John Grochowski writes about money management.

[Alan Mendelson]

Alan, they won't "work" for anyone if you believe they will increase your pER. I'm not telling you to quit using them as that is your own personal choice. However you should quit promoting them as a method of improving a person's bottom line. That is a proven falsehood. The Alan's Best Buy brand is weakened by claiming a proven mathematically fact can be overcome by voodoo rituals.

You won't quit because you have really brainwashed yourself. First, you concocted something called a pER and congratulations for that. Second, you are trying to say that someone who can minimize his losses while allowing himself to maximize his wins is wrong and makes no sense.

All I can say is continue to live in your fantasy world. Because every player who ever finished a session or a trip with $1 more than what he started with knows that what you are saying is wrong.

I'm not going to debate this anymore with you. It is not a challenge to math. It is a question of reality: how much money is in your pocket at any given time vs how much money have you lost or could lose and what choice are you making about continuing to play. That is what win goals and loss limits are all about. And you still can't figure that out.

[arcimede$]

You won't quit because you have really brainwashed yourself. First, you concocted something called a pER and congratulations for that. Second, you are trying to say that someone who can minimize his losses while allowing himself to maximize his wins is wrong and makes no sense.

I'm not saying it. The math is telling you that is a fact. What makes no sense is anyone claiming that proven math is wrong. It's beyond silly.

All I can say is continue to live in your fantasy world. Because every player who ever finished a session or a trip with $1 more than what he started with knows that what you are saying is wrong.

Nonsense.

I'm not going to debate this anymore with you. It is not a challenge to math. It is a question of reality: how much money is in your pocket at any given time vs how much money have you lost or could lose and what choice are you making about continuing to play. That is what win goals and loss limits are all about. And you still can't figure that out.

I didn't figure it out. I simply reported what the math proof is telling all of us. It is you who is in denial and living in a world of make believe.

[Alan Mendelson]

Arc, try to visualize this: You sit down at a video poker machine with a pay table that returns 99.2% and you insert a $100 bill. You hit a few winners and you cash out $125. You reached a win goal of 25%. You put the money in your pocket and you leave. What math principle did you violate? What math books need to be rewritten? Did this cause a rift in the space-time-continuum that will destroy the universe? Will apples that fall from trees now start floating up?

This is what win goals are all about.

Many of us who are regular players have noticed that there is a time when we play that we are "up" a significant amount, and using that experience we say "if we can find these win points and cash out at these "win points" we can become "winners" even at negative expectation games.

Are you saying that when we see a positive number of credits on a credit meter it is a hallucination or it is fictional?

[arcimede$]

Arc, try to visualize this: You sit down at a video poker machine with a pay table that returns 99.2% and you insert a $100 bill. You hit a few winners and you cash out $125. You reached a win goal of 25%. You put the money in your pocket and you leave. What math principle did you violate? What math books need to be rewritten? Did this cause a rift in the space-time-continuum that will destroy the universe? Will apples that fall from trees now start floating up?

Alan, try to visualize this: You sit down at a video poker machine with a pay table that returns 99.2% and you insert a $100 bill. You hit a few winners but more losers and you lose it all. This turns out to eat up all of those little $25 wins and a little more putting your actual return at less than 100%. You know, what happens in real life vs. your dreams.

This is what win goals are all about.

To bad those loss limits come into play as well.

Many of us who are regular players have noticed that there is a time when we play that we are "up" a significant amount, and using that experience we say "if we can find these win points and cash out at these "win points" we can become "winners" even at negative expectation games.

Well Alan, if that happens every time you play then go for it. Just consider yourself lucky that you have found a non-random machine. In fact, since this works for you almost every time, all you need to do is cash out and move to another machine where you will once again find yourself at "a time when we play that we are "up" a significant amount". Cash out again. Repeat until you can't keep your eyes open. Sounds like and easy way to get rich.

Are you saying that when we see a positive number of credits on a credit meter it is a hallucination or it is fictional?

Honestly, do you really expect people to believe this nonsense? What have you been smoking?

[redietz]

Millions of people have played video poker. Hundreds of thousands of people have tried win goals and loss limits. They actually do work, but it's been a secret until now because of a vast conspiracy. Very few people know the organization that has managed to keep the win goal/loss limit strategy success a secret until now, but my undercover contact informs me it's known as the Winners Hating All Credentialed Knowledge -- Just Our Big Secret Society.

