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

[Vegas Vic]

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.

A fancy way of saying "get lucky".

[arcimede$]

A fancy way of saying "get lucky".

I think it's more like .... da plane, da plane.

[Rob.Singer]

Was that a "sigh of relief" exhibited by arci, that a poster as weak as Vic bothered to come on to support him in his time of need?

Hilarious!

[Alan Mendelson]

A fancy way of saying "get lucky".

Absolutely it's all about getting lucky. But when you play "conventional strategy" you also have to get lucky. You can't overlook that conventional strategy does not guarantee a win. "Expected return" is not a guaranteed return, is it?

[Rob.Singer]

Further, ER can only be attained over the "long term" the AP's believe in if all the lucky hands are actually hit--something that is hardly guaranteed and is thus, an unreliable method of approaching video poker success. In fact, the only thing a player can count on during his play, is getting more losing hands than winning hands.

This is why SPS has always been a successful, consistent winning strategy. It takes the math for what it was meant to be taken for: recognizing that very little is guaranteed for the player over the long term, recognizing that over that long term the casinos will always flourish, and understanding that in a short term session-by-session approach laden with specific goals and special plays which enhance big hit opportunities, the math as assumed from a long term point of view, simply does not exist. In fact, several times I've stated here--and several times it tugged at Supernerd's cape-- that my special plays combined with other SPS aspects actually increase game ER in the single session. Why? Because, and the math will show this, when you reduce the ER's long term effect on results by the percentage derived by comparing how many hands the long term actually plays (use assumption because there is no clearly true answer other than "infinity") to the average amount of hands played in a short term session--and apply the factor derived from comparing big hit opportunity % playing optimal strategy to big hit opportunity incorporating special plays, this results in an approximate 32% increase in today's session's ER. And I believe I beat that expectation when playing SPS, by quite a bit.

[Vegas Vic]

Was that a "sigh of relief" exhibited by arci, that a poster as weak as Vic bothered to come on to support him in his time of need?

Hilarious!

Don't flatter yourself by misconstruing anything that appears to be anti-Singer as being pro-Arci, and vice versa. The world of video poker doesn't begin with, end with, or revolve around either of you.

[Vegas Vic]

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.

Getting lucky aside, "tweaking your play" can also worsen the mathematical disadvantage that the pay table gives you. If you are playing 8/5 BP, breaking up and turning down a standard JOB hand (because going for pushes is not part of the strategy), and breaking up 2 pair to go for a quad can reduce a 99.166% game down to as low as a 55.939% game if none of the tweaks pan out. That's a scary thought.

[Alan Mendelson]

Those are not examples of things I would do Vic. But in TDB when dealt AAA3K I would hold just the trip Aces. What would you do? Take the conventional play of a 1/47 shot of drawing an ace or give yourself two shots at drawing the case A ?? That is about the best example there is of the effectiveness of Rob's special plays. Breaking up two pair in Bonus isn't.

[Rob.Singer]

Getting lucky aside, "tweaking your play" can also worsen the mathematical disadvantage that the pay table gives you. If you are playing 8/5 BP, breaking up and turning down a standard JOB hand (because going for pushes is not part of the strategy), and breaking up 2 pair to go for a quad can reduce a 99.166% game down to as low as a 55.939% game if none of the tweaks pan out. That's a scary thought.

That's where you're completely wrong Vic (although it is I who am the end-all in video poker, while arci always has been and remains....an Internet hack with habitual troll tendencies on the subject). Making certain special plays improves opportunity in a session. You cannot apply long term rules to short term play. Show me any one session that comes out exactly on ER target, and I'll show you how to spell MIRACLE. As such, while it is virtually impossible to alter the ER into infinity, it is as easy as pie to do TODAY, and you will not know which direction it'll take you until the deal is done. Overall, I've developed a method which gives a big nod to the player based on historical fact, while theorists can only studded their way into predicting doom.

[slingshot]

And doesn't where you're at in the strategy have a lot to do with it? Let's say I'm playing aart and I've advanced to the $10 level and the first hand I'm dealt a full house-Aces over. Since it's my first hand at this level, I can't lose with the 3 A's. I will win $1.25 ANYWAY and RETURN to the lowest level. And, if the 4th one hits- I'm gone. Now if it was my THIRD hand, I would hold the full house. Is this proper thinking?

[Alan Mendelson]

And doesn't where you're at in the strategy have a lot to do with it? Let's say I'm playing aart and I've advanced to the $10 level and the first hand I'm dealt a full house-Aces over. Since it's my first hand at this level, I can't lose with the 3 A's. I will win $1.25 ANYWAY and RETURN to the lowest level. And, if the 4th one hits- I'm gone. Now if it was my THIRD hand, I would hold the full house. Is this proper thinking?

Huh?? I really wish this was explained so the rest of us mere mortals would know what the heck you're talking about?

[Vegas Vic]

Those are not examples of things I would do Vic. But in TDB when dealt AAA3K I would hold just the trip Aces. What would you do? Take the conventional play of a 1/47 shot of drawing an ace or give yourself two shots at drawing the case A ?? That is about the best example there is of the effectiveness of Rob's special plays. Breaking up two pair in Bonus isn't.

2 reasons why I selected BP as an example: 1) I believe it's Rob's game of choice 2) the disparity of the two percentages is so great that it's a graphic illustration of how tweaking can affect the game in a worst case scenario.

Without precise and specific guidelines as to "how and when to tweak" (that sounds so silly, I was reluctant to type it), the many and assorted alphabet systems that Rob employs might be more destructive than beneficial to the typical VP player, and even more so to the novice player.

Even though it's possible that detailed step-by-step tutorials were published by Rob years ago in those now defunct locations, anyone coming onto the scene today hasn't the foggiest idea what he's attempting to communicate in regard to tweaking / special plays. If there are indeed hundreds of his students out there who he claims are successful players only due to his tutelage, I would expect to see some of them show up here to help explain the intricacies to us morons inasmuch as the professor has yet to do it and appears to be incapable of doing it.

[Vegas Vic]

That's where you're completely wrong Vic (although it is I who am the end-all in video poker, while arci always has been and remains....an Internet hack with habitual troll tendencies on the subject). Making certain special plays improves opportunity in a session. You cannot apply long term rules to short term play. Show me any one session that comes out exactly on ER target, and I'll show you how to spell MIRACLE. As such, while it is virtually impossible to alter the ER into infinity, it is as easy as pie to do TODAY, and you will not know which direction it'll take you until the deal is done. Overall, I've developed a method which gives a big nod to the player based on historical fact, while theorists can only studded their way into predicting doom.

Then teach us, omniscient guru. Bring the great unwashed masses into your fold. The needs of the people are many, and you are the last great hope upon whom we beseech our pleas.

[Rob.Singer]

Huh?? I really wish this was explained so the rest of us mere mortals would know what the heck you're talking about?

What I believe he means Alan, is that in the AART strategy (I haven't explained it to you thoroughly yet) when you're dealt two pair or better on any level as the first hand in that level, you automatically win your mini-win goal and go back to the lowest denomination to start again. The $1.25 reference means he started at the 25c level, I expect. I would not, however, ever go for the four Aces over holding the FH in this case, because your first goal is to attain a mini-win goal, and since that's been done with the FH, there's no need to go for a special play--even if there's a decent possibility of being done. IE, going home with a four Aces hit.

[slingshot]

Huh?? I really wish this was explained so the rest of us mere mortals would know what the heck you're talking about?

I guess you've never played arrt in Rob's strategies. I think it's his best. I was talking about an imaginary $1/$2/$5/$10 game of artt in bp.

[Rob.Singer]

Vic, this is exactly why I've met with many players over the past 12 years or so. It is not easy--not much that provides exceptional success in this world is, let alone in gambling. I could type a million words and there would still be questions. I will put up explanations, yes, but that alone will not make everyone knowledgeable to the point that they will be able to play the strategy as perfectly as I'm capable of. Videos will go a LONG way in helping, and I'm sure Alan would want to do that.

[antfanas]

If your intention was to merely respond to Alan's comment, you could have simply said "I was dealt 8c,Ac,Qc,Jc,10c I held the 4RF and hit the Kc for 2k."

Sorry,I will send my comments through you first before posting so that you can correct them.

[antfanas]

You must have felt it was important and vital to include you were playing Singer's system.

How could you know how I feel? Do you know what system is that I mentioned? If you know what the system is do you know how it is played and have you tried it?

[antfanas]

by doing so, you opened yourself up to scrutiny.

By who? I thought that this was an open forum to discuss VP.Non posters see this will never write anything for fear of being scrutinized.

[antfanas]

Besides, my analogy was completely accurate when it comes to correlating end results to any "system".

the results were do to a "math" play the system had nothing to do with it.