Stopping at a set playing limit is just as important as quitting at a set losing limit-just my thoughts.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Stopping at a set playing limit is just as important as quitting at a set losing limit-just my thoughts.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I think that is more likely to happen with someone who thinks they have some kind of entitlement towards winning, such as someone with a formula for winning, or someone who has some recipe to follow for casino gambling. Perhaps someone who says "the math" should make them a winner might be running to the ATM to keep playing.Originally Posted by arcimede$
I hate to say it, but our friend Rob does that when he carries a $50,000+ bankroll around with him for the sole purpose of reaching a $2,500 win goal. That makes no sense to me.
On the other hand, true recreational players have set budgets because they are using only recreational dollars with no master plan to drive them to keep playing. Recreational players know they are there at the casino for a given amount of time, and a set amount of money, and when it's time to go to the airport or to the show or to dinner or to meet the wife for the shopping trip they know it's time to leave. Recreational players also don't have to win because they haven't convinced themselves that they should be winners.
Arc, could you accept that you can't win on your positive expectation one-eyed jacks machine? Hell no. I'm sure you consider them your personal piggy bank that the law grandfathered just for you at that Indian casino.
I remember about seven or eight years ago when I went to Vegas and had passes for the Global Gaming Expo. I was playing craps and the table was hot. We were all making money with hot shooter after hot shooter and as it neared 10am I started looking at my watch. Sid the floorman (may he rest in peace, he just passed away a couple of weeks ago after a few years of retirement) said "going somewhere?" "Yes, Im going to the gaming expo." "You'll never make it," he said "you'll be here all day." Well, at 10:15 when the shooter made his pass, I took down all my bets, took my chips out of the rail, and headed to the cage. (I did not color up at the table because I didn't want to take the time or interrupt the flow of the game).
One more TRUE story: I'm at the table at Caesars and a shooter is having a hot roll and exactly at 12 noon a guy at the table yells out, "it's noon, I gotta go. Give me my chips (take his bets down is what he meant)." As the dealers were taking his bets off the table the floorman says to him, "where you going?" "I have to go to the room," the guy says, "noon is when my wife says I have to come up for sex."
For everyone who thinks they are entitled to win, watch this (one of my favorites):
And part two:
And part three:
Last edited by Alan Mendelson; 11-27-2012 at 11:02 AM.
Let me see if you can clear up something for me. You ask if I can accept not winning when I win every year. Sorry, that does not compute. Now, if you rephrase to ask if I would reconsider playing in the future if I started to lose the answer is easy. Yes. That is why I keep accurate records. If something started to look fishy then I would quit playing.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
The truth is the machines will be lucky to last another year. They've been slowly but surely taking them out. Only 4 left. So, I don't think there's a long enough time period to assess a change.
So if I understand the "math guys" correctly, they see no reason to quit when ahead if they have an advantage. Well, I think I have an advantage when I play live poker because I am a rock solid player. I know how to fold and I don't bluff. Tonight, I got lucky and I am sure that my edge helped. Two hands in a row I won with a full house with kings full -- I was playing pocket kings both hands. Another hand with pocket 8s I flopped an eight for a set and rivered quads. And another hand my pocket queens held up against a board with all small cards and a player who was out of control was betting wildly with a pair of 8s. Those were pretty much my big winning hands, and I turned $200 into, at the peak, $962 (the phtoto below). I kept raising my stop loss and decided that at $900 I would go home. On my very last hand before the big blind reached me I looked down and I saw that I had 99 (pocket nines). I called the big blind for $3 (leaving me exactly $902 in my rack) and several other players foleded. I thought I would get to see the flop cheap but then another looser player raised to $15. Other players folded and I folded my pocket 9s also. I could have easily called that player another $12 -- maybe I would have won, and maybe I would have lost. But at that point I wanted to guarantee myself a $700 profit on the evening. So I folded my pocket nines. There was no action, so I will never know if my 9s would have won. But it doesn't matter. In a matter of 5 hours, I had pocketed $700 and at that point that's all I cared about. I was not tired and I certainly could have kept playing. But the actual cash in my pocket was more important than any edge I might have over the other players. Below is the photo of my stack. The white chips are $100, the nlues are $1. A bit more than $900 ($962) in all at the peak.
