Big Casino Wins and Jackpots

[redietz]

Rob has said, on these pages, that his systems were verified by three world class mathematicians. That's good enough for me.

Of course, it would be helpful if he occasionally named one or two.

[Rob.Singer]

Red, you're a true liberal, and of course you understand by now how your beliefs have been rejected by normal people.

No one but you has ever said the 3 math people who reviewed & commented on my strategy were "world class mathematicians". They were simply from Germany, China and the UAE, and I became friends with them on my travels to their countries. And I have provided their names multiple times over the years.

Facts like these have driven arci crazy and probably contributed more than he'd like to admit, to his health problems as of late. Of course he'll come on out of the blue and deny such issues, but that's what he does. You aren't far behind him in making up or twisting things just to feel better about them.

Suggest you get married in your declining years. Or does she despise gamblers....

[coach belly]

The more you play a -EV game, the more likely you are to lose.

Is the likelihood always the same, or does it change as you play more hands?

[redietz]

Red, you're a true liberal, and of course you understand by now how your beliefs have been rejected by normal people.

No one but you has ever said the 3 math people who reviewed & commented on my strategy were "world class mathematicians". They were simply from Germany, China and the UAE, and I became friends with them on my travels to their countries. And I have provided their names multiple times over the years.

Facts like these have driven arci crazy and probably contributed more than he'd like to admit, to his health problems as of late. Of course he'll come on out of the blue and deny such issues, but that's what he does. You aren't far behind him in making up or twisting things just to feel better about them.

Suggest you get married in your declining years. Or does she despise gamblers....

Rob, I know you're a precise writer, so where on this message board did you provide their names? I cannot find a mention. And what exactly is "math people?" Is that a new credential?

[mickeycrimm]

Rob, I know you're a precise writer, so where on this message board did you provide their names? I cannot find a mention. And what exactly is "math people?" Is that a new credential?

Rob's "mathematicians" are selling their systems in the roulette forums.

[mickeycrimm]

Let's assume that he will play the same number of hands as he did in his last session. Was the certainty of losing before his last session the same as it is before his next session?

Coach, I don't really look at it on a session by session basis. I look at the cost. You said Alan plays 8/5 Bonus Poker. I assume $5 denom. That's a $25 bet per hand. 8/5 BP has a 99.17% return. The royal pays 800 for 1 or $20,000.

The royal frequency with optimum strategy (I assume Alan try's to play perfectly) is 40,503. So the royal represents 1.98% of the payback (800/40,503). Subtracting 1.98% from 99.17% means a return of 97.19% between royals. That means Alan is taking a 2.81% loss rate between royals (100 minus 97.19).

Alan is betting $25 per hand. So 25 X 2.81% means the average cost to play a hand is 70.025 cents. Taking the royal odds, 40,503 and multiplying it by 70.025 cents means the average cost for Alan to produce the royal is $28,453. The royal only pays $20,000. So if, in the long run of things, the game averages out on Alan, then he is losing $8,453 for every royal he hits. The only thing Alan can do to overcome such a negative expectation is to get lucky. If he averages hitting a royal every 29,000 games he would break about even. And he would have to get very lucky indeed to pull that off.

[RS__]

Is the likelihood always the same, or does it change as you play more hands?

I know where you're headed with your crafty questions, so I'm not gonna waste my time explaining it. But the short answer: It's based on number of hands played, so yes--it changes if you're going to play more or fewer hands.

[Rob.Singer]

Rob, I know you're a precise writer, so where on this message board did you provide their names? I cannot find a mention. And what exactly is "math people?" Is that a new credential?

A long time ago here, on LVA Sports, and in an early 2000's GT column. Full names only it didn't matter. Most people on gambling forums have never been anywhere or done anything outside of going to casinos or take cruises on ships because they have casinos, so finding overseas contact info isn't their strong point.

"Math people" refers to anyone with a higher education in math, and who works in a field where math is used on a daily basis. For instance, I'm an EE with an MBA, and my working career required a math background. The 3 people I paid to review my strategy for input & comments were a math teacher and 2 engineers.

I'd have had Steve Bannon on the list if I knew him back then. Just to piss off crybaby liberals who don't know how to stop whining.

[Alan Mendelson]

When did you & company start taking everything so literally? If I say "The Falcons are going to win the super bowl" do you really believe I'm saying they are 100% guaranteed to win?

Thank you. Now we know everything has a bullshit factor.

[Alan Mendelson]

The only thing Alan can do to overcome such a negative expectation is to get lucky.

This is going to hurt. The only thing I have to do is quit when ahead.

On my last trip I was playing a combination of $5 and $25 8/5 Bonus. I quit after hitting several quads at $25 including small quads that paid $5,000. No royal was needed as the video poker share of my $16,500 win that weekend.

I also won at craps -- another negative expectation game. I quit when ahead. OMG that's gotta hurt.

