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

[arcimede$]

Arc, are you grasping at straws? There are no video poker games with an expected return of 0.5. Would I expect to win? You might also ask if you thought I might expect to live going over Niagara Falls wearing boxer shorts.

OK Alan, what about .7? Would you expect to win using win goals? If not, why not? At what level do you think you can overcome a negative expectation?

You also wrote: "What making wrong holds does is change the return from positive to negative." Gee Arc, what are you talking about? The expected return or the actual return? The expected return as you point out is based on optimal holds. So you must be talking about the actual return. Well, Arc, that's what I've been talking about -- the actual return. And the way you play can change the actual return. You might even be able to change a negative expected return to a positive actual return if you do something that "isn't optimal." That would mean "breaking the rules" of play. Doesn't Rob do this in some of his special plays?

No, I'm talking about the future expected return of a strategy that is not optimal. What is advertised as "ER" is somewhat a misnomer. It is the expected return of optimal strategy. No one achieves that. We all have personal expected returns based on the strategy we use which is less than the optimal strategy. Do you not understand what optimal means?

I'm tired of discussing this with you. Do stand your ground, even if your feet are firmly planted in quicksand. There is more to playing video poker than just the pay table. Just as there is more to playing live poker than knowing that AA should beat 22. You see Arc, 22 can beat AA -- I saw it happen last night when a third deuce flopped.

That has nothing to do with expectation. The expectation of AA is not to win 100% of the time. That is where you are failing to understand reality.

You're tired of discussing this because at some level you know I am right and you are wrong. You don't want to give up your fantasies. It's really quite simple.

[arcimede$]

Math cannot predict randomness, virtual or real.

Math predicts randomness within well understood bounds. These bounds are based on probabilities.

The key thing to understand about randomness is that even though it is not exact, there is no way to control it. You can't make an RNG give you 4 aces more than another person. You can get up and leave, twirl around or take a leak all you want but you can't force random events to lean towards what you want. That's why it's called random. And, that's why Alan's "human element" is total nonsense. He is claiming he can make a RNG give him better cards than the average player. That is just plain stupid.

[arcimede$]

Albert Einstein: "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm
not sure about the the universe."

Proven one more time.

[arcimede$]

Riddle me this, Alan.

What is the difference between BP and games like craps and blackjack? All are slightly negative games based on random events. Therefore, if win/loss goals work for BP then they should also work for craps and blackjack. Have you tried to use them for craps?

Why do you think the MIT blackjack team developed a counting scheme and worked so hard to hide that fact? Why didn't they just use win/loss goals. It would have been significantly easier. Are MIT professors stupid? Or, just maybe, do they understand the situation better than you do?

[redietz]

Yeah, this is getting to the point where I have to wonder if Alan is just tweaking you, Arci. I mean, he sidesteps the whole "ask a math professor" line of reasoning and inserts AA vs. 22 analogies (AA's a 4 to 1 fave, I believe -- good, but not a lock). So maybe he has another agenda -- promoting casinos, maybe? I mean, in terms of "getting a good gamble," Harrah's/Caesars is the bottom of the barrel in just about every category of gambling. They could use some promotion that emphasizes something other than math because, mathwise, they lose to other casinos.

[Rob.Singer]

If you've watched arci perform over the years, you'd see that when he gets frustrated he tries to put on the "cool & calm" act. Thus, the fun derived from my "chipping away" process--which can also be perceived as a mathematical process, for the simple fact that it is a structured approach in response to illogical input.

However....and this is where it REALLY gets to be a gas: when he gets SUPER IRRITATED that he can't convert someone to HIS way of thinking, he gets going on the long-winded line-item-veteoing of what THEIR positions are, regardless of how exposed he becomes at that point or how stupid it makes him look. And the funniest part is, look at the clock times he does these things. You can tell he tossed and turned all night because someone either said something he just couldnt't come up with the right words for at the time, or he had the feeling that the hammer would come down on him while he was trying to get some rest. (My guess is he's not allowed to go near the computer overnight ).

So lo & behold, he jumps out of bed and before anything else, hits this site to see his nightmare come true! And in predictable fashion, even before the roosters awaken, he goes into these long, rambling tirades against the person who made him look like a confused soul the night before. These posts of his....it's as if he's substitute-teaching a class on "Why I'm Always Right and You're a Moron" in the ghetto, when he's really supposed to be responding to the middle class on why clothes dry fast on a windy day in the desert. In other words, he just can't get it right!

[arcimede$]

redietz, yeah that's possible but why wouldn't he just ban me if he didn't want the sound mathematical advice put forth?

I think he's just caught up in wanting something so bad he ignores the facts. This is how con men are able to fool people over and over again. It's a very simple word ... greed.

[arcimede$]

If you've watched arci perform over the years, you'd see that when he gets frustrated he tries to put on the "cool & calm" act. Thus, the fun derived from my "chipping away" process--which can also be perceived as a mathematical process, for the simple fact that it is a structured approach in response to illogical input.

However....and this is where it REALLY gets to be a gas: when he gets SUPER IRRITATED that he can't convert someone to HIS way of thinking, he gets going on the long-winded line-item-veteoing of what THEIR positions are, regardless of how exposed he becomes at that point or how stupid it makes him look. And the funniest part is, look at the clock times he does these things. You can tell he tossed and turned all night because someone either said something he just couldnt't come up with the right words for at the time, or he had the feeling that the hammer would come down on him while he was trying to get some rest. (My guess is he's not allowed to go near the computer overnight ).

So lo & behold, he jumps out of bed and before anything else, hits this site to see his nightmare come true! And in predictable fashion, even before the roosters awaken, he goes into these long, rambling tirades against the person who made him look like a confused soul the night before.

Or, my wife woke me up in the middle of night.

Looks like Singer just did another of his Roseannadanna imitations. Always the fool.

[antfanas]

Albert Einstein: "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm
not sure about the the universe."

Proven one more time.

He also said "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction."

[arcimede$]

He also said "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction."

Which is exactly why the mathematical approach is so simple. VP is a completely solved game just like tic-tac-toe. We know precisely the optimal strategy. There's nothing simpler than knowing something precisely. That is as simple as it gets. It's similar to Occam's razor: The simplest explanation is usually the correct one.

[jatki]

Or, my wife woke me up in the middle of night.

Looks like Singer just did another of his Roseannadanna imitations. Always the fool.

Arc, that's the type of response someone would get when they hit that nail on its head. He really did you know, and it's all a result of your constant crankiness at not being able to get Alan to believe like you believe.

You are a glutton for punishment.

[Rob.Singer]

Or, my wife woke me up in the middle of night.

Looks like Singer just did another of his Roseannadanna imitations. Always the fool.

Seems to me you should be happy if your wife wakes up in the middle of the night....especially these days

[arcimede$]

Arc, that's the type of response someone would get when they hit that nail on its head. He really did you know, and it's all a result of your constant crankiness at not being able to get Alan to believe like you believe.

You are a glutton for punishment.

It's also the response one gets when they missed by a country mile. But, as usual your hero worship won't allow you to perceive reality. That's why you are such an easy tool.

[arcimede$]

Seems to me you should be happy if your wife wakes up in the middle of the night....especially these days

If the old saying about surviving bad situations makes one stronger is true then she'll out live us all. Especially those who can't walk straight much of the time.

[Rob.Singer]

Arci, if you're really around someone who's "strong" during a bad situation, you're really not handling it very well....especially for someone who is responsible for what you made the two of you go thru.

Pull yourself together--we're here to help. Don't get so frustrated with Alan because you aren't sure whether he's more intelligent than you or not, and stop picking on jatki just because he's good at jabbing you when you ask for it. You'll like yourself just a little better in the "long run".

[Alan Mendelson]

Riddle me this, Alan.

What is the difference between BP and games like craps and blackjack? All are slightly negative games based on random events. Therefore, if win/loss goals work for BP then they should also work for craps and blackjack. Have you tried to use them for craps?

Why do you think the MIT blackjack team developed a counting scheme and worked so hard to hide that fact? Why didn't they just use win/loss goals. It would have been significantly easier. Are MIT professors stupid? Or, just maybe, do they understand the situation better than you do?

