Have you ever been up 25% of your bankroll?

[jbjb]

There is a lot of value in quitting when ahead. You might never beat a negative expectation game, but nothing beats and there is nothing wrong with leaving the casino with a profit. I would never criticize anyone who left the casino after being ahead.

Sure there's value in it. But you guys with these "stop wins" seen to think that because you have a predetermined point to PAUSE your play that you'll magically get there every time.

[mickeycrimm]

Question for Mickey: why must Rob hit his win goal in one hand?

I would think that is what his special plays are all about. When given a choice he takes the draw that gives him the chance-IF IT HITS-to make his win goal. The only thing is, from the example I gave above, he could hit his win goal with either of the two diffrent draws. So which one does he choose?

[jbjb]

Question for Mickey: why must Rob hit his win goal in one hand?

If he uses "special plays" to get to his predetermined "win stop", he should ONLY go for royals from hand #1. So, if dealt 6d, 9h, Qs, Qd, Jc, he should hold the Jc only!! Why? Because holding the QQ will not get him to that goal.

[Alan Mendelson]

Sure there's value in it. But you guys with these "stop wins" seen to think that because you have a predetermined point to PAUSE your play that you'll magically get there every time.

Not true. We also have loss limits.

[jbjb]

Not true. We also have loss limits.

Ok then. We both play next to each other and quit down the exact same amount. You leave and go home because you hit your "loss limit." I sit there doing nothing and just wait. You come back another day and I'm still there and we start again. What's the difference? Again, there is no difference if you leave or stay. Same goes goes for win goals. Both are nonsense on -EV games, PERIOD!!

[Rob.Singer]

Big difference. Greed kills, addiction fosters greed, and it doesn't matter one bit if it's an 8/5 BP game or an 11/5 BP one.

[redietz]

Rob, as far as machine play goes, I think most research suggests that greed doesn't much enter into the equation nowadays. People don't expect to win. They play to get into a kind of hypnotic zone.

[mickeycrimm]

Big difference. Greed kills, addiction fosters greed, and it doesn't matter one bit if it's an 8/5 BP game or an 11/5 BP one.

Rob, you often wrote that you went the casino once a week to put your play down. What if there were two Rob Singers. Rob Singer A goes to the casino once a week, Rob Singer B goes to the casino once every two weeks. Would Rob Singer B call Rob Singer A a greedy addicted gambler?

[jbjb]

Rob would chase losses on the 8/5 game claiming to beat it while we would flat the 11/5 game and clean up. Naturally he'd call us stupid for doing so...

[redietz]

Big difference. Greed kills, addiction fosters greed, and it doesn't matter one bit if it's an 8/5 BP game or an 11/5 BP one.

The 8/5 versus 11/5 statement is quite non-rational. In fact, each component of the statement is incorrect.

As in: "Greed kills," but Rob loves Trump, who has been in 3500 lawsuits with subcontractors. Maybe "greed kills others" would be a better motto.

As in: addiction fosters greed. Maybe addiction to things or services. But most people do not play video poker to win money. They play it to "win" zone time.

As in: if Rob really believes playing an 8/5 versus 11/5 doesn't matter, well, in one case you're winning money and in the other case you are losing money. For some folks, that means something. Rob may have a different definition of "winning," which would explain how he has won each year since 1996.

[Alan Mendelson]

I think Rob's point is this: a $1000 profit on a 7/5 game is the same as a $1000 profit on an 8/5 game as it is on an 11/5 game. If he is playing only for a profit, then walking after reaching that profit is all that matters.

Yes, it is more likely we would make that profit on the 11/5 game. Rob would agree but he doesn't say that. I know he would agree because he says he plays the best pay table available.

As far as the greed comment: playing the best pay table doesn't mean you'll win. We all agree, don't we? Rob is also saying there is a risk of giving back in the same session that which you just won, so he leaves with a big win.

I think Rob is just reflecting on what we have all experienced: we should have quit when ahead.
Of course there are some of you "super players" who never lose, so "quitting when ahead" is meaningless to you. The concept of "quitting when ahead" applies to us mere mortals.

[RS__]

I think Rob's point is this: a $1000 profit on a 7/5 game is the same as a $1000 profit on an 8/5 game as it is on an 11/5 game. If he is playing only for a profit, then walking after reaching that profit is all that matters.