Last edited by Alan Mendelson; 12-04-2012 at 08:12 AM. Reason: typos fixed
Alan, let me see if I understand. You think you had the advantage and let a win goal stop you from pursuing that advantage. If ever there was a reason to chuckle at silly win goals you just made a great case.
Haha! Sounds like the difference between avoiding becoming addicted via a silly justification....and leaving with a profit. Of course, he could've dragged his wife along with him so they both could play further into that "advantage", but the thought of possibly having to look into the eyes of a loved one unable to move at will because of it, was likely too much for any decent person to fathom.
Last edited by Rob.Singer; 12-04-2012 at 05:08 PM.
I'm going to argue this one with you Arc. I had decided to lock up a profit of $700 which is exactly what I did. To be honest, pocket nines is not a very good hand in poker. It's a mediocre hand which needs "a lot of help." I lose to pocket tens, jacks, queens, kings and aces. I also lose to a bigger hand such as J-ten, Queen-jack, king-queen, or ace-king should the player with those cards hit a pair. When a player raises the big blind by five times it is a good indication that the player has a superior hand to pocket 9s. I know that player making the raise, usually bet that much with a hand such as ace-ten or better.Originally Posted by arcimede$
So, in this case you have to do more than look at your own personal skill.
I told you I had an edge at this game -- and my edge told me not to chase and risk losing. At this point, with a $700 profit locked up, there was no reason to gamble. The money was mine to enjoy.
So explain this to me. If quitting when ahead is so important, why don't you quit -- as in permanently?
You claim you're a "recreational player," which means you don't play exclusively positive expectation games, which means profit is not driving your play. So why does profit drive your decision to stop playing when it doesn't drive your decision to begin playing?
Redietz, you answered the question. First you ask:
And then you answer it yourself:Originally Posted by redietz
And to answer your complete thought:Originally Posted by redietz
And since you need a little explanation for the latter, try this: By quitting with a profit, my recreation was a lot more fun. You guys (and I am including Arc) really have a disconnect with the rest of humanity, don't you? Is there a sickness for being so blinded by the math that you can't see the rest of the world? LOLOriginally Posted by redietz
Let me add this thought: it's more fun to win. So, I'd rather go home with the win. And I'm realistic enough to realize that good cards don't come forever, despite all of my skill. Got it?
Last edited by Alan Mendelson; 12-04-2012 at 07:14 PM.
I played as a professional 40 times a year for years, and the only fun part of it was quitting when ahead--which was over 85% of the time. Now I'm a recreational player who might play 20 times a year and who has fun every visit, and I still win overall by quitting when ahead. Guess what--it WORKS!
Come on Alan, you wouldn't have lost the entire $700 by continuing to play. However, you let a silly win goal control your judgement. Now, if you didn't like the hand you should have folded right away, so your excuse about it being a poor hand appears irrelevant. Sure you might have lost an few extra bucks and left with lightly less than $700 or you might have gone home with slightly more than $700. Neither would be a big deal to your bankroll.
The problem is you let an extraneous factor affect your play. The next time you play you might be dealt pocket 9s on your first hand. If you would not fold then, you shouldn't be folding at the current time. Not smart.
Finally, why didn't you quit before the hand?
Arc, thanks for your expert analysis. It is particularly informative considering you never played live poker. So let me give you a possible scenario of the problem I faced if I continued to play:
Suppose I called the extra $12 and the flop came 9 J Q ?? What the heck do I do then? In video poker there is no problem with that flop (the first three cards on the table), but in live poker (Texas Holdem) that kind of a flop is a disaster for pocket 9s. I'll give you a quick lesson in poker about all the ways my set of 9s (trips) could lose:
The other player could have a king high straight, or a queen high straight, or a set of jacks, or a set of queens, or Ace-king which still leaves the door open that I could lose to an ace high straight.
Now, let's add in another factor which goes beyond "video poker play" and that is subsequent betting. After the flop the other player could have bet or reraised me. So instead of losing just $12 more, I could have lost much more. In fact, the other player had a bit more than a $100 in front of him. So in just a few seconds, a $15 loss could have become a $100+ loss. And instead, I settled for a $3 loss and a pleasant ride home.
The alternative? Yeah, I might have won another hundred bucks, or I might have driven home telling my windshield what an idiot I am.