I applied for membership today.

[regnis]

Too bad-I'm in charge of the new member acceptance committee----REJECTED!!

[Alan Mendelson]

No redietz, very few players actually have loss limits and win goals. the usual routine for casino players is to insert money and play till you either win big or lose it all.

[regnis]

Let me see if I can get this straight. If I am ahead by a significant amount (which is a different amount from person to person), and the ER is 99% so I should either lose or almost break even if I continue to play, taking my profit before I lose it back is bad. It is better to keep playing and lose back the profits because win goals are stupid and not according to the math.

Years ago I won the math and science fair in High school using (of course) various gambling demonstrations. The math must have changed since then.

[Alan Mendelson]

regnis, I am still waiting for the math that shows it is wrong to quit when ahead, or where the math says to keep playing when you are ahead, or...

I am still waiting for the math that shows it is wrong to quit when you have reached your budget for the session or trip, or where the math says to keep playing when you have reached your budget for the session or the trip.

Where is this "math"??

[Rob.Singer]

If all players used win goals and loss limits and actually stuck to them instead of continuing on or hitting up casino credit, the cash advance machines, or the ATM's, no casino would ever be profitable. That's proof that what Alan said is correct--most players ...really, nearly EVERY player....play the game exactly like the casinos want and expects/hope they will. Keep giving them action, and watch bank accounts fall.

I hope everyone finally realizes almost everything arci says and makes up about the math this and the math that, and his phoney claims of winning as an "AP" who plays up thru dollars, is all only part of his fairy tale. Can't you see how he was pulling everyone's leg with his pretend 6-7 hour sessions every week at some Indian casino with the world's most generous machines? Remember when he was pressed about why he never posted pictures of his supposed wins after giving a load of BS that I exposed as just another of his lies? Suddenly, a picture from who knows when appears.

((OFFENSIVE COMMENTS DELETED. THESE WERE OVER THE LINE, ROB. -- Alan))

This is why you waste your time playing around with his nonsense and his virtual pretend world. He's a nobody who can't stand not posting provocative tidbits hoping people will give him something to keep doing, otherwise he can only stare into an empty hole constantly wondering what could have been if it all didn't turn out so cruel.

[arcimede$]

Let me see if I can get this straight. If I am ahead by a significant amount (which is a different amount from person to person), and the ER is 99% so I should either lose or almost break even if I continue to play, taking my profit before I lose it back is bad. It is better to keep playing and lose back the profits because win goals are stupid and not according to the math.

Another silly illogical piece of nonsense. The point is your future expectation (pER) is always the same after any hand. So, it makes no difference if you continue to play now vs. coming back another time and playing. The only way to reduce losses is to play less often. If you can use win/loss goals to do that then it can be useful, however, a lot of people who go home a winner are motivated to return sooner. Hence, it is not clear that even this factor really helps. And, if you understand the situation properly you already have a play to play a limited amount of time irrespective of you current win/loss situation.

Years ago I won the math and science fair in High school using (of course) various gambling demonstrations. The math must have changed since then.

The math proof is exceedingly simple. I guess your competition must have been pretty poor.

[arcimede$]

regnis, I am still waiting for the math that shows it is wrong to quit when ahead, or where the math says to keep playing when you are ahead, or...

Once again the math shows it makes no difference. Why do you persist in being dishonest>

I am still waiting for the math that shows it is wrong to quit when you have reached your budget for the session or trip, or where the math says to keep playing when you have reached your budget for the session or the trip.

Where is this "math"??

Another silly strawman. The math simply tells you that no betting system (like a progression or choice of start/stop points) will make any difference in your future expectation (pER).

http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/progress/unfair.htm

To any person with a few working brain cells it should be obvious that there is no difference between a hand played today and one played next week. Your chances do not change. Just like in my statement above, if win/loss goals really did make a difference then a person should not have to leave a casino. Simply cash out when a goal is reached and move to another machine. The situation is exactly the same as it would be if they left and returned another day. The RNG is no smarter now.

The logic involved here is so simple a cave man could figure it out.

[arcimede$]

I see the doofus Singer once again provided a series of lies. One can only chuckle at a person with such a low self esteem that they must lie over and over again to maintain a fake persona.

