Maintaining 7 Stars Ratings at Caesars Total Rewards

[Rob.Singer]

Dan looks at everything as if you're playing into infinity. Alan has said all the right things about looking for and playing the best pay tables, but that when they aren't available it does not by any means mean that you cannot win TODAY. Dan would believe that by winning today on a 7/5 pay table that you are required to lose sometime, somewhere to make up for it, but that is simply off-the-wall. No one has ever answered me as to why, if a -EV game is beaten with a stop-play win limit strategy today, that it just can't keep happening, which, of course, it does. And when they peel that onion down to claim "when the big loss does come, it'll wipe out all the little wins and more in order to get you to that obligatory negative expectation" they never, ever want to acknowledge that there OF COURSE are big winners too, and most of the time they are far bigger than the big losses. Their lack of and fear of confrontation on these issues defies debate common sense.

I'll give Dan one more lesson on why he wastes his time and money on a game like job. His first demon is believing that because it's an over 99% game, combined with the slot club fluff he's been brainwashed into believing he's playing in a "positive" situation. How's that been working out for you?

He also, due to his VAST experience with vp play, is afraid of higher variance. He cannot and will not listen to myself, Dancer, Wizard etc. that IF YOU HAVE THE PROPER BANKROLL, HIGHER VARIANCE GAMES WILL CREATE MORE PROFIT THAT LOWER VARIANCE GAMES. It has nothing to do with game EV, because the math people wouldn't be playing these games if they couldn't concoct a positive situation out of the slot club benefits.....and I wouldn't be playing them if I didn't set win goal stop limits.

So Dan, you can either accept this as a teachable moment, or keep throwing good money after cheap comps. Wynn has a great 9/7 TDBP +EV "playable" game at $5 and above as you've seen in my picture, that with their benefits easily beats the CET rewards system and overall +EV percentages. VP is all about getting lucky. There are multiple ways to get lucky in TDBP, again as you've seen from my pictures, and only one way in boring job. And BTW, that's where the saying "You've got a boring job" comes from.

[Dan Druff]

Rob, can you explain how "stopping" is any different than playing one long session?

That is, if I sit down for 100 hands today, get ahead, and then sit down for 100 hands tomorrow, how is that any different than playing 200 hands today?

Does the machine have a memory that I won and adjust my ability to win?

Because that would be violating all sorts of Nevada state laws.

Your "book a bunch of little wins" crap ignores the fact that machines have no memory and no ability to adjust your odds, so stopping while ahead and playing again later is identical to continuing to play today. You're still continuing play while ahead, except yours is just delayed by a meaningless break.

I'm sure you've been told this countless times, but you refuse to accept it.

I would like to think that you're just a troll who knows better, but part of me thinks that you believe your own lies.

[Rob.Singer]

Rob, can you explain how "stopping" is any different than playing one long session?

That is, if I sit down for 100 hands today, get ahead, and then sit down for 100 hands tomorrow, how is that any different than playing 200 hands today?

Does the machine have a memory that I won and adjust my ability to win?

Because that would be violating all sorts of Nevada state laws.

Your "book a bunch of little wins" crap ignores the fact that machines have no memory and no ability to adjust your odds, so stopping while ahead and playing again later is identical to continuing to play today. You're still continuing play while ahead, except yours is just delayed by a meaningless break.

I'm sure you've been told this countless times, but you refuse to accept it.

I would like to think that you're just a troll who knows better, but part of me thinks that you believe your own lies.

Yes I can help you here and if you retain an open mind it will make sense. But first, you need to get the "troll" & "lies" comments out of your mind because they don't work on me since I live my life nearly free of them.

Look at it in this manner: I play 100 hands at Wynn and win $2000 when my win goal for that day was $250, based entirely upon my bankroll I have with me and the game(s)/denomination(s) I intended to play. Great, right? So after a walk I go to the Mirage and play under the same parameters once again. You're saying how does that differ from just continue play on the machine at Wynn? Here's how:

At Wynn I obviously got lucky with a decent winner. But it was the MACHINE that gave this to me, and it had very little to do with the basic skills of the game and casino industry I possess. We know that with perfect play, this machine's TDBP 9/7 pay table returns nearly 100%, and over time the results will approach that % based upon the quality of play it gets. Perhaps the two players before me lost a huge bundle and the players after me won a bundle. All I care about though is how it was paying (or not paying) when I was at it. In my case, as I said, it was paying and that was good enough for me. The math of the machine is the math of the machine, and it is very clear that it is not always going to take our money nor pay off. I happened upon it at the right time for me. It could have been better--a LOT better--but because of my non-greedy win limit this was good enough for me.

