Good day for a break. I see a little common sense is required to help the AP's cope. Then I'll run over to help the new poster that I was e-mailed who needs expert advice.

Redietz, there's a reason "AP" authors, infrequent vp players like yourself, and an Internet hack who just wants and needs to belong-like arci-find solace in TALKING about "advantage play" video poker instead of actually PLAYING it where they could post numerous winning hits like the rest of us do---and that reason is simply because they love the sound of "probability theory over time" but they know better than to try and make it work. Alan had a good question one day that you ducked. He asked what your purpose was in being here as a die hard AP who does who knows what, but who plays not a heck of a lot of vp....and at not for a heck of a lot of stakes, either. My guess is you came to learn from me. As for arci, I've said numerous times why he hangs around: his life is basically over except for this forum nonsense. It gives him the ability to make up any scenario he likes, then spew it, and then live it in a virtual fantasy. Name another saddled old man who spends endless hours scouring video poker forums of all things, then says as many stupid things about it as he does.

Your comment about playing negative games is just as shallow as any misled AP's comments. Win & loss goals absolutely do make a huge difference in any term's results....if utilized consistently. For the past 15 years that's all I've done, and I know I've netted a much higher overall vp profit during that timeframe than all of the so-called AP's here, and more than any single AP anywhere. Those geniuses play a losing game, they believe "expectation" means more than actual results after the session is over, and they ALL hypocritically claim they "know" they'll "be OK somewhere down the road" because that's how "the math's supposed to work". Yet when anyone else goes in and plays a 99.9% game instead of a 100.1%er and says THEY expect to win, it's "magic"! That's why no one believes in the theory approach, and why most of you hardly play (unless you're like Dancer and have no problem making a public fool out of yourself by exposing how video poker has wrecked your personal life). You guys all want it both ways.

The single largest hole in the AP "theory" about -EV games is in how you toot that "you can't win on them over time, but you can win any session"...then when my play strategy is employed, "you will win a lot of sessions, but the few big losses means you will lose overall--and all because you are playing a game that's 99.99% instead of 100.01%!" Completely absurd. If I can win a session playing a very advantageous method developed to WIN a session, why should that not be the case in the next one, the one after that, and the one after that etc.? And of course, conveniently left out of every AP's story is that the large "wins" actually do occur--and much more often that those large losses you theoretically want to wipe out the many small wins.