Question for Rob.

[slingshot]

I have been playing the rtt strategy using bp at 200 credits. I may be playing it differently than you suggest. After reading your strategy again, you say you never leave the denom you're at until you win your mini-goal. So that means if I'm at quarters and hit my mini-goal, I progress to the next denom? I've been just starting over-usually on a new machine. Thanks.

[Rob.Singer]

Starting over at the low denomination is correct.

When in doubt on any of my play strategies, remember this one golden rule: NEVER GO UP IN DENOMINATION AFTER WINNING. It takes patience and discipline to go DOWN, but it is the right thing to do, always. Only hopeless addicts think they will win more on a higher denomination after either hitting one at a lower level or attaining a win goal on a lower level.

[Alan Mendelson]

So with 200 quarters (200 X .25 = $50) what is the "mini-goal"??

[a2a3dseddie]

Starting over at the low denomination is correct.

When in doubt on any of my play strategies, remember this one golden rule: NEVER GO UP IN DENOMINATION AFTER WINNING. It takes patience and discipline to go DOWN, but it is the right thing to do, always. Only hopeless addicts think they will win more on a higher denomination after either hitting one at a lower level or attaining a win goal on a lower level.

So why do you advocate moving up in denomination when you lose a certain amount of credits? How can you be more likely to "get yourself out of a hole" by moving up after a loss but you can't "win even more" after winning?

[slingshot]

So with 200 quarters (200 X .25 = $50) what is the "mini-goal"??

Alan, the usual recommendation is 40 credits. It's harder than one thinks.

[Alan Mendelson]

Alan, the usual recommendation is 40 credits. It's harder than one thinks.

Okay. So at the $5 level, I would be starting with 200 credits or $1,000 and my mini goal would then be winning $200? Would that be using the "soft profits" system or just when my "meter" shows I am ahead by $200 above my original $1,000 buy-in?

[slingshot]

Okay. So at the $5 level, I would be starting with 200 credits or $1,000 and my mini goal would then be winning $200? Would that be using the "soft profits" system or just when my "meter" shows I am ahead by $200 above my original $1,000 buy-in?

\
So my understanding is when the meter shows +$200. You're thinking of the single play strategy-which is more complicated and requires much attention to where you are in the strategy. And you can either switch machines (my preference) or start over again on the same machine-according to how comfortable you are with the machine. The other difference in the two strategies is that on this rtt strategy you progress to 5X the last denom.-so quarters to dollars to $5. If you decide to just double-i.e., quarters to halves to $1 to $2, etc. then the mini goal must be smaller-20 credits. I like it because it isn't as volatile as the other strategies and is a rather relaxing way to play.

[Rob.Singer]

So with 200 quarters (200 X .25 = $50) what is the "mini-goal"??

In order to be one of or a version of my play strategies you have to play at least four levels and identify those denoms in order for me to recommend a win or mini-win goal. Many players use only 3 levels since that's what they have at their casinos. That's why I didn't yet answer the one denom/200 credit question.

[redietz]

I think a2a3 asked a reasonable question. Maybe the most reasonable question of the thread. So why no responses?

[Rob.Singer]

So why do you advocate moving up in denomination when you lose a certain amount of credits? How can you be more likely to "get yourself out of a hole" by moving up after a loss but you can't "win even more" after winning?

A simple lesson in discipline and the gambler controlling what he does vs. the casino controlling him.

Moving up in denom as you lose, as long as it's part of a structured strategy rather than emotion or rage being the driver, is a very effective method of consistent winning. You can't win if you don't play, and if you're losing you will have a very hard time making a profit before you leave unless you increase your denomination in a meaningful way. However, if you're winning, you have no reason to go up in denomination--or even to keep playing if you've reached or surpassed your goal--because all that shows is greed, over-confidence, and a false sense of winning being too easy when it's just the opposite.

People need to learn to be happy with their wins. We all feel almost invincible when we hit a large jackpot, and while it is certainly possible to jump up the ladder and hit another larger jackpot, overwhelmingly it does not happen. Remember when a fully addicted Bob Dancer hit a $25 royal, then took that cash to the $100 machine and hit another, which is the basis of his book "Million Dollar Video Poker"? So just think about how many times he's done that over the years, and you might be able to understand the incredible amount of heartbreak & anger he's experienced because of that very serious flaw. And, of course, just as all AP's have been shown to do, he has and will never talk about going up in denomination again until and unless he can attach another huge win to the jump up.

[redietz]

"Moving up is a very effective method of consistent winning."

That phrase looks meaningful, but check again. The key word here, as Alan will confirm, is "consistent." By inserting this word, Rob is technically telling the absolute truth, as "consistent" would refer to winning-session percentage rate, not overall winnings. By shifting the evaluation from "money winnings" to "consistent winnings," Rob would probably pass any advertising laws. His systems should win somewhere between 75 and 80% of all sessions. That is, by any definition, "consistent." What it is not, going forward, is a "net" winner.

