Big Casino Wins and Jackpots

[Rob.Singer]

OK Alan, I explained very clearly that I took $10,000 to play a session of $1 thru $25 ARTT, that I had $500 left when I hit the $100k winner. So if you can add and subtract you'll see a profit of $90,500, and if you've ever read the VERY DETAILED explanation I wrote several times here about exactly how ARTT works, you would have understood all of it. But all you're interested in is how much I left ahead or behind. Well, you now have your answer twice, and no, I never play past my goal-attainment, which means the casinos never get my wins back. Never. That's what weak andinexperienced players do....all the time as you may know and be disgusted over.

[Alan Mendelson]

OK Alan, I explained very clearly that I took $10,000 to play a session of $1 thru $25 ARTT, that I had $500 left when I hit the $100k winner. So if you can add and subtract you'll see a profit of $90,500,

Rob, what about your "soft profits" that you banked all along during your play? You've made such a big deal about your soft profits yet they don't show up here. Why?

You started with $10,000 and according to your previous posts you bank these "soft profits" as you play. Yet, in your final tally you only report the $100,000 jackpot less the $9,500 from your starting bankroll. Where are the soft profits?

[a2a3dseddie]

Rob, what about your "soft profits" that you banked all along during your play? You've made such a big deal about your soft profits yet they don't show up here. Why?

You started with $10,000 and according to your previous posts you bank these "soft profits" as you play. Yet, in your final tally you only report the $100,000 jackpot less the $9,500 from your starting bankroll. Where are the soft profits?

Alan, Rob said earlier that "soft profits" were a cornerstone of his strategies. Remember this post?

First, the return of a game is based on the overall pay table, not just the flush and/or full house. They always get the distinction because they're the two winners which change the most, which in turn affects the payback %. And I agree, there's been too many times to count, most recently in some of the sessions where I've hit my big winners, where flushes and full houses were nowhere to be found in the session.That's why I teach not to focus on those two hands being very important in the overall scheme of things. They play a part, but mostly (and I say that because in goal-oriented strategies such as mine they play a slightly more important part) only as far as giving you a few more hands to play--and most probably, lose anyway--before you leave. They are greatly overrated, and mostly serve to feed into the meaningless +EV & -EV frenzy, which any intelligent player knows is of so little difference that in any given session

Well, it seems to me that flushes and full houses would make up a good portion of these "soft profits" but here Rob has forgotten an earlier lie and downplays the importance of these winning hands. I guess that since he only hits 4 of a kind with kickers and Royal Flushes now he doesn't need the "soft profits".