Oh, while we are talking about other flops, what if the flop came 2, 3, 4 and the other player had Ace-Five suited? What if the flop came three diamonds, and my two nines were black?
You really have no idea about the complexity of live poker and Texas Holdem. I wish you showed up at one of my tables sometime. I'd probably bankrupt you... if someone else didn't bankrupt you first.
What you did makes perfect sense to me. I wonder tho if any one knows what your chances to win that hand were. On the televised poker tournaments, they always give a percentage. Anyone??
All of the poker calculators require a flop and knowing what the other player has. It's anyone's guess how my hand ranked against the other player or what the flop might have been.Originally Posted by regnis
But I bet arci could tell you
In video poker, you (Arc) probably could tell my odds because there are only 52 or 53 cards with a defined pay table and its a one dimensional game. What Arc probably doesn't realize is that its your hand against another players hand.
I might have had pocket 9s, the other player might have had pocket Ks. The flop came 3, 4, 5 rainbow. I check, the other player bets... and I have to call thinking that with the other player making a raise he didn't have ace-deuce for a straight and he wasnt playing a 3-4 or 4-5 for two pair. The risk I take calling the bet after the flop is that the player was playing a pair of 3s or 4s or 5s or perhaps pocket 10s or higher.
For pocket 9s to win, the conditions have to be perfect, as it was earlier last night when my pocket eights turned into quads (wrote about this in the other thread).
My comment has nothing to do with the game. It's all about gambling in general.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Once again, this has nothing to do with the situation. The question is what would you have done if you weren't sitting at that win/loss limit? If you would ahve folded then what you did is just fine. If not, then you let the a non-poker factor drive you and that is not smart.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
All this is nothing but silly nonsense unrelated to the question at hand. What would you have done if this was your first hand? For every bad flop you mentioned I can name a good flop (like another pair of nines).Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I can see it now ... Alan is playing blackjack and dealt 6-5 against a dealer's 6 hole card. Oh wait, I'm at my loss limit so I can't double down.
Golly gee whiz that dad-gum live poker sure is a woozy.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
The sad part of your comment is you were actually serious.
Still not the point Alan. You used this hand as an example of quitting due to a loss limit. If the real reason you quit was because it was a poor hand then the loss limit was NOT why you quit and your whole spiel was nothing but a worthless waste of time for everyone. If you would not have quit without the loss limit then you let it influence your play which is not very smart.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Sorry Alan, those are the facts.
Arc, this is the most ridiculous thing you ever wrote: "My comment has nothing to do with the game. It's all about gambling in general."
Wow, are you messed up.
No Arc, the facts are I had a stop loss limit to preserve a large win. I didn't have to call the $3 big blind with my pocket nines. I could have folded and left the game right then and there before the next hand which was my big blind. You see Arc, in poker, you can look at your cards for free until you are a blind -- big or small. In video poker, you have to pay to see every hand.Originally Posted by arcimede$
Now, with pocket 9s I had the option of deciding to see a flop. $3 was a fair price to pay to see a flop with 99. So I called the big blind. If I got lucky, the flop would have been very favorable for pocket 9s. But another player raised to $15. When a player raises to $15 the value of my 99 drops dramatically -- he is signalling that he has a strong hand which could be anywhere from another pair to AA or KK or QQ or even AK and pocket 9s is at a disadvantage to all of those.
Because I was at the table with this player, I knew he was loose but at the same time I knew he only raised with strong hands. And at that point I didn't want to gamble with my 99 anymore and leave with a solid win intact.
We've gone over this before in other threads. There is more thinking in live poker than in video poker. Video poker is a one dimensional game. There are many dimensions in live poker -- including, believe it or not, win goals and loss limits and bankroll preservation and there are books written about the math of just betting and pot odds. You never even played the game, and you are trying to show me and everyone else that your "video poker strategy" applies to live poker? You're giving me a big laugh.
I suggested this to you once before and I am going to suggest it to you one more time: go play some live poker. Don't make any bets. Just pay your blinds in a small game -- say a $40 buy in no limit game, or a $20 limit game with $1 and $2 blinds -- and watch the action and just think about what you would do with the cards you are dealt. It's a whole new world you never imagined.
All of your principles and strategies from video poker will fly right out the window.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote