Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 100

Thread: The Mendelson Voyage

  1. #1
    Alan, here's the issue I have with your previous posts and your latest posts regarding video poker gambling. Correct me if I misstate your position.

    You are basically taking the position that certain individuals, because they have won money following various strategies at negative EV games, have something worthwhile to say regarding how to win at video poker.

    There will always be individuals who are ahead playing negative EV video poker for a limited number of hands. Their strategies can vary from something as labyrinthine as Rob's, to rabbit-foot-in-pocket, to drinking grape powerade at precisely 8 AM every Wednesday, to praying to God, to praying to Satan. At any given moment, there are literally thousands of people with thousands of "strategies" who have won playing negative EV games. You think, for whatever reason, that you can evaluate these strategies in some non-mathematical way using reasoning, deduction, and your powers of judgement.

    I'm telling you that you cannot, or at least (for the benefit, well-being, and sanity of your audience) that you probably should not -- unless it's to debunk them.

    You can spin your wheels forever evaluating these things non-mathemtically, and as you look more closely while these indviduals play more hands, their "strategies" will disappear into the mist. The winning was real -- it's bell curve stuff -- but the rationale that "they won because" was a mirage.

    Check the old parapsychology literature for the "shyness effect," which was just a way of describing reversion to the mean. And save yourself some wheel-spinning.

    The answer to "how not to lose at 96% games" is "Don't Play."

  2. #2
    There will always be people looking for some magic elixir ... and there will always be some folks like Singer claiming they have found it. The smart folks understand this reality and realize there is no magic. People need to decide whether they want to make smart decisions or whether they want to listen to the lies.

  3. #3
    Within the context of playing a negative expectation game, and knowing that over a million hands or a billion hands you should approach the results that the math dictates, is there something that can be done Thursday for 2 hours, other than blind luck, to assist one in winning?

    I'm not going to play a million hands today. I am going to play until I lose as much as I am willing to lose or hit a win goal that leaves me satisfied.

    So again, no argument about math, any thoughts re playing for a couple hours today, and I'll worry about only my next 2-3 hour session next time.

  4. #4
    The answer to "Hot to not lose for two or three hours per session at a negative EV game" is (hold onto your hats, boys and girls), "Don't Play."

  5. #5
    Redietz if you stopped at this: "You are basically taking the position that certain individuals, because they have won money following various strategies at negative EV games, have something worthwhile to say regarding how to win at video poker" I would say yes, you are correct.

    There are certain things you can do to help you win at negative expectation games. One of those is quitting when ahead. Another is having bankroll management. Another is playing the correct strategy.

    Do you have a problem with any of the things I just mentioned?

    I was glad to see that you mentioned prayer. Prayer is important. People pray in church, in synagogues and in their homes, and in other places of worship... but when they pray in casinos they really mean it.

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    The answer to "Hot to not lose for two or three hours per session at a negative EV game" is (hold onto your hats, boys and girls), "Don't Play."
    redietz, you are preaching as if your audience is made up of professional video poker wannabes. No, I think most of us (with the exception of you and arc) are just recreational players looking for a way to have more fun in a casino and maybe find a way to help us leave with a little more money.

    I'd like to think that the rest of us are not as uptight as you are about the rules of math.

  7. #7
    I would ask Redietz if he does anything where losing is a possibility. Most things in life, and particularly gambling, have a good chance of losing. Does that mean you never gamble. I played semi-pro hockey for nearly 40 years, and was damn good, but we lost plenty and even against bad teams had the chance of losing. Should I have never played? There is nothing I enjoy more than playing hockey except maybe a hot craps game. Should I deny myself that pleasure because I may lose?

    I am a lawyer---and yes I have lost cases--sometimes on merit, sometimes because the judge is an idiot. Should I not practice law (a few of those losing clients would probably say yes-lol)?

    So again, I'm looking for ideas to approach a recreational session of a few hours. And if there is nothing other than the things Alan mentioned that are very logical, so be it. Blind luck it is and I'm overdue. Then why are we all spending so much time on this forum arguing about video poker systems and whether Singer is Jatski?

  8. #8
    regnis, please understand this. If Rob Singer said the sky is blue or grass is green, his critics will find a way to say he is wrong.

    edited to add: allow me to elaborate on this. I've said it many times that there are parts of Rob Singer's system/strategy/method that are beneficial. I don't know all of his system/strategy/method but I certainly want to find out what it is. There are parts of his system/strategy/method that I absolutely disagree with but that doesn't mean that something he does or says to do can't be beneficial.

    However, his critics think that anything he says is either a lie, a fabrication, or can't work because... well, just because.

    What they will not believe is that people can win, and sometimes doing something differently can help you to win.

    If this different idea can help me win, great. If not -- like you -- I can accept the losses as part of the fun of going to a casino.
    Last edited by Alan Mendelson; 10-04-2012 at 11:34 AM.