Rob's a smart guy. He uses this kind of advertising sleight of mind regularly.

As usual, I did like Rob's opening line. And I did not like his "all AP's" line. Rob, you've gotta let that go. Stereotyping all AP's as fat, junk-fooding, gamble-gamble-gamble blokes is old hat. Some professional gamblers don't even like to gamble.

[Alan Mendelson]

People need to learn to be happy with their wins. We all feel almost invincible when we hit a large jackpot, and while it is certainly possible to jump up the ladder and hit another larger jackpot, overwhelmingly it does not happen. Remember when a fully addicted Bob Dancer hit a $25 royal, then took that cash to the $100 machine and hit another, which is the basis of his book "Million Dollar Video Poker"?

This statement of yours, Rob, is a bit ironic, because it is you who talks about hot and cold cycles. If the machine is hot, why not move up in denomination? In fact, that's what you do! And what better proof of a "hot cycle" is hitting big wins.

Remember my last two $20K royals came after hitting quad aces TWICE on the same machine? And don't call me an addict.

[slingshot]

In order to be one of or a version of my play strategies you have to play at least four levels and identify those denoms in order for me to recommend a win or mini-win goal. Many players use only 3 levels since that's what they have at their casinos. That's why I didn't yet answer the one denom/200 credit question.

in order to play your stategy at only 3 levels?

[Rob.Singer]

"Moving up is a very effective method of consistent winning."

That phrase looks meaningful, but check again. The key word here, as Alan will confirm, is "consistent." By inserting this word, Rob is technically telling the absolute truth, as "consistent" would refer to winning-session percentage rate, not overall winnings. By shifting the evaluation from "money winnings" to "consistent winnings," Rob would probably pass any advertising laws. His systems should win somewhere between 75 and 80% of all sessions. That is, by any definition, "consistent." What it is not, going forward, is a "net" winner.

Rob's a smart guy. He uses this kind of advertising sleight of mind regularly.

As usual, I did like Rob's opening line. And I did not like his "all AP's" line. Rob, you've gotta let that go. Stereotyping all AP's as fat, junk-fooding, gamble-gamble-gamble blokes is old hat. Some professional gamblers don't even like to gamble.

You're a smart guy as well--you should know by now that every time I use the phrase "consistent winning" there's no advertising intent because I'm not selling anything, and trickery is saved for those who peddle the idea of optimal play only as a vehicle for success. It simply means, and has always meant, to win as I have, which is at least 80% of sessions played as well as being an overall winner.

You won't change my mind on what most AP's really are. Ever see Dancer lately? I saw him last year at a machine. He looks 75, his shoes were ripped open exposing several holes in his socks, and his belly was resting on his lap. I know hundreds of his & arci's type and s a group, they fit that look precisely.

[Rob.Singer]

This statement of yours, Rob, is a bit ironic, because it is you who talks about hot and cold cycles. If the machine is hot, why not move up in denomination? In fact, that's what you do! And what better proof of a "hot cycle" is hitting big wins.

Remember my last two $20K royals came after hitting quad aces TWICE on the same machine? And don't call me an addict.

You're twisting the facts of what I do...and why. Cycles have nothing to do with playing my strategy. If I'm in a cold streak playing a particular strategy or just playing to pass the time, I switch machines and expect better. If I'm in a hot cycle all that means is a much better chance of attaining my win goal and leaving for home.

I know you've recently experienced great wins in situations I would have been happy enough and quit. But like I said about Dancer, how's that worked over the years? Only you know, but Dancer hasn't blabbed about it happening again for nothing.

[Rob.Singer]

in order to play your stategy at only 3 levels?

3 levels still beats pounding away aimlessly on a single machine for hour after hour, hoping your last day on earth is getting closer so you can leave the misery behind.

[slingshot]

3 levels still beats pounding away aimlessly on a single machine for hour after hour, hoping your last day on earth is getting closer so you can leave the misery behind.

I have a 5-25 credits nickel machine with 4 levels and I CAN go 5-10 cents on the nickels for the first two levels and add the 25 cent and 50 cent levels for 4 levels. But I would play artt on that to keep from getting bored and stay within my budget. There are only 3 of these machines in the whole building.

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob, haven't you told us that you moved up to higher denominations on a multi denomination machine when you sensed the machine was "hot"?

[redietz]

While I can't speak to Dancer's belly, and I really do not like him at all, I need to let the cat out of the bag here and point something out that should be obvious once I say it.

Ummmm, I changed my mind. I'll keep it to myself. Keep it stashed in storage.

[Rob.Singer]

I have a 5-25 credits nickel machine with 4 levels and I CAN go 5-10 cents on the nickels for the first two levels and add the 25 cent and 50 cent levels for 4 levels. But I would play artt on that to keep from getting bored and stay within my budget. There are only 3 of these machines in the whole building.

In fact, 5c/10c/25c/50/c is the most popular spread I hear about from those who keep in touch.