But hey, what can you say about a person who thought W was the greatest president ever. The only reason he's not the worst ever is because he has been outdone since he left office.

[redietz]

Great news! The organization keeping the great win goal/loss limit strategy secret from the millions of video poker players has accepted me! I am now officially a member of the Winners Hating All Credentialed Knowledge -- Just Our Big Secret Society, or W.H.A.C.K.J.O.B.S.S. for short !!!

I asked what got me in. It wasn't my name dropping of Rob. And they said my disbelief in the efficacy of win goals didn't work against me. What got me in was the fact I spent so much time making clear and simple points to people who don't want to believe in these clear and simple points. They said I was, without a doubt, W.H.A.C.K.J.O.B.S.S. material. Arci, you're a mortal lock, given the time you spend trying to make similar points. Way more than me -- you might be an officer right off the bat.

Do you folks realize what the casinos would look like if win goals and loss limits worked? You would have great streams of people crowding casino doors, trying to get seats. People would sit down, wait until they were ahead, then they'd leave and go outside to the end of the line so they could sit back down for another session wherein they could get ahead. The casinos would be permanently packed with masses of humanity lined up for profit-taking. Or do Alan and Rob really believe they are a couple of the chosen who have discovered the secret and who have the sheer superheroic will to sit down and leave after getting ahead? I mean, c'mon, you're not that special. Other people have brains. Other people have will. Other people can (gag) do math.

[Alan Mendelson]

The point is your future expectation (pER) is always the same after any hand.

Okay, Arc, we understand that. So what's the problem with quitting the session with a profit? What's the problem with stopping when you have "lost enough" for that session or trip?

So far, with all of your preaching you have not yet answered these questions or given us any reason not to use win and loss goals. Nor have you provided any math that shows win and loss goals don't work or are wrong to use. Nor have you shown us that if we continue to play we wouldnt lose more or win more.

In other words, you've talked a lot and said nothing.

[Alan Mendelson]

Once again the math shows it makes no difference. Why do you persist in being dishonest>

What math? Still waiting.

The math simply tells you that no betting system (like a progression or choice of start/stop points) will make any difference in your future expectation (pER).

Correct, Arc, no one said ever that quitting with a win goal or quitting with a loss limit changes any expectation about future hands.

To any person with a few working brain cells it should be obvious that there is no difference between a hand played today and one played next week. Your chances do not change. Just like in my statement above, if win/loss goals really did make a difference then a person should not have to leave a casino. Simply cash out when a goal is reached and move to another machine. The situation is exactly the same as it would be if they left and returned another day. The RNG is no smarter now.

The logic involved here is so simple a cave man could figure it out.

Absolutely correct, Arc, so WTF are you arguing about? You have stated our case for using a win goal and a loss limit. As you said: " it should be obvious that there is no difference between a hand played today and one played next week." This is why you take your profits, and this is why you cut your losses. Thank you. You finally woke up.

[Alan Mendelson]

Other people can (gag) do math.

I'm going to ask you the same question: what math?

[arcimede$]

Okay, Arc, we understand that. So what's the problem with quitting the session with a profit? What's the problem with stopping when you have "lost enough" for that session or trip?

There is no problem UNLESS you fool yourself into believing it will make a difference ... or worse, you fool others into believing this nonsense.

So far, with all of your preaching you have not yet answered these questions or given us any reason not to use win and loss goals. Nor have you provided any math that shows win and loss goals don't work or are wrong to use. Nor have you shown us that if we continue to play we wouldnt lose more or win more.

Alan, I provided the mathematical proof that betting systems make no difference. I can't help it if you are in denial.

In other words, you've talked a lot and said nothing.

So, Alan, where is your proof that they make a difference? I'm actually the only one who has supported my comments with real evidence.

[arcimede$]

I'm going to ask you the same question: what math?

The math in the proof I've provided many times. You are becoming more dishonest in every one of your comments.

http://www.bjmath.com/bjmath/progress/unfair.htm

[redietz]

And Alan, I'll ask you the same question I asked before -- let's see if you deign to respond, "Do you really think you and Rob are two of the few who have come up with the magic of win goals/loss limits as a way to win on negative expectation machines?"

Or, to put it another way, "Do you really not think thousands of people have tried exactly what you're suggesting?" And still the casinos survive. Everyone else must just not "get it," as you say, or they must have inferior discipline or something.