Originally Posted by
Rob.Singer
Eddie, listen to Alan please. I didn't win all that money and the pictures of all those big winning hits were not mostly because of making special plays that worked. Some winning sessions were/most winning sessions weren't. It is the overall combination of ALL aspects that makes SPS such a successful approach.
Any mathematical analyses of the special plays cannot be accurately presented by simply approximating how often quads should hit vs. how many hands might be lost because they're made. To do it right means taking into account the value of the quads that are being sought out, not just the fact that it is a quad. It may be too complex for some, but I developed the plays knowing most quads SPS chases pay 400, 600, 800, 1200, or 2000 credits. Also, it may be impossible for some to comprehend, but the entire strategy was structured within the playing parameters of a single session being played TODAY. Of course any off-the-cuff long term-driven analysis of special plays will yield vastly skewed results. I used to look at everything about vp with long term glasses. Then I woke up, because none of us will ever play anything close to that, and the benchmark is how much play a casino experiences to actually own that advantage over every player. Therein also lies the fallacy of the AP argument. The math books reflect the edges in the casinos and only approximate the case for individuals--who because of their own failings cannot combine all their life's play in order to even tie what the casinos hold.
Eddie, re: the eventual EV on the machines we play: the return of course is from the players, but the EV is the EV. The machines I've played may at the time I play them, show an internal return of maybe 92% for instance. But on about 85% of the machines I've played, I've vastly improved on that because I've won. That probably has.little overall effect on the overall return though, because -EV games attract the full spectrum of players.