[mickeycrimm]

This is going to hurt. The only thing I have to do is quit when ahead. On my last trip I was playing a combination of $5 and $25 8/5 Bonus. I quit after hitting several quads at $25 including small quads that paid $5,000. No royal was needed as the video poker share of my $16,500 win that weekend. I also won at craps -- another negative expectation game. I quit when ahead. OMG that's gotta hurt.

Alan, I'm glad you won. I hope you do more of it in the future.

[Alan Mendelson]

Alan, I'm glad you won. I hope you do more of it in the future.

Why not? It's very simple. When you get ahead, you quit. You go home. You take the money. Then you return to the casino with a limited budget and if you get ahead again, you quit again and go home and take the money.

The same luck that allows you to win when you have a +EV is the same luck that lets you win when you have a -EV game.

[redietz]

Warning: this is sexist and juvenile.

Alan, I'm thinking your "quitting when ahead" could have massive practical implications in other aspects of life. Imagine, if you will, breaking up with each woman after you got laid the first time. If you just kept "quitting when ahead," no hassles, no headaches, no splitting up of resources. Think about it.

You could write a book. Maybe a three-part series. Possibly an encyclopedia before you're done.

Rob wouldn't be able to contribute much. He's strictly Reader's Digest material.

So why haven't you been quitting when ahead in the important stuff?

[Alan Mendelson]

Alan, I'm thinking your "quitting when ahead" could have massive practical implications in other aspects of life. Imagine, if you will, breaking up with each woman after you got laid the first time. If you just kept "quitting when ahead," no hassles, no headaches, no splitting up of resources. Think about it.

There are people who don't want to be married exactly for those reasons -- both men and women.

As I meet women in my age group many of them have no intentions of getting married again because of the problems involved with assets and asset protection. Many older people want to protect their assets for their kids. They just want "boyfriends" or "girlfriends" without the "problems" that marriage creates.

[coach belly]

I know where you're headed with your crafty questions

I maintain that I am asking questions to gather information.

You keep insinuating that my questions are an attempt to lead you somewhere, that I'm trying to get you to say something.

Please share with the group...where are these questions headed?...what's my agenda?

[coach belly]

Coach, I don't really look at it on a session by session basis. I look at the cost.

I think I understand...you've explained expected value, and how it applies to the expected overall cost of playing.

I'm concerned with the ambiguity of the following phrase...

So if, in the long run of things, the game averages out

"in the long run of things"...what's that mean?

I'm more interested in the session, as defined by a number of hands played.

I assume that this has been determined through simulations...

Considering a session of 2400 hands (4 hours x 600 hph)...what percentage of sessions is a player expected to lose?

Assume 8/5 BP and a bankroll sufficient to cover a maximum loss in any session...12000 credits.

[Rob.Singer]

Alan what you're explaining about quitting when ahead is your most valuable info posted here. You recently won $16,500 on -EV games when you could have easily claimed how the games you were playing plus expected comps etc. etc. etc. really put all of them into +EV territory--and therefore, you continued to play and ended up losing all if it and more, because of some dumb notion that the play "was worth $75/hr." or something stupid like that . Ain't the "long-term" great!?

And the best part is the part the AP's just can't get a grip on....that it is very likely to happen again and again and again. Imagine "the math" failing in its attempt to keep you within the pages of the math books?

[quahaug]

I think I understand...you've explained expected value, and how it applies to the expected overall cost of playing.

I'm concerned with the ambiguity of the following phrase...



"in the long run of things"...what's that mean?

I'm more interested in the session, as defined by a number of hands played.

I assume that this has been determined through simulations...

Considering a session of 2400 hands (4 hours x 600 hph)...what percentage of sessions is a player expected to lose?

Assume 8/5 BP and a bankroll sufficient to cover a maximum loss in any session...12000 credits.

The answer depends on your win goal.

[jbjb]

Alan what you're explaining about quitting when ahead is your most valuable info posted here. You recently won $16,500 on -EV games when you could have easily claimed how the games you were playing plus expected comps etc. etc. etc. really put all of them into +EV territory--and therefore, you continued to play and ended up losing all if it and more, because of some dumb notion that the play "was worth $75/hr." or something stupid like that . Ain't the "long-term" great!?

And the best part is the part the AP's just can't get a grip on....that it is very likely to happen again and again and again. Imagine "the math" failing in its attempt to keep you within the pages of the math books?

He hasn't won shit! He's still in the hole from gambling. He'd have much more money if he just stayed home and NEVER gambled at all.

[redietz]

He hasn't won shit! He's still in the hole from gambling. He'd have much more money if he just stayed home and NEVER gambled at all.

Jbjb, Rob has different long term goals from the rest of us. I mean, think about it. Alan says he never has a winning year. He posts a win. Rob explains how what Alan just did is the key to winning.

It all makes perfect sense to those with IQs in the 400 range. To those around 150, it makes no sense at all. But that is the way of the world.