Now onto the Mirage, and I'm seriously condensing this in order to make my point. You believe that if I'm playing the same -EV game or games it'll eventually catch up with me and I will be a long-term loser. I get that--play +EV and you will win; play -EV and you will lose. Simple mathematics that the casinos all live on. But what every such critic does not get and what I figured out as I departed from the curse of advantage play in 1996, is that it is not ME who runs the positive or negative vp EV show. It's the machines. Who says the machine has to be in "catch-up" mode because I've won there or elsewhere? In fact, this machine may well be in some sort of pay mode within its random configuration for the very short time I'm sitting at it--or it may not, and that's why I developed a strategy that increases denominations and game volatilities and requires I change machines should a bad streak appear. Eventually, when you play enuf credits, you almost always WILL hit a normal quad or better, and because of the high denomination and high variance game I'm now playing, the win goal is almost always attained, and surpassed--sometimes by a very large amount.

So you now ask how this can be accomplished at 99%? Well, would 103% be any better for this short amount of play I'm giving it? OF COURSE NOT! Those few extra credits that may or may not be realized really are not all that meaningful. The quads are, and those are the hands that determine when/how much I win. Over and over again. When you say I HAVE to lose because I'm not playing a 100% machine over all the years, that's because you have not understood how I've done and do what I do. The strict math people always will balk at it because + is + and - is -. But these people insist on applying long term rules to short term play, and that is as incorrect to do as anything ever was.

I have never said that I've re-written the math books or don't agree with any of the math as it pertains to gambling. Others have but I haven't. What I've said is you cannot beat the math that the casinos all have on their side AGAINST EACH AND EVERY PLAYER, no matter what kind of theoretical "edge" they've created in their own minds for the little time they are there. It's futile to fight the math over time, regardless of who you are. But when you use the math along with the various other factors that goes into my strategy, it is certainly very possible to consistently win from the vp machines at ANY pay table, over time. As I've been doing for 18 years now. A player cannot win in the long term or by the math alone, without getting very lucky. My strategy takes total advantage of every bit of luck I receive--good OR bad.

[Alan Mendelson]

I have never said that I've re-written the math books or don't agree with any of the math as it pertains to gambling. Others have but I haven't. What I've said is you cannot beat the math that the casinos all have on their side AGAINST EACH AND EVERY PLAYER, no matter what kind of theoretical "edge" they've created in their own minds for the little time they are there. It's futile to fight the math over time, regardless of who you are. But when you use the math along with the various other factors that goes into my strategy, it is certainly very possible to consistently win from the vp machines at ANY pay table, over time. As I've been doing for 18 years now. A player cannot win in the long term or by the math alone, without getting very lucky. My strategy takes total advantage of every bit of luck I receive--good OR bad.

This is the essence of win goals and loss limits. Rob dresses it up with his descriptions about his strategy and special plays and other holy water talk but it comes down to this:

1. No one disputes the math of any game
2. If you get lucky and cash out when you are ahead -- you will do better than the expected return of any pay table

And that's all it is, folks.

Luck + cashing out when your credit meter is positive = winning on a negative expectation machine.

[Rob.Singer]

Yes it is that simple--even Porky Pig can agree. I "dress it up" because there are tools available to help players get to the points where they CAN get ahead and cash out.

[redietz]

Luck plus cashing out when your credit meter is positive = winning on a negative expectation machine THAT SESSION.

That's a distinction worth noting. Without specifying "that session," the sentence would more often than not be interpreted as "luck plus cashing out when your credit meter is positive = winning on a negative expectation machine" overall, as in lifetime. So, in a sense, it's a carefully constructed sentence in that either meaning can be derived from it. Perhaps the author intended that; I do not know. One would have to ask him. I strongly recommend that no reader interpret the sentence, however, as meaning this strategy/philosophy will yield lifetime winning on negative expectation machines.

Editorial Bob

[Alan Mendelson]

Yes, redietz: wash, rinse, repeat. If you have more sessions when you cash out showing a profit on the credit meter you will come out ahead even on a negative expectation game.