Big Casino Wins and Jackpots

[Rob.Singer]

Hey Rob was just wondering your strategy used for this. Was it 100-200-300-400 credits at each denomination on BP or did you use something else? And if you used it for a 3 level 25c to 1.00 what credits did you use there? Just found it interesting and may be something I may want to try. Oh and Congrats on your nice hit.

This was the final stop on what I call a "RTT"--or Romp Thru Town. In this approach I only play BP (at whatever the best pay table I can find where I choose to play is) and I played a version where 50 credits are played on all but the highest denomination, where I played up to 150. Normally I WOULD play increasing quantity of credits, but I didn't want this to take all day since I had other commitments. And, the royal was on my final stop, but I actually had one more planned after it. Royals ALWAYS end my play.

[redietz]

Arci's simply trying to steer readers clear of doing something that doesn't really work. He's a bleeding heart do-gooder. I also don't know what his problem is -- probably read too many Spider-man comic books as a kid.

[Rob.Singer]

Now redietz is taking how vp AP's play as a slap in the face. There's no satisfying him. At best, sitting at machines playing on and on, thru winners, and like a zombie is foolish; worse case scenario, it's a stupid choice. Period.

Whenever I watch the O'Reilly Factor I almost always watch him render the guests who continually delve into the realm of theory, as ineffective debaters. And that's exactly what's happening here. The math guys, because they feel they can either arrive at the long term expectation of the "positive" machine in the 6 hours they are playing it (redietz) or because the only reason they come onto forums is to argue, which helps them cope with their self-caused bevy of personal problems (arci), they have to ignore Alan's actual return argument and go into theoretical scenarios just to keep their sanity. However, even they have to know all they're doing is waving the flag. You can even tell how frustrated redietz seems to get when, after the truth that he dislikes is posted, he wants to believe, as a form of comfort, that it's somehow bothersome for my real last name to be identified. It'a regular habit of his.

Alan, they know as well as you & I know that the ONLY thing that matters after a session of play--whether that session lasts two minutes, two hours, or half a day--is how much is won or lost when you get up and leave. We know the ER has not been "breached" and we also know what our actual return or loss is. The difference is--and redietz has this one wrong also--is that the longer one plays on ANY machine, the more one is overwhelmingly going to lose. That's why casinos are thriving....that's why they are there.

Years ago Dancer, in his articles and posts, started the silly crusade about how playing less on -EV machines was a good thing....because it meant you would lose less. He carries that nonsense with him today, only just like how the "global warming" nutjobs have recently had to change their hysteria to "climate change" so as not to keep looking so foolish in the wake of overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary, Dancer now uses the terminology "playing less in negative situations is a good thing so you'll lose less money". This is just as stupid as what these guys are theorizing about.

First they have no experience with it, and secondly, anyone who tells them their actuals do not follow this theory they cannot accept. In other words, reality is not something they can deal with. When you ask what's wrong with cashing out with an $80 profit, they have no choice but to either insinuate you'll "eventually return it...and more" to the casino because of .8%, or that quitting with a profit is dumb because you don't know how much more you COULD (ie, theoretically) have won. The amazing part is, to these misled mental contortionists, that $80 is never real money. They can only cope if they somehow incorporate it into being some crazy part of someone else's long term scheme.

They have real problems.

[Rob.Singer]

Arci's simply trying to steer readers clear of doing something that doesn't really work. He's a bleeding heart do-gooder. I also don't know what his problem is -- probably read too many Spider-man comic books as a kid.

Now that's funny. Knock on his door and ask that question, and spider-woman just might pull out the hammer.

[redietz]

Rob, first of all, I don't think mentioning your last name bothers you at all. As I recall, and I read a ton of your columns, you mentioned it yourself in your columns on occasion. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Second, you respond to many comments, but somehow missed the one where I called you out for making behavioral assumptions regarding me that were an out-and-out lie. I then called you on the fact that you had lied. But we get no feedback on that. Inquiring minds want to know why you felt comfortable lying about me in a public forum. That's a bad thing to do, since I'm not Singing or Dancing or Scotting. I'm Dietz-ing, and that's a real name attached to a real business, as in Bob Dietz's Integrity Sports. It's really, really inappropriate to lie about somebody who's had to live up to that (admittedly semi-corny) name for 35 years.

[Rob.Singer]

It's simple red. I don't believe they are lies.

[arcimede$]

Let me clue you in to reality:

If I insert a $100 bill into an 8/5 Bonus Game my expected return is approximately 99.2% for each and every time I push the button for a play.
But if after five plays I cash out $125 I will have an actual return of 125%.

