Big Casino Wins and Jackpots

[slingshot]

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.

Maybe if you had used the word "pause"....

[Rob.Singer]

I like the part where mickey pontificates about how many thousands Alan actually loses every time he hits a $20k royal

This is the kind of stuff redietz goes with before making his awkwardly worded comments.

[mickeycrimm]

I like the part where mickey pontificates about how many thousands Alan actually loses every time he hits a $20k royal .

It's simple math but goes right over Rob's head. Its the reason that through making hundreds of thousands of posts in the internet gambling forums you've never seen Rob put up one simple equation. Only the mathematically illiterate like Rob could come up with the idea of martingaling negative expectation video poker.

[mickeycrimm]

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.

I'm not set up to make such calculations, Coach. There are tools out there like Dunbar's Risk Analyzer that I don't have. My best guess would be 70% to 80% chance of have a losing session. Somewhere in there. BTW, I think I'll order DRA just to have it on hand.

[redietz]

Rob doesn't really do math, mickey. He studiously avoids it.

And Rob, you got the tense wrong describing mickey. Mickey pontificates about how many thousands Alan has actually LOST (past tense) every time he hits a 20K royal. Wise up.

[bocce ball]

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

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.

I'm confused about implementation. Let's say I've just finished a winning session. How do I know when I'm clear to begin a new one? I understand I have to go home, but what if I'm on a trip? Can I go to my hotel room instead?

[Rob.Singer]

Alan, best you try not to hit any more royals. The casino managers are hoping you hit at least 10 on every visit so they can count out how much they just made!

It's the new, liberal math. mickey and red say so.

[coach belly]

I'm confused about implementation. Let's say I've just finished a winning session. How do I know when I'm clear to begin a new one? I understand I have to go home, but what if I'm on a trip? Can I go to my hotel room instead?

This speaks to the claim that individual sessions do not exist, it's all one lifetime session...with pauses.

Although among APs, there seems to be a difference of opinion...

A session is however long it is from when you sit down to play until you leave.

there is no difference if you leave or stay.

[redietz]

Alan, best you try not to hit any more royals. The casino managers are hoping you hit at least 10 on every visit so they can count out how much they just made!

It's the new, liberal math. mickey and red say so.

Rob, this was pretty weak, man. I'm just telling you as a friend. It's hard to tout someone who hasn't had any winning years as an exemplar for your video poker priorities. I suggest going back to posting photos of your many jackpots.

[coach belly]

It's hard to tout someone who hasn't had any winning years as an exemplar for your video poker priorities.

I recall that Alan has stated, more than once, that he's had winning years at VP...which were mitigated by losing at craps.

[slingshot]

I'm confused about implementation. Let's say I've just finished a winning session. How do I know when I'm clear to begin a new one? I understand I have to go home, but what if I'm on a trip? Can I go to my hotel room instead?

This is from Rob's past articles per my words:
Of course you can- or go to a movie, or enjoy a meal. And what if you can't? Play at low denominations and resist the urge to go up in denominations until your compulsion subsides-anything to keep from giving back your winnings. The machines will always be there the next day. Harder to do than you think. I know.

[mickeycrimm]

This is from Rob's past articles per my words:
Of course you can- or go to a movie, or enjoy a meal. And what if you can't? Play at low denominations and resist the urge to go up in denominations until your compulsion subsides-anything to keep from giving back your winnings. The machines will always be there the next day. Harder to do than you think. I know.

Rob is advising not to go up in denomination? That's exactly what HE does when he is losing.

[bocce ball]

Rob is advising not to go up in denomination?

I assume the context is after a session has concluded with a win. After that point, you're free to play for fun at insignificant stakes.

[RS__]

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?

You're asking a question in one context then attempting to refute the given answer based on a different context. "Everything is one long session" is true, when it comes to calculating and figuring out how much you're expected to be up or down after a certain number of hands. In other words, 10 sessions of 500 hands or 1 session of 5,000 hands are both the same thing, when figuring out how much you should be up or down for those 5,000 hands (whether in one session or over 10 sessions).

By taking people's words out of context, you're trying to discredit them.

