Putting your faith in "the math." Really???

[slingshot]

The special plays should only be used when the opportunity is there for a session-ending hit, UNLESS the deal gets you to you first goal, which in this case is a mini-win goal. Remember, there are also session & trip win goal I use with ARTT, and that FH can mean a lot to both of those. Yes four Aces means you probably quit for the day, but greed comes into play since a goal has already been hit along with a little bonus. I only leave/change machines if it becomes uncomfortable to continue on for whatever reason, or if I detect that it's in a cold cycle--which in this case isn't very likely given the dealt FH.

Ok-I can see that. I don't see the greed part. I see it as using the best opportunity available to hit the session-ending win and since there's a possibility it's in a hot cycle-or somewhere near it-I will further be able to start again at my lowest denom on the next hand if it doesn't hit. But you're right-a 25 credit win at those levels is also a good win.

[arcimede$]

Alan says: "It is not an issue about machines being totally random." and "You don't know when hot or cold cycles will start and stop, you cannot predict the next hand."

Guess what, the reason you don't know is because the machines are random. The hot/cold cycles are inherent in randomness. Anyone who flips a coin will see streaks of several heads or several tails. Is the coin hot/cold? Of course not. It's just how randomness operates. Of course, this facilitates making silly claims about machines which less than honest people might take advantage of.

[Rob.Singer]

Slingshot, if your looking for something logical, forget it. You won't get that from Singer.

Singer is the only one who seems to think that SIMPLE mathematics has changed in the last 50 years. I guess he must think Einstein was a real dolt since he had to work with mathematics 50 years before that. To anyone with half a brain they can tell that Singer is lying. Does anyone really believe that simple math used to be computed differently? Well, I suppose the suckers Singer's looking for might believe, but not anyone with any common sense at all.

And now, he's going to run to his silly "cold cycle" detection nonsense. Absolutely hilarious. I wonder how the "math" for that is figured into this strategy. Bwah haha haha haha haha

And this epic flow of "logic"....from someone who moved to LV DELETED. STOP IT

[slingshot]

Slingshot, if your looking for something logical, forget it. You won't get that from Singer.

Singer is the only one who seems to think that SIMPLE mathematics has changed in the last 50 years. I guess he must think Einstein was a real dolt since he had to work with mathematics 50 years before that. To anyone with half a brain they can tell that Singer is lying. Does anyone really believe that simple math used to be computed differently? Well, I suppose the suckers Singer