Here's what I don't get. I don't claim to be a vp specialist, but I can keep up with where I'm at and know when to use a special play-it's just common sense. And Alan, you just confirmed you know too, so why the big to do about when he held the kicker in tdbp.? And this from me- someone who badly needs a day job.
My idea is better. Keep track of your next ten trips to a casino and report back on the number of trips you were ahead by at least one bet during the trip. And if you're only making one bet per trip I guess you'll have to be very lucky to be ahead 95% of the visits.Originally Posted by quahaug
You actually played it at a casino? Or did you play it on some computer? World of difference.Originally Posted by arcimede$
I have a video with Rob where he says he doesn't hold kickers. Then he posts a picture of a $50,000 win holding a kicker. That is a bit surprising don't you think? It really makes you wonder if he follows his own strategy or even if that was a picture of his own jackpot? And this is why his method can't be simulated.Originally Posted by slingshot
No. He kept up with where he was at in the strategy-WAY behind-and the only way, short of the kicker coming out by chance, was to hold the kicker. The strategy is as flexible as the mind of the player. He should have lost his ass, but he gave the hand a CHANCE to happen.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Last edited by slingshot; 10-29-2015 at 09:09 PM.
Once again Alan, I know that bothers you, but you have to fully understand every aspect of the strategy if you're going to either criticize it properly or play it successfully. It is not easy for sure, but it wasn't an easy or quick task developing something that consistently wins against the unforgiving game of vp.
This thread has split off into a couple of related issues, which I think is okay if we understand and keep the subjects different.
First, this was supposed to be about "quitting when ahead."
Then the subject of simulating the Rob Singer strategy was brought up.
Third we are back to discussing holding the kicker.
It is easy to see that simulating the Rob Singer strategy is difficult because of when to make the decision of when to hold and when to not hold a kicker. Again, look at what Rob said here in video #16: http://alanbestbuys.com/id195.html
I can understand why Rob would now say to hold the kicker sometimes and not hold the kicker other times, and I accept that. More importantly this is a key reason why the Singer System can't be simulated -- UNLESS Rob can specifically set down on paper WHEN to hold the kicker and when not to? So I will ask: ROB, CAN YOU SPECIFICALLY TELL US WHEN TO HOLD THE KICKER AND WHEN NOT TO HOLD THE KICKER? (And by the way, I think video #16 needs to be corrected or changed now.)
And getting back to the main question:
I haven't simulated how many times I should be ahead by at least one bet when I play, but I do know this: ABOUT 90% TO 95% OF THE TIMES I PLAY I AM SHOWING A PROFIT AT SOME POINT. I invite all of you to put your simulations aside and just keep track of your own play.
I will honor your request, since I do it automatically-but I will do it so as to report it. I have been thinking about wording, and the best I came up with is the strategy is as flexible as the mind of the player.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I wonder if the "math guys" will bother to keep track of their play during their next ten or twenty casino visits to see if they were ahead at some point? Of course we all have to be patient for the reports as we all don't go to casinos every day.
With that said, I would be very surprised if our "advantage players" here tell us they weren't ahead 100% of the time. After all, they are always playing with an advantage, aren't they?
I swear, you're mentally retarded.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
If we make a bet that you can flip a coin and it lands on heads 5 times in a row (2^5 or 1/32 chance), then I'd pay you 33:1....you'd be playing with an advantage, but you certainly wouldn't be winning every session (unless you play very long sessions). Most of the time when playing VP with an advantage, you play with a disadvantage up front, and all the gains (making it +EV) come in down the road in the future. Not to mention the variance in VP is astronomical compared to what you probably think it's like. Alan, you being someone who talks about knowing how stuff work (playing with an advantage, for example), sure know very little about what you're even talking about.
For the record. My session yesterday was never positive. The closest I got was being at -$25 ($5 denom on BP) after hitting a 4oak. I was actually keeping track to see if I'd ever go positive...never did. Session earlier today and later today, both showed a profit at least one point in time.
#1: never
#2: positive at least once
#3: positive at least once
I like this game.
What's it going to prove again, Alan?
RS___ do you think you'd be suspended over at the Wizard's forum? I think so.Originally Posted by RS__
But what is so difficult about being ahead by one bet in 90% of the visits you make to a casino? Is it really flipping a coin so it lands on its head-side five times in a row?