FWIW -- You can think of all of your play in your lifetime as being one big session. After all, isn't the goal to make money overall? Or are you & Rob & Alan more concerned about how frequently you have a winning session or trip, even if it means you're in the negative? I know some people who win very frequently, almost every session....the problem lies in the fact they lose way more on a losing trip than they end up winning...and overall, continue to lose on average.

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.

VPW shows a probability to win is 29.97%. Probability to lose is 69.77%.

This speaks to the claim that individual sessions do not exist, it's all one lifetime session...with pauses.

Although among APs, there seems to be a difference of opinion...

If you can't figure out what was being said in those quotes....I'm not sure what to say. Try reading them again until it sinks in. Let's start off with an easy question:

What's the difference between flipping a coin 1 time every day for 100 days versus flipping a coin 100 times in 1 day?

If you're really smart, try this one: How do those 2 compare to flipping a coin 10 times a day for 10 days?



What's funny (sad, actually), is every time Alan posts a $20k or $100k royal, a big craps win, or whatever else -- Rob pipes in saying something about "quitting when ahead" and that's how winners play, yada yada ya. The interesting part, of course, is that Alan is STILL DOWN life-time in gambling. You'd think with how much they say something like, "That's how a winner plays" that he'd actually be a winner.

Mickey already showed the math. I don't remember exactly what it was, but something along the lines of every time you hit a royal, it cost you $28,000 in losses to get that $20,000 win (for a net loss of $8,000). If this is what y'all consider to be a "win", then by all means, enjoy your -$8,000 "wins".

[slingshot]

I assume the context is after a session has concluded with a win. After that point, you're free to play for fun at insignificant stakes.

Three sessions are in the strategy if you don't reach a reasonable win goal. Just common sense. That's why he says to have a bankroll equal to 1200 credits of the highest denom you play. So three 400 credit sessions are max if you don't have a winning session. Loss limit. He will add info to serious inquiries.

[coach belly]

By taking people's words out of context, you're trying to discredit them.

My agenda is to discredit people? I don't think I've gone there...but I can tell that you're nervous about it.

From what you've written during this discussion, you are the pot calling the kettle black.

I know some people who win very frequently, almost every session....the problem lies in the fact they lose way more on a losing trip than they end up winning...and overall, continue to lose on average.

And what is the point of your anecdote? That a player can win frequently on -EV games? That he can quit while ahead for almost every session? And what then? The player is prevented from quitting after reaching a loss limit? The player must/will/is guaranteed to lose way more than he can win?

The interesting part, of course, is that Alan is STILL DOWN life-time in gambling.

Has he "ended up" losing, or is he still in the middle of his playing days, having so far been the victim of variance?

Mickey already showed the math. I don't remember exactly what it was, but something along the lines of every time you hit a royal, it cost you $28,000 in losses to get that $20,000 win (for a net loss of $8,000).

No you don't remember exactly what it was...he qualified his math..certain conditions must exist for the math to apply:

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.

I asked earlier...what's "in the long run of things" mean? It sounds ambiguous...undefined.

[mickeycrimm]

I asked earlier...what's "in the long run of things" mean? It sounds ambiguous...undefined.

It depends on the frequencies involved.

[coach belly]

It depends on the frequencies involved.

What does that mean?

[mickeycrimm]

I assume the context is after a session has concluded with a win. After that point, you're free to play for fun at insignificant stakes.

But Rob doesn't do that when he hits his win goal. He immediately leaves the casino and drives home. He sits at home with the money then drives back a week later and starts the progression all over again. According to Rob, after hitting your win goal, if you start the progression over again on the same day you will lose. You have to take the money home and sit with it for a week or the progression won't work.

Rob just explained recently how he mentored some guy, sat next to him while he played, and the guy came up with a $38,000 win. Rob told him to take the money home. But the guy wanted to start the progression all over again on the same day. Rob couldn't talk him out of it. Rob watched as the guy blew back $28,000 of the money. Rob didn't blame it on the failure of the progression to work. He blamed it on the guy not taking the money home and sitting with it for a week before coming back and starting the progression again. If the guy would have just went home with the money and came back a week later he would have surely won again.

[jbjb]

Coach, read and try to understand these terms. Although they are on a blackjack site, they pertain to any gambling game, negative or positive EV in nature.

https://www.blackjackapprenticeship....dvantage-play/