Increasing denominations anomoly

[Rob.Singer]

Up above in a post of yours you put the exact identification of a cold cycle in [B][I]Bold Italics[I][B] and I would write the same thing here if I knew how to cut & paste on this phone. Maybe you didn't understand the part about completing the FOUR CARD DEALT ST's, FH's, FL's, SF's, or RF's on the one card draws--at the same time within approx. 100 hands never turning a RAZGU into a winner of any kind? That does not mean there are no other winners being produced via other manners during that clump of hands, nor does it mean that there are zero winners.

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob I still don't understand how a machine giving you a bunch of two pair and 3oaks hands is "cold machine." In JOB or Bonus getting two pair doubles your money. Give me a bunch of two pair and I can turn a nice profit.

In fact, just the other night at Pechanga I took $100 of their "free play" to a Bonus machine and getting only two-pairs and one 3oak I was able to cash out $115 and went to the next casino for more free play action.

I think we have different definitions of what a "cold cycle" is.

[Rob.Singer]

If you have a different definition of what a true programmed-in cold cycle is than what I've explained it is, then what you're thinking of it is is nothing more than random fluctuation. And it is not my definition, as I've said.


"A bunch" means nothing more than multiple occurrences. You're over-simplifying when you say 2 prs. can give you a nice winner. All winners combined, including high pairs, make up less than 50% of all hands, so it is extremely unlikely getting enough 2 prs. & trips will ever produce a winning session of 100 hands.

Besides, that's not what this is about and you seem unable to grasp it while clouding you thoughts with things I don't think I've said. Stick with the explanation, visualize it in your mind as those failed 4 card hold/draw conversions combined with RAZGUS that do not produce any winners on the draw, and just think about that. Other winners may well enter into those 100 hands as will other losers. So what. This is a cold cycle as programmed into the machines. And it does not at all mean the cycle is over after the 100 hands. The 100 hands are only the indicator, and the cold cycle will continue in whatever way until the machine return gets back within its safety zone so it does not go under its pre-determined hold %.

[Alan Mendelson]

Sorry Rob, you lost me on this one. I just don't buy into your definition of a "cold cycle" when the machine is also delivering other types of winners.

I've had cold cycles when Ive lost 20 hands in a row without even a high pair to give me money back. Those runs of 20 losing hands in a row is what I define as a "cold cycle."

What you define as a cold cycle -- hitting pairs and 3oaks -- sometimes can make me very happy.

[Rob.Singer]

You're still not getting it. The situation I explained is the INDICATOR that you are entering a cold cycle, and is not the entire cycle by any means. You can lose every hand or even be dealt four Aces during those 100 hands. Why are you so concerned with two pair or trips? What is won or lost during this phenomena is irrelevant. And once again, this is not MY definition of a cold cycle. It's the software engineer's. I have done exceptionally well over the years-partially because I believed him and understood him & experienced the occurrence and changed machines whenever this occurred. I believe your results would improve as well if you only had the desire to comprehend this and the fortitude to actually change machines when signalled.

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob, I don't get it because I don't understand what you're talking about. Are you trying to tell me I have to wait through 100 of these misses just to know that I am entering a cold cycle? But in the meantime I'm getting plenty of pairs and even quad aces?? I'm sorry, but -- just as you say -- I'm still not getting it.

[Rob.Singer]

Let's see if I can explain the same thing a different way. You are playing an hour, and suddenly the 100-hand cold cycle indicator begins in this manner: Within those 100 hands you see multiple four card FH's, flushes and straights dealt--and maybe a four-to-the-royal or SF....and you don't convert any of them on the draw. Also within those 100 hands, you experience one or more RAZGUS that do not improve to any winner(s) on the draw. THAT IS THE INDICATION THAT YOU HAVE ENTERED A COLD CYCLE. How long that cold cycle lasts after those 100 hands is unknown and is based on where the machine is in its hold percentage. Also, within those 100 hands may be all kinds of winners received any way but by drawing the 5th card or after being dealt a RAZGU, or you may receive a bunch of losers.

Now where or what don't you understand? I see it as something very easy to comprehend. If you still can't understand it then you may not want to get it. Your last question is so far from what I've explained that I can't tell if you've read everything thus far.

[Alan Mendelson]

OK Rob, I understand that. Now in my experience I have never gone through 100 hands where I had a 4 card FH, flush, or straight without converting. I guess that means I never had a cold streak. I also guess that means that I lost (because I've never had a winning year playing video poker) just playing normal machines with a normal distribution.

But with that said, I've certainly sat down at machines and lost on ten or fifteen or even 20 hands in a row without even hitting a paying pair. And that's cold enough, thank you.

[quahaug]

Alan, try not to take this the wrong way. You seem to be a good guy but sometimes you are an idiot.

[Alan Mendelson]

First quahaug, thank you for joining and for posting. I just don't think you have to go through "100 hands" as Rob describes them to say you are at a "cold machine." Losing just 20 hands is frigid enough for me.

But Rob says you might still lose those 4-card conversions over 100 hands but still be getting quads and trips and two pairs, and that makes no sense to me. Are you saying that only missing 4-card conversions defines a "cold machine" but being dealt quads, or hitting quads with holding only a pair while missing those 4-card conversions doesn't count?

Honestly, what I am doing is challenging the entire concept of "cold machines." All of the machines I sit at in a casino are usually at room temperature. My problem with most casinos is that they keep the air conditioning on full blast and I am forced to wear a jacket in the casino even on hot summer days. When the machines are under the AC vents, the machines tend to be cold.

Other than that, I don't think the RNGs can sense the outside temperatures.

Getting back to my original point: losing 20 hands in a row without even hitting a paying pair is cold enough for me.