Of course craps players use win goals. I explained this many times in the past and questioned why win goals were okay for craps and for live poker but only the video poker community challenged the idea of quitting when ahead.

I am not a blackjack player but based on my limited knowledge of the concept of card counting, when the shoe or deck turns positive you want to stay at the game betting big.

I did play blackjack once with a friend who is a card counter (we almost got thrown out of State Line Primm when he discovered the count went positive and he upped his bets from $10 to $100 -- the floorman came over and said to him "no more, sir.") So blackjack is a game where you can detect trends. Video poker is not as each hand is an independent event... as craps is also a game of independent events.

Getting back to craps-- of course we use win goals. And after a big run/win craps tables will clear out. Players instinctively know that it is very unlikely to have two big winning hands (shooters) back to back. In craps its OK to take the money and run with it.

Only in video poker -- with the AP crowd -- does this idea of win goals and taking the money and run does not make sense.

[Alan Mendelson]

redietz, yeah that's possible but why wouldn't he just ban me if he didn't want the sound mathematical advice put forth?

I think he's just caught up in wanting something so bad he ignores the facts. This is how con men are able to fool people over and over again. It's a very simple word ... greed.

Why should I ban you or anyone, Arc? This is an open forum. You have your opinion and I welcome it. Unfortunately you and redietz continue to confuse "math" with the human factor of playing video poker.

For the one hundred and umpteenth time, no one disputes the math. All I am saying and I think what Rob is saying, is that if you tweak your play you can overcome the mathematical disadvantage that the pay table gives you.

As I said above -- you play the game, and you don't let the game play you.

Arc says he plays VP for a set amount of time each session so that he gets his various time requirements in for points and comps, etc. Isn't that dangerous? Suppose he won big early in his session and then continued to play for "points" only to give back his winnings? Or has he also timed when his machine gives winning hands?

One more time consider this: when you play video poker, YOU play the game and you don't let the game play you. Hence, win and loss goals. That doesn't mean you play for four hours because the comp policy says you need to play for four hours. See my other post about how craps and live poker players also quit when ahead. Only VP players -- and I mean ONLY VP players think it doesn't matter.

Even blackjack card counters know there is a time to bet big and a time not to.

[arcimede$]

Of course craps players use win goals. I explained this many times in the past and questioned why win goals were okay for craps and for live poker but only the video poker community challenged the idea of quitting when ahead.

No one in the VP community has a problem with quitting when you are ahead playing negative games. They may have a problem with playing negative games but that's a different issue. What they also will tell you is having win goals with a positive return game is unnecessary.

So, how much money have you won with win goals playing craps?

I am not a blackjack player but based on my limited knowledge of the concept of card counting, when the shoe or deck turns positive you want to stay at the game betting big.

Yes, the game return actually changes as you play unlike either craps or VP. Since casinos can count as well and can see if you increase your bet, they have the ability to catch counters and ask them to leave. However, if win goals provide the advantage you keep claiming then why wouldn't smart players use them instead of counting? They'd never get kicked out.

Video poker is not as each hand is an independent event... as craps is also a game of independent events.

Which is exactly why win goals provide no advantage.

Getting back to craps-- of course we use win goals. And after a big run/win craps tables will clear out. Players instinctively know that it is very unlikely to have two big winning hands (shooters) back to back. In craps its OK to take the money and run with it.

So, how much have you won?

[Alan Mendelson]

Arc asks: So, how much money have you won with win goals playing craps?

Since it is very hard to win big money at craps without betting big there were three times I walked away from the table after reaching a profit of $5,000 or more. (Starting bets were either less than $100 on a $10 table, or less than $300 on a $25 table.)

The most recent time I walked was when I rolled five of six points for the fire bet at Caesars a couple of weeks ago -- and the fire bet (a very very long shot) paid $2500.

[arcimede$]

You keep avoiding the question. We know you've had $20K RFs in VP and you claim to be a net loser. I believe you've also claimed to be a net loser at craps. It appears those win goals aren't working.