s within normal probability to draw three, four or even more."

    That's a darn big spread when you think about it. So maybe doing something besides what the "math" says to do isn't too bad?

    Classic case: you are dealt a flush with four to the royal. I know, I know. We sacrifice the dealt flush to try for the royal. But maybe a flush in the hand is worth more than a royal in the bush?

  2. #2
    This is precisely why my play strategy was developed. It, being only a short-term strategy, improves game er and thus, gives the player a far better opportunity to get ahead in a session by their pre determined goal. But it only means something if they're discipline also, and a good amount of it.

  3. #3
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Classic case: you are dealt a flush with four to the royal. I know, I know. We sacrifice the dealt flush to try for the royal. But maybe a flush in the hand is worth more than a royal in the bush?
    I was playing Mr Singer's RTT method and had progressed to .50 BP machine and was dealt 8c,Ac,Qc,Jc,10c I held the 4RF and hit the Kc for 2k

  4. #4
    The problem with your logic Alan is there is no method of play that will make a difference. The odds of hitting a RF is still 1/47 no matter what you do. The odds of hitting a flush is also the same. So, the big question is why would you want to use an approach that reduces your expected return when you can't count on that approach providing any advantage. That is the key and you, Singer and anyone else promoting alternate play strategies have no answer to it.

    BTW Alan, you keep saying Singer does not claim he can overcome the math. Yet, this is about 3 times in the last few days he has done exactly that. What do you think he means when he says "improves game er"? He is clearly claiming he can beat the math with his system (which is what he has always said).

    I have given you a mathematical proof that shows that is impossible. Now we really see what's happening. You don't care about facts or the truth. You clearly want to support this silly nonsense for some other reason.

  5. #5
    Arc, what is your definition for "overcome the math"? Is it that he can do better than what the math says he will do playing a particular VP game? Yes, that's what he says and that's what we all want to do.

    Does he say he can beat the math return on a game? Yes he says that, and we all want to do that.

    Does he dispute the math? No he does not.

    When I play 8/5 Bonus I am playing a game that says I should lose... by the math. So I want to play that game and leave it ahead, and overcome, beat, and do better than the math. Do you have a problem with that?

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Arc, what is your definition for "overcome the math"? Is it that he can do better than what the math says he will do playing a particular VP game? Yes, that's what he says and that's what we all want to do.

    Does he say he can beat the math return on a game? Yes he says that, and we all want to do that.

    Does he dispute the math? No he does not.
    Of course it does. You can't beat the expected return of game. Period. On any given day your actual return may be better but that is not the issue.

  7. #7
    Alan, if you were playing head to head video poker for 100K hands, comparing your wins or losses to one other person's, and you got first choice as to Arci's style or Rob's style, with your opponent taking whichever style you did not take, and 100K were to go to the person with the better result, which style would you choose?

  8. #8
    Arc, how many times do we have to discuss "expected return" vs "actual return."

    If you concede that someone can have one winning session on a negative expectation game, why can't they have more? Why can't their wins on a negative expectation game add up to more than their losses? Does the RNG have a memory that says... "oh, here's Rob Singer. We let him win twice before but we're going to zing him on his next ten sessions." Is that what's going on?

    Why don't you just call it quits and say there is a difference between expected return and actual return, and some players might have an actual return that beats the expected return? That's all. Instead of going through life with your mathematical blinders on.

    Originally Posted by arcimede$ View Post
    You can't beat the expected return of game. Period. On any given day your actual return may be better but that is not the issue.
    Make up your mind Arc. If your actual return on any given day may be better why can't it be better overall?
    Last edited by Alan Mendelson; 08-16-2012 at 10:29 AM.

  9. #9
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Alan, if you were playing head to head video poker for 100K hands, comparing your wins or losses to one other person's, and you got first choice as to Arci's style or Rob's style, with your opponent taking whichever style you did not take, and 100K were to go to the person with the better result, which style would you choose?
    According to the math, the person playing the better paying game will win. So what if Rob or anyone else gets lucky? That doesn't mean the math is wrong. It only means that their actual return beat the expected return.

    Is it so difficult to accept that some people can "get lucky" and beat the expected return? You guys amaze me.

  10. #10
    Redietz, playing100,000 hands using my strategy would win more money with no doubt whatsoever, and it's because every time my win goal were hit I'd start over at dollars again. The other guy, if he played only AP, would be at a SERIOUS DISADVANTAGE compared to the guy playing SPS, given the SPS history of an 85% win rare along with a large overall actual dollar win rate to go along with that. Doesn't matter if the AP played only $100 games or not. There's a better chance the AP will lose than win.