  9. #9
    My personal view on Rob, and I followed him for years in Gaming Today, is that no one could keep winning that consistently. But being a trusting person, I attributed it to just plain good luck. I am not in favor of his attacks on Arci and vice versa. I have used some of his special plays (before I ever knew they were "his') and I am a believer in going to a higher level at times so that a win effectively recoups your losses, and usually with a large profit. But while I play craps at a significantly higher level, a couple thousand is my poker limit and I essentially play a 50 cent to $5.00 sequence.

    By the way Alan, a while back you had an extended "no royal streak". I have had only 1 royal in over 25 years of playing video poker. So math guys, explain that!! 1 royal in many millions of hands. my bell curve is broken.

  10. #10
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    The answer to "how not to lose at 96% games" is "Don't Play."
    Oh by the way, I meant to ask you about this, redietz. 8/5 Aces and Faces and 8/5 Bonus both are called 99.2% games. Is it okay to play? I don't think I ever played a 96% return game in my life. And... I don't think your nemesis Rob Singer would either.

  11. #11
    Originally Posted by regnis View Post
    I have had only 1 royal in over 25 years of playing video poker. So math guys, explain that!! 1 royal in many millions of hands.
    Was it really "many millions of hands"? I was able to have a relatively accurate count of the number of hands during my royal flush drought because I used my "tier score" to figure the number of hands played.

  12. #12
    That actually raises a good question that maybe Arci can answer. In my area, the casinos are in god foresaken places that require a drive of an hour to an hour and one half. But there is 1 casino 15 minutes from my office that I usually use. If the casino near my office is 96-97%, and the further ones are 98-98.5%, figuring in gas and time and wear and tear, what's the better move?

    And please---don't play is not an answer. These payoffs are on the high end in my area. Taxes are so high the casinos can't (or just won't) offer better games.

  13. #13
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Was it really "many millions of hands"? I was able to have a relatively accurate count of the number of hands during my royal flush drought because I used my "tier score" to figure the number of hands played.
    I don't have an actual count but my friend and I play video poker several days a week for usually 3 hours but also as much as 10 hours per day and I play with lightening speed on 3 way or 5 way games.

  14. #14
    I'll take a stab at your question, regnis. If you put through $10,000 and the difference is 1% return, you are talking about $100. Compare that to the cost of gas, wear and tear, and other "comps" you might get. If you are putting through ten-grand per session is a hundred bucks really an issue?

    Maybe to the math guys it is.

  15. #15
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Oh by the way, I meant to ask you about this, redietz. 8/5 Aces and Faces and 8/5 Bonus both are called 99.2% games. Is it okay to play? I don't think I ever played a 96% return game in my life. And... I don't think your nemesis Rob Singer would either.
    Just gonna quibble with you. Bonus Poker 99.17 and AF Bonus is 99.26. Did you ever start playing the ACES bonus game which kicks it above 99.4%?

  16. #16
    Regnis what city are we talking about?

  17. #17
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    regnis, please understand this. If Rob Singer said the sky is blue or grass is green, his critics will find a way to say he is wrong.
    Utter nonsense. His critics only point out the things that he says that are wrong. No more, no less. Your problem is you want to believe some of the things he says are true. Hence, you think we are being overly critical. As you should have learned by now everything I have said about Singer and the tool were 100% accurate. When are you going to realize that all I am doing is providing easily verified facts. Most of them have been known for as long as VP has existed and long before I started playing.

  18. #18
    Originally Posted by regnis View Post
    By the way Alan, a while back you had an extended "no royal streak". I have had only 1 royal in over 25 years of playing video poker. So math guys, explain that!! 1 royal in many millions of hands. my bell curve is broken.
    Time is not important, only the number of hands played and the strategy. If you have been playing regularly for this time then you are either the unluckiest person alive (at VP) or your strategy is poor.

  19. #19
    Originally Posted by regnis View Post
    That actually raises a good question that maybe Arci can answer. In my area, the casinos are in god foresaken places that require a drive of an hour to an hour and one half. But there is 1 casino 15 minutes from my office that I usually use. If the casino near my office is 96-97%, and the further ones are 98-98.5%, figuring in gas and time and wear and tear, what's the better move?
    You can determine the difference quite easily. Determine the amount you put into the machines and multiply that by the difference in return. If you play $1 single line at 800 hands/hour you would invest $4000/hour. If the difference in return is 2% then the cost of playing the lower return game is .02*4000 = $80/hour which is $240 for 3 hours of play. Just replace the numbers above with your real numbers and you should be in the ballpark.

  20. #20
    Arc, some of the things Rob Singer says are true -- and you just can't allow yourself to admit it.

    Bigfoot, only played the ACE$ game that one time at Rincon.

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
  •