Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 51 of 51

Thread: Doesn't this exercise prove money management and win goals/loss limits don't work?

  1. #41
    Eddie, inasmuch as you ignored all but one of the reasons presented as to why your misconceptions about this million hands are misguided, your comment about the randomness of machines had nothing to do with the success of my strategy. Detecting possible cold cycles did prompt me to change machines at times (although I have no idea if that helped or hurt) but if a hot cycle was detected then it had no influence on how long I stayed at that particular machine. Why? Because once a sesssion win goal was realized, I left.

    Your remark about progressions had even less insight. When utilized within a non-structured continuum of vp play, of course that changes nothing. And there is no system that ever changes the mathematical odds. But what DOES improve, and rather drastically, is opportunity, and opportunity is the most important aspect when playing a goal-oriented strategy.

  2. #42
    Originally Posted by a2a3dseddie View Post
    You seem to think that by having win goals and loss limits will somehow help guarantee you a long term net profit.
    Nope, I never said that and I don't believe it. All the win goals/loss limits do is help me maximize my wins and minimize my losses.



    Originally Posted by a2a3dseddie View Post
    As far as progression betting goes, in a game of chance since when does the size of your bet change the odds against you?
    I am not a progression better and do not follow Rob's system. So you will have to discuss that with Rob. But I agree that progression bets does not change the odds. However, when you do increase your bet limits and hit a winner at a higher bet amount, you do have the opportunity to score a big win that will let you reach your win goal. I'm not endorsing the system, but I can understand how it can work.

    It actually worked for me in a round about way many times. I played $1 vp and got no where, and then moved up to $2 and got no where, and then moved up to $5 and hit something big that put me ahead. But by the same token, I have also done that and just lost more money.

    So the bottom line is that I usually play at one level based on my budget for that trip.

  3. #43
    As I said above, a progression doesn't change odds, but when used with win goals it changes amount of opportunity to win your session. No one here or anywhere can truthfully say the big losses that come with this strategy will wipe out all the smaller winners along with the accompanying huge hits. That's the typical blinded math critique. Doesn't happen and in fact is exactly the opposite. If you know how to run the numbers properly on a session-by-session basis--which I did in detail before I began--then it is all very easy to see why I was so successful playing SPS. Arci's gonna say he wants to see the numbers because he's not modern or clever enough to figure short term play out. It's coming, in time, but in the meantime let's see how Royer reacts when asked to provide written proof of anything he claims

  4. #44
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Nope, I never said that and I don't believe it. All the win goals/loss limits do is help me maximize my wins and minimize my losses.
    How can they do that if you end up playing all the same hands? You end up with the same ER no matter how long you wait between hands. There is no maximizing or minimizing. You are fooling yourself with nonsense.


    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    I am not a progression better and do not follow Rob's system. So you will have to discuss that with Rob. But I agree that progression bets does not change the odds. However, when you do increase your bet limits and hit a winner at a higher bet amount, you do have the opportunity to score a big win that will let you reach your win goal. I'm not endorsing the system, but I can understand how it can work.
    And you also will lose your money faster when you don't hit big negating any possible gain from the occasional big hit.

    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    It actually worked for me in a round about way many times. I played $1 vp and got no where, and then moved up to $2 and got no where, and then moved up to $5 and hit something big that put me ahead. But by the same token, I have also done that and just lost more money.

    So the bottom line is that I usually play at one level based on my budget for that trip.
    You just verified what redietz, Eddie and I have been saying.

  5. #45
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    As I said above, a progression doesn't change odds, but when used with win goals it changes amount of opportunity to win your session. No one here or anywhere can truthfully say the big losses that come with this strategy will wipe out all the smaller winners along with the accompanying huge hits. That's the typical blinded math critique. Doesn't happen and in fact is exactly the opposite. If you know how to run the numbers properly on a session-by-session basis--which I did in detail before I began--then it is all very easy to see why I was so successful playing SPS.
    I thought Robbie was going to produce all that data back in October. Oh how the time flies ....

    Robbie, you really shouldn't keep telling the same lies after you promised to produce the evidence just a few months ago. Even some of your supporters are going to wonder ... why is he not providing the evidence he promised? Maybe it doesn't exist after all.

    ROTLMAO.

    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Arci's gonna say he wants to see the numbers because he's not modern or clever enough to figure short term play out. It's coming, in time, but in the meantime let's see how Royer reacts when asked to provide written proof of anything he claims
    Bwah haha haha ... you've already been asked for the numbers, you promised to take yourself (jatki) and retrieve them well over a month ago. Now you are looking like a complete dufus making the same claims without having produced squat.

  6. #46
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Just for the record, I think it is inappropriate to quote Victor Royer as claiming 86 percent of gamblers are ahead at one point in their trips. There is no data attached to that claim, just the assuarnce that Royer is a "gaming author." Hell, I'm a "gaming author." Rob Singer is a "gaming author." The phrase "gaming author" means absolutely nothing in terms of providing an objective evaluation of expertise or accurate information.

    That's pretty obvious, but it needed to be pointed out.
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Eddie, inasmuch as you ignored all but one of the reasons presented as to why your misconceptions about this million hands are misguided, your comment about the randomness of machines had nothing to do with the success of my strategy. Detecting possible cold cycles did prompt me to change machines at times (although I have no idea if that helped or hurt) but if a hot cycle was detected then it had no influence on how long I stayed at that particular machine. Why? Because once a sesssion win goal was realized, I left.

    Your remark about progressions had even less insight. When utilized within a non-structured continuum of vp play, of course that changes nothing. And there is no system that ever changes the mathematical odds. But what DOES improve, and rather drastically, is opportunity, and opportunity is the most important aspect when playing a goal-oriented strategy.
    Playing the SPS, one can actually watch the hot and cold cycles-a unique learning experience.

  7. #47
    Since I have a chance to play SPS. I have a question. If the session ending win goal for $1-$25 is $2,500-or 100 X the top denom- is $200 the session ending goal for 5¢-$2? Thanks.

  8. #48
    SPS's $2500 win goal is a function of playing 6 levels, $1 thru $100. But the win goal was figured as a % of the overall bankroll for the session, and 5% was used--another reason why the strategy is such a consistent winner.

  9. #49

  10. #50
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    SPS's $2500 win goal is a function of playing 6 levels, $1 thru $100. But the win goal was figured as a % of the overall bankroll for the session, and 5% was used--another reason why the strategy is such a consistent winner.
    Rob I thought you said this strategy could be adjusted to accommodate smaller bankrolls and smaller denominations?

  11. #51
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Rob I thought you said this strategy could be adjusted to accommodate smaller bankrolls and smaller denominations?
    He did. I got it. I just take 5% of the almost $1,600 in bankroll -$80- as a session ending win goal- 5¢-$2- those 6 denoms.I was making it a function of the highest denom played. I started one session months ago and didn't allow for the time to finish it. I got to dimes and had +$30 w/$10 soft profit due to quad aces on ddbp at dimes. I have one casino in mind for this strategy-tough place. Artt works best elsewhere.
    Last edited by slingshot; 09-05-2016 at 08:13 PM.

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
  •