  11. #11
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Arc, how many times do we have to discuss "expected return" vs "actual return."
    it appears it does not matter. You ignore the facts.

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    If you concede that someone can have one winning session on a negative expectation game, why can't they have more? Why can't their wins on a negative expectation game add up to more than their losses? Does the RNG have a memory that says... "oh, here's Rob Singer. We let him win twice before but we're going to zing him on his next ten sessions." Is that what's going on?
    Why doesn't one place in the country get all the rain while other places are completely dry? That's what you want to happen Alan. You simply can't force good cards to be dealt. You are going to get a variety of cards and the betting system you use has nothing to do with it. Your results will be determined by the frequencies of the various cards. Just like the rain, you can't make the aces show up. You can't will a RF to happen. The only thing you control is the ability to select the cards that give you the best chance at success.

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Why don't you just call it quits and say there is a difference between expected return and actual return, and some players might have an actual return that beats the expected return? That's all. Instead of going through life with your mathematical blinders on.
    I've already said exactly that many times. I call it a bell curve. However, you can't make yourself end up on the right side of the curve other than make the best holds possible. Try flipping a coin and see if you can force heads to show up more than tails. That is what you are claiming can be done.

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Make up your mind Arc. If your actual return on any given day may be better why can't it be better overall?
    The same reason you can't force more heads than tails. It's called randomness.

  12. #12
    Originally Posted by antfanas View Post
    I was playing Mr Singer's RTT method and had progressed to .50 BP machine and was dealt 8c,Ac,Qc,Jc,10c I held the 4RF and hit the Kc for 2k
    It doesn't matter what kind of system you were playing when you were dealt the foyal and then hit the royal. The "system" did not give you the foyal and the "system" did not fill the hand for a royal. Suggesting that the "system" was responsible for your 2K is as silly as saying you got it because you were drinking a Coke and not a Pepsi when you hit.

  13. #13
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Redietz, playing100,000 hands using my strategy would win more money with no doubt whatsoever, and it's because every time my win goal were hit I'd start over at dollars again. The other guy, if he played only AP, would be at a SERIOUS DISADVANTAGE compared to the guy playing SPS, given the SPS history of an 85% win rare along with a large overall actual dollar win rate to go along with that. Doesn't matter if the AP played only $100 games or not. There's a better chance the AP will lose than win.
    Complete and total nonsense.

  14. #14
    Arc you really can distort facts: it even rains in the desert. When will you acknowledge that it is possible to win on negative expectation games? Is that so impossible for you to admit? That's all I'm saying: it is possible to win one day, two days and overall. Just like it rains in the desert.

  15. #15
    Alan, he's only acting like that because it provides amusement for someone with a plethora of time to kill...time that you or I would spend as quality time at home or by going out for entertainment. You're feeding the troll, and he comes back with the most foolish of unsubstantiated replies.

  16. #16
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Arc you really can distort facts: it even rains in the desert. When will you acknowledge that it is possible to win on negative expectation games? Is that so impossible for you to admit? That's all I'm saying: it is possible to win one day, two days and overall. Just like it rains in the desert.
    Yes, just like I've stated a zillion times. My point once again is not that you can't win occasionally, it is simply that your chances of being ahead diminish over time if you play negative games. The more negative the faster those chances diminish. Over a couple of years of steady play those chances get really close to zero.

    Now, when will you quit worrying about one days play and think about your results over multiple sessions? Is that so impossible for you?

  17. #17
    Hehe! Arci stepped into his own trap again.
    If someone acknowledges it's possible to win on today's visit on a "negative" game that's .5% less theoretically than some other, then that same person must be insane not to believe it can happen again tomorrow & the day after etc. And that's playing a single denomination. Use SPS as I developed and there's an 85% chance of winning along with an even larger chance you will be ahead more than the amount of your session win goal times the number of sessions you've played. People who take on the lazy theory that if it's a negative game you will win, and if it's a positive game you will lose, either don't play, are forced to lie,about their results, or do not know how math really works.

  18. #18
    Originally Posted by arcimede$ View Post
    Now, when will you quit worrying about one days play and think about your results over multiple sessions? Is that so impossible for you?
    We're not talking about me. We're talking about the idea about winning playing negative expectation games using various tools such as "banking profits" and "quitting after reaching win goals." These are all useful tools when coupled with the fact that you can reach big winning combinations even playing negative expectation games.

    After all, what makes a negative expectation game? It's not the royal flush -- nearly all royals pay 4000 coins. And various other "big payoffs" are darn close to other big payoffs. What typically is used to lower pay tables is an adjustment for two pair, three of a kind, full houses and flushes.

    Hitting the big hands on an 6/5 Bonus game pay the same as a 8/5 bonus game which are the same as a 10/7 double bonus game.

    So, when you hit the big combinations, that negative pay table you are so worried about no longer is an issue.

    Now granted, no one sits down and immediately hits a royal. Well, practically no body... My last two royals on $1 8/5 Aces and Faces were hit just on the free play money which was less than $200 on both occasions. No Arc, pay tables do not mean as much as being in the right place at the right time. Video poker isn't just math, it's also a lot of variance... ummmm.... luck.

    If you think the whole thing is predetermined by the math then you will have to stop playing the day you lose those One Eyed Jacks machines.

    Edited to add: Again you concede that one can win at negative expectation games occasionally and you say that over time you can't. Really, Arc? Does the RNG have a secret code in it that says "we'll let this guy win once but not twice"? Or does the secret code say "this guy is now ahead for the past six months, so it's time to give him a losing streak"?

    In craps we say that the dice have no memory. What makes you think that the video poker machines know what you won before and if you won before they won't let you win again to keep you "negative" over the long term?

    Just admit it. The pay tables and the expected return have nothing to do with anyone's actual results. The pay tables and the expected return give you an indication of what might happen, but it is not set in stone. If it were, an RNG would not be truly random, would it? Are you suggesting RNGs are not truly random, Arc?
    Last edited by Alan Mendelson; 08-16-2012 at 05:19 PM.

  19. #19
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    People who take on the lazy theory that if it's a negative game you will win, and if it's a positive game you will lose, either don't play, are forced to lie,about their results, or do not know how math really works.
    did you reverse those in error?

  20. #20
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    We're not talking about me. We're talking about the idea about winning playing negative expectation games using various tools such as "banking profits" and "quitting after reaching win goals." These are all useful tools when coupled with the fact that you can reach big winning combinations even playing negative expectation games.
    Alan, they are illusions. You can't change your future expectation with a betting system.

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    After all, what makes a negative expectation game? It's not the royal flush -- nearly all royals pay 4000 coins. And various other "big payoffs" are darn close to other big payoffs. What typically is used to lower pay tables is an adjustment for two pair, three of a kind, full houses and flushes.

    Hitting the big hands on an 6/5 Bonus game pay the same as a 8/5 bonus game which are the same as a 10/7 double bonus game.

    So, when you hit the big combinations, that negative pay table you are so worried about no longer is an issue.

    Now granted, no one sits down and immediately hits a royal. Well, practically no body... My last two royals on $1 8/5 Aces and Faces were hit just on the free play money which was less than $200 on both occasions. No Arc, pay tables do not mean as much as being in the right place at the right time. Video poker isn't just math, it's also a lot of variance... ummmm.... luck.
    Well, if you can figure out how to be at the right place at the right time and hit the buttons at the right time then you are one heck of a psychic. I don't know why you'd waste your time playing VP when you could make a fortune on the stock market with ease. Not only that, you should win all future power ball drawings. You are da man.

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    If you think the whole thing is predetermined by the math then you will have to stop playing the day you lose those One Eyed Jacks machines.
    I will.

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Edited to add: Again you concede that one can win at negative expectation games occasionally and you say that over time you can't. Really, Arc? Does the RNG have a secret code in it that says "we'll let this guy win once but not twice"? Or does the secret code say "this guy is now ahead for the past six months, so it's time to give him a losing streak"?
    Have you tried flipping those coins and making them come out heads? No? Do you believe you can make a random event come out the way you want? IF not, then why do you believe you can make a VP random card selection come out like you want? It's exactly the same logic.

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    In craps we say that the dice have no memory. What makes you think that the video poker machines know what you won before and if you won before they won't let you win again to keep you "negative" over the long term?

    Just admit it. The pay tables and the expected return have nothing to do with anyone's actual results. The pay tables and the expected return give you an indication of what might happen, but it is not set in stone. If it were, an RNG would not be truly random, would it? Are you suggesting RNGs are not truly random, Arc?
    No, that is what you are doing if you think you can force it to provide only the cards you want.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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