So what. It tells you nothing about what you are going to do in the future. Look anyone can make up scenarios. For example, you insert a $100 bill and lose 5 straight hands and have $75 in credits. Once again it tells you nothing about the future.

I can't predict what my actual return will be before I start to play -- and that is true. But when I hit the cash out button I decide what my actual return is.

In this example, the actual return is 125%. I could also hit the cash out button when the credit meter reads $90 in which case the actual return was 90% which was less than the expected return.

Now -- where is my mathematics wrong?

No one ever said you can't determine your current actual return at any time. What you are being told is it a meaningless metric for how you will do in the future.

The problem is you will twist and turn everything I say -- and everything Rob Singer says -- to try to discredit a very simple and smart way to play which is simply to quit when you're ahead. Yet, you yourself say there is nothing wrong with quitting when you are ahead. So what's your problem making a big fucking deal over such a simple plan when playing?

You amaze me.

You are still making stuff up. What we have told you over and over and over again is that win/loss goals will not change you future expectation. Hence when you said "Money management ALWAYS can aid your actual return", you were making a claim that isn't true.

[regnis]

No one says that today's results are indicative of a future event. But if today's results include $$ in the pocket you are ahead. And if you put cash in your pocket next time, you are still ahead.

You refer to "future expectation". On the negative games most of us play, future expectation is always a loss. If you quit with a profit, you are ahead. So EFF my future expectation. I got the $$$$$. And whatever happens next time, they cant take away that cash.

[Alan Mendelson]

I can't understand why an intelligent and probably brilliant mathematician like Arc would continue this ridiculous argument of putting theory ahead of putting money in your pocket. People go to casinos to win money -- and hopefully not to lose it. We don't go to casinos as a mathematical exercise.

Nor can I understand how he can't differentiate between "expected return" and "actual return."

I have played many sessions on positive paytable machines (when they were available) but none of those games was like punching in a PIN at an ATM. In other words -- I didn't win. Even if I did match the theoretical return you can't get rich with a .017% when inflation is at 1.0% or greater.

Anyone who doesn't hit the cash out button when they are ahead -- or isn't using a rising stop loss -- is crazy. I admit -- I have been crazy. But I am trying desperately to be cured of that craziness. Give me a win today and watch me run.

[arcimede$]

No one says that today's results are indicative of a future event. But if today's results include $$ in the pocket you are ahead. And if you put cash in your pocket next time, you are still ahead.

You refer to "future expectation". On the negative games most of us play, future expectation is always a loss. If you quit with a profit, you are ahead. So EFF my future expectation. I got the $$$$$. And whatever happens next time, they cant take away that cash.

Wrong ... the next time you play they could "take that cash".

[arcimede$]

[QUOTE=Alan Mendelson;23754]I can't understand why an intelligent and probably brilliant mathematician like Arc would continue this ridiculous argument of putting theory ahead of putting money in your pocket. People go to casinos to win money -- and hopefully not to lose it. We don't go to casinos as a mathematical exercise. [quote]

Silly deflection. Has nothing to do with the current discussion. Once again for the umpteenth time, no one has ever said you can't cash out whenever you want. That is not and has never been the issue. Why do you continue to spew this nonsense?

Nor can I understand how he can't differentiate between "expected return" and "actual return."

I have played many sessions on positive paytable machines (when they were available) but none of those games was like punching in a PIN at an ATM. In other words -- I didn't win. Even if I did match the theoretical return you can't get rich with a .017% when inflation is at 1.0% or greater.

More silly deflection.

Anyone who doesn't hit the cash out button when they are ahead -- or isn't using a rising stop loss -- is crazy. I admit -- I have been crazy. But I am trying desperately to be cured of that craziness. Give me a win today and watch me run.

Delusional nonsense.

[regnis]

Wrong ... the next time you play they could "take that cash".

No Arci--you are wrong. If I have taken a profit it will be a meaningful one that I can't and won't give back next time. That is the whole point you cannot understand. I am not going the next time to play for 8 hours because I have an expected return of +.02%. I am going back with way less money than I won.

So you are wrong---I can't give it back next time, and I didn't stay to give it back the previous time when I won.

[redietz]

Well, Rob, who has never met me, never seen me gamble, never seen me play video poker, has drawn some conclusions about me and posted them on Alan's Best Buys Forum. The fact that these posts stay up is something for which I hold Alan Mendelson personally responsible.

[arcimede$]

No Arci--you are wrong. If I have taken a profit it will be a meaningful one

That was not what you said above. You simply mentioned a profit. To get a "meaningful one" is far from guaranteed on any trip to a casino I've ever seen. You could lose all you took to the casino, in fact, you probably will, without hitting a "meaningful one". Or are you special?

that I can't and won't give back next time. That is the whole point you cannot understand. I am not going the next time to play for 8 hours because I have an expected return of +.02%. I am going back with way less money than I won.

Well, if you can always hit a "meaningful win" then I can't understand why you won't go back real quick.

So you are wrong---I can't give it back next time, and I didn't stay to give it back the previous time when I won.

Maybe not "next time", but what about the next 10 times? Or, do you believe there is some magic win/loss goal god that guarantees you will obtain a "meaningful win" every time you play?

[Alan Mendelson]

Well, Rob, who has never met me, never seen me gamble, never seen me play video poker, has drawn some conclusions about me and posted them on Alan's Best Buys Forum. The fact that these posts stay up is something for which I hold Alan Mendelson personally responsible.

What would you like done? Have your attorney contact me. I would be happy to speak with him. By the way, who are you?

[Rob.Singer]

Red, whatever I said is simply what you've said previously about your vp play. So who are you anyway? And if you'd like, I'd be happy to train your attorney.

Alan & regnis, you're feeding the troll. Arci only keeps saying that nonsense to give him something to look forward to doing after the next monotonous task at his abode completes. The giveaway is in how his only retorts are claims that you'll lose it all in the future. Saying you won't because you will never bet that much again renders him tongue-tied. For instance, I had that streak a year ago where I hit very big on 4 winners. I haven't played anything near the $25 machines since, and I've actually kept winning albeit on lower levels. So he's stuck, and his only insinuations are that the wins are all "made up". Notice how he can't explain that either. Just that it is because he says it is. It is what all theorists rely upon, no matter how apparent the contrary facts are. And it is also what makes him look so foolish (something I'm sure he hears spoken every passing, boring day).

[regnis]

That was not what you said above. You simply mentioned a profit. To get a "meaningful one" is far from guaranteed on any trip to a casino I've ever seen. You could lose all you took to the casino, in fact, you probably will, without hitting a "meaningful one". Or are you special?




Well, if you can always hit a "meaningful win" then I can't understand why you won't go back real quick.



Maybe not "next time", but what about the next 10 times? Or, do you believe there is some magic win/loss goal god that guarantees you will obtain a "meaningful win" every time you play?

Arci--I have never claimed that I win at all in VP, let alone that I am special. I am only pointing out the ridiculous argument that you persist in making. On the one hand you say you shouldn't quit and take your profit. On the other hand, you tell me I will lose it all back if I keep playing or on my next trip.

White man speak with forked tongue.

I have never gone broke in a casino in 40 years of gambling. I have never lost all I had. It just might be because I know when to quit and cut my loss, and when to quit while ahead. Avoid the extremes and have some control and some plan as far as loss limits and win goals. It does not violate your set in stone math. It is simply common sense.

I should also point out---now don't get crazy--but there is no santa claus and no tooth fairy.

[Alan Mendelson]

It does not violate your set in stone math. It is simply common sense.

Simply brilliant way to put it.

[Alan Mendelson]

redietz, after consulting with some advisors, I want to take a look at the specific posts that you refer to here:

Well, Rob, who has never met me, never seen me gamble, never seen me play video poker, has drawn some conclusions about me and posted them on Alan's Best Buys Forum. The fact that these posts stay up is something for which I hold Alan Mendelson personally responsible.

I am doing that because of what appears to be a threat against me, perhaps for some sort of legal action.

I am also concerned that you are purposely trying to set me up for a lawsuit because you volunteered this information:

since I'm not Singing or Dancing or Scotting. I'm Dietz-ing, and that's a real name attached to a real business, as in Bob Dietz's Integrity Sports. It's really, really inappropriate to lie about somebody who's had to live up to that (admittedly semi-corny) name for 35 years.

You were not required to post with your real name, or to even mention the name of your business.

Once you cite the specific posts that you feel offended you, if I believe they are in fact personal attacks and not in the spirit of our forum, I will remove them. And at the same time I will have to permanently ban you from the forum because I can't risk that in the future someone might make a negative comment about you personally and your business and you might hold me personally responsible and bring legal action.

[arcimede$]

Arci--I have never claimed that I win at all in VP, let alone that I am special. I am only pointing out the ridiculous argument that you persist in making. On the one hand you say you shouldn't quit and take your profit.

I have never said any such thing. I can never understand why people need to lie.

On the other hand, you tell me I will lose it all back if I keep playing or on my next trip.

Never said that either.

White man speak with forked tongue.

It appears someone does.