[Rob.Singer]

OK Rob, I understand that. Now in my experience I have never gone through 100 hands where I had a 4 card FH, flush, or straight without converting. I guess that means I never had a cold streak. I also guess that means that I lost (because I've never had a winning year playing video poker) just playing normal machines with a normal distribution.

But with that said, I've certainly sat down at machines and lost on ten or fifteen or even 20 hands in a row without even hitting a paying pair. And that's cold enough, thank you.

You mean that with all the times you've played and for as long as you play on many of your casino visits, you can actually say you've never had a time where within 100 hands of vp you know absolutely that these hands did not appear? If that's the case you're certainly a far better player--and luckier--than I not to have been at a machine such as this.

On the flip side, you're a good player who understands the cards better than many when playing--and you have a bankroll. It is exactly that kind of player that I have been able to turn into a consistent winner from a perrennial loser over the years. A lesson on strong casino discipline, a learning experience on how not to just foolishly give away a portion of your machine winnings in tips, a solid understanding without a fear of using all the special plays which deviate from expert strategy, how to break the casino-induced habit of not using casino ATM's or casino credit/check cashing privileges, the extreme advantages of only playing SDBP or TBP+ as the advanced BP game, and how to learn to detect certain machine cycles while being willing and able to change machines....is just what you need to complete your playing experience in a positive way.

[Alan Mendelson]

Rob, you're changing your statement now.... You just wrote:

You mean that with all the times you've played and for as long as you play on many of your casino visits, you can actually say you've never had a time where within 100 hands of vp you know absolutely that these hands did not appear?

Rob, I've had plenty of 4-card draws that have missed, but I've never missed them all in 100 times. Unless I read you incorrectly, you earlier said that your cold cycle is determined by missing these 4-card draws consistently for 100 hands. This is what you originally wrote:

Within about 100 hands, if you find you're not converting the card that'll fill in the four card straight, flush, full house, SF, or RF even once while never getting at least a high pair on any of your sweeps, then you are in a cold cycle,

The key phrase in your statement was "even once."

I've missed 4-card draws and I've made 4-card draws. But I never missed 100 4-card draws in a row.

Now, do you care to restate your comment about what constitutes a cold cycle?

[Rob.Singer]

Alan, after reading your response to quo I see you're still a million miles away from understanding. It may be because you've seen too much losing lately and just aren't allowing yourself to grasp what a real cold cycle is--I really can't say.

Just read this and try to get it: THE PHENOMENA DESCRIBED WITHIN THOSE 100 HANDS IS NOT THE ACTUAL COLD CYCLE, BUT THE INDICATION THAT YOU ARE ENTERING A COLD CYCLE THAT CAN LAST ANY AMOUNT OF HANDS AFTER THOSE 100 HANDS.

Why are you still trying to tell yourself that the cold cycle IS those 100 hands? Why does it not make sense to you that IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT ANY OF THE OTHER HANDS ARE SURROUNDING THE FAILED CONVERSIONS WITHIN THOSE 100 HANDS? Ignore what you've seen as losing spells or whatever. They are irrelevant to this discussion and only serve to confuse you.

[Alan Mendelson]

Alan, after reading your response to quo I see you're still a million miles away from understanding. It may be because you've seen too much losing lately and just aren't allowing yourself to grasp what a real cold cycle is--I really can't say.

Just read this and try to get it: THE PHENOMENA DESCRIBED WITHIN THOSE 100 HANDS IS NOT THE ACTUAL COLD CYCLE, BUT THE INDICATION THAT YOU ARE ENTERING A COLD CYCLE THAT CAN LAST ANY AMOUNT OF HANDS AFTER THOSE 100 HANDS.

Why are you still trying to tell yourself that the cold cycle IS those 100 hands? Why does it not make sense to you that IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT ANY OF THE OTHER HANDS ARE SURROUNDING THE FAILED CONVERSIONS WITHIN THOSE 100 HANDS? Ignore what you've seen as losing spells or whatever. They are irrelevant to this discussion and only serve to confuse you.

Rob, think of it this way: I don't care if I miss all of the 4 hold card draws (1 card draw) in the world, as long as winners are being dealt to me or if my 3 hold card draws are converting. As a matter of fact, most of the Royals I got in my life came from holding only 3 cards. Twice I was dealt a royal. Once I got a royal on a five card draw. Twice I got a royal holding two cards. Twice I got a royal holding one card. Yes, Ive also gotten royals holding four cards.

But I cannot accept your premise that "cold cycles" are determined by missing one card after a four hold card draws. That makes no sense to me.

[Rob.Singer]

I give up Alan, you're simply too far into your own versions of cold streaks and refuse to read most of what I've told you with any understanding. What you choose to believe is not the issue here: I'm simply trying to help you understand what was passed on to me from a machine programmer for the purpose of maybe helping your results.

I'm sorry, but if you worked for me I'd have to fire you for the good of the company

And as I shake my head, where have I ever said these failed conversions have to occur 100 times....

[redietz]

I think I actually grasped some of this -- it's the lack of conversions that allegedly indicates that a "cold cycle" is either underway or imminent. It's not the quality of the hands surrounding the lack of conversions.

[Alan Mendelson]

In normal play, you will lack conversions -- and you will make some. Saying that a lack of conversions on 1 card draws makes no sense if you are converting hands with 2 or more card draws.

[redietz]

Ok, Alan, I see what you're saying now. Now I guess I understand the debate; I was lost there for a bit.

[quahaug]

Hey Rob, Alan did something no one else could or ever will do again. He put you and arci on the same side of an argument. HAHA!

[quahaug]

Alan the bottom line is you and Rob are talking about two different things. Your confusing a run of bad luck with a programed cold cycle. The former is a result of randomness, the latter is predetermined and according to what he says will probably be much longer of a losing "streak" if you don't get your butt outa that seat.