Yes, it is more likely we would make that profit on the 11/5 game. Rob would agree but he doesn't say that. I know he would agree because he says he plays the best pay table available.

As far as the greed comment: playing the best pay table doesn't mean you'll win. We all agree, don't we? Rob is also saying there is a risk of giving back in the same session that which you just won, so he leaves with a big win.

I think Rob is just reflecting on what we have all experienced: we should have quit when ahead.
Of course there are some of you "super players" who never lose, so "quitting when ahead" is meaningless to you. The concept of "quitting when ahead" applies to us mere mortals.

What? Who is a "super player"? If anything, Rob describes himself as a "super player" of sorts.

[redietz]

I need to pause a moment to soak this all in. Rob says to quit when ahead. Rob has not had a losing year since 1996. So Rob has, in a sense, always been ahead. Shouldn't he have quit a gazillion times?

[Alan Mendelson]

I need to pause a moment to soak this all in. Rob says to quit when ahead. Rob has not had a losing year since 1996. So Rob has, in a sense, always been ahead. Shouldn't he have quit a gazillion times?

He hasn't had a losing year because he did quit when ahead.

[jbjb]

He hasn't had a losing year because he did quit when ahead.

Can you verify this with facts? If no, then it's hearsay.

[mickeycrimm]

I think Rob is just reflecting on what we have all experienced: we should have quit when ahead.
Of course there are some of you "super players" who never lose, so "quitting when ahead" is meaningless to you. The concept of "quitting when ahead" applies to us mere mortals.

Pausing when ahead so much or behind so much is a strategy for negative expectation players. I dont' have a problem with it. It's a harmless strategy. But for positive expectation players the recurring sum of net edge times volume equals the earn. In short, the more time I put in on the play the more I make. But even positive expectation players pause. I have to go to the restroom sometime, I have to eat sometime, I have to get some sleep sometime, I get tired sometimes. I might have a schedule where I only play 4 or five hours a day.

So I pause too. But for different reasons than the negative expectation stop win/stop loss crowd.

[jbjb]

Pausing when ahead so much or behind so much is a strategy for negative expectation players. I dont' have a problem with it. It's a harmless strategy. But for positive expectation players the recurring sum of net edge times volume equals the earn. In short, the more time I put in on the play the more I make. But even positive expectation players pause. I have to go to the restroom sometime, I have to eat sometime, I have to get some sleep sometime, I get tired sometimes. I might have a schedule where I only play 4 or five hours a day.

So I pause too. But for different reasons than the negative expectation stop win/stop loss crowd.

Exactly. But this flys over their heads and under their feet. And the notion that we never lose is ludicrous. We've been crushed on plays many times.

[Alan Mendelson]

Pausing when ahead so much or behind so much is a strategy for negative expectation players. I dont' have a problem with it. It's a harmless strategy. But for positive expectation players the recurring sum of net edge times volume equals the earn. In short, the more time I put in on the play the more I make. But even positive expectation players pause. I have to go to the restroom sometime, I have to eat sometime, I have to get some sleep sometime, I get tired sometimes. I might have a schedule where I only play 4 or five hours a day.

So I pause too. But for different reasons than the negative expectation stop win/stop loss crowd.

Thank you. For once, a well thought out response.

I wish I could find games with a positive expectation to play all the time. Even when I do have a "positive expectation" because of free play and bonuses, it doesn't last. For example, there are only 500 hands of $1 video poker to play when I have $500 free play.

Only once in my life did I find a video poker game with a positive pay table -- it was at Primm -- and it was only because of a bonus promotion on the royal.

Unlike the "super players" I don't have a team that can scout out and find positive expectation games to play all the time, I can't be in a casino 24/7, I can't scout out the dealers at table games who unknowingly show their cards, and the other "advantage plays" that have made these "super players" so rich.

[jbjb]

Unlike the "super players" I don't have a team that can scout out and find positive expectation games to play all the time, I can't be in a casino 24/7, I can't scout out the dealers at table games who unknowingly show their cards, and the other "advantage plays" that have made these "super players" so rich.

You don't need a team. You just don't want to do these things, which is ok. Me personally, I'd rather walk around looking for them then to just "plop" (pun intended) at a favorite machine or table. It's about making money. Not having fun.

[Alan Mendelson]

jbjb you are a super player. I can't do what you do. I have to work a tedious, daily job and scratch out a living.