Let me clue you in, and all of the rest of you math experts: people get up out of their seats and leave with small profits all the time. You know who doesn't? The "experts" who think they have to play four hours a day, or a certain number of hands, or have to reach a certain tier score -- they're the ones who can't get up out of their seats.
Little old ladies who hit a winner to pay for the buffet know how to get out of their seats all the time with a ten dollar victory.
No one said EVERY session has to be positive. Heck, I've had sessions where I've lost 20 hands in a row at $5 Aces and Faces -- 20 hands without even a pair of Jacks. But I've played enough to know that 90% to 95% of my casino visits I've been ahead at some point.
Since you said you're a dealer at craps, tell us this: has any player at your craps table ever shown a profit for even one roll of the dice? Don't you dare tell me that everyone is a loser from the first bet that they make.
What it proves is that proper money management can make you a winner. Even at a -EV game you will have those wins that if you allow yourself to keep will give you an overall profit. Learn to quit when ahead.Originally Posted by RS__
Alan, once again, you've misinterpreted my post (or else you failed to read it).
I am fully aware you'll be showing a profit at some point in a session for a majority of your sessions. I even said so earlier in this thread (or perhaps the other thread).
Your post insinuated that [you believe] playing with an advantage = winning every session.
What's this? ... do you mean you advantage players aren't winning every session? OMGOriginally Posted by RS__
No, we're not. I can't tell if you're joking though...Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Relax, I'm joking.Originally Posted by RS__
But seriously, keep track. Tell me the percentage of times you are ahead at any point during a casino visit. If you can, add up the high points of your profitable times, and deduct from them your losses. See if you would have won more money if you somehow knew when you were at your peak of each session and cashed out then. Compare that to your actual results.
The point is too many players do have profits during their session that they fail to pocket and take out of the casino. This is part of Rob's strategy which to me makes good sense. I regret those many times I was ahead by $500 or $3,500 that I didn't leave.
I think what everyone is missing is this.. Robs 'special' plays are nothing more then a Hail Mary hoping to dig him out of a hole his 'system' dug him into.. he was so far down even quad queens wouldn't have dug him out for that 'session'.. so this ONE time he got lucky and got the royal.. how often does that happen ??
[QUOTE=Alan Mendelson;32888] breaking up trip queens with three to the royal is another special play when he was really showing a deep, deep loss at the $25/coin level.
JustaDiamind is now justa-seven-star..
Video 16 is normal play when even 4 A's will give a nice SECONDARY jackpot-your words.Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
"What it proves is that proper money management can make you a winner."
At negative EV games, this is just wrong. Blatantly wrong. Utterly wrong. Obviously wrong. Sports is a -110 problem; your losing wagers pay a 10% penalty. What Alan is saying is that proper money management can overcome this. Proper money management, however byzantine, elaborate, "strong," cannot overcome this. In video poker, the house edge is 1% or thereabouts for most games. Money management, similarly, cannot overcome this.
The claim that it can is just completely wrong.
I'm no fan of the Wizard's forum, or people waxing eloquent about having massive edges against the house, or obsessions with hole card peeking, or people who ignore the gritty realities of playing in real casinos, but I have to say something when folks say they can circumvent probability. No, you can't circumvent probability. Games of opinion (horse racing, sports) are separate issues. But video poker is not.
Last edited by redietz; 10-30-2015 at 08:14 AM.
Look again. #16 is about holding 222 and dropping the kicker. #15 is about holding AAA and dropping the kicker.Originally Posted by slingshot
However, in conventional strategy you always hold the kicker in Triple Double Bonus.
We don't know if his "system" got him into that big hole. I get into a big hole sometimes and I don't play Rob's way. Perhaps Rob will tell us if he got into that big hole because of conventional strategy or his own special plays that failed him. Is that what you're asking?Originally Posted by JustaDiamind
Remember, Rob says he makes special plays only about 5% of the time. The rest of his play is conventional video poker strategy.
Before I did that series of videos with him Rob was with me in the high limit room at Caesars watching me play. The only "tips" he gave me were "conventional strategy tips." Never did he suggest a special play. All of his tips were the same that would be given by Dancer or Grochowski or any conventional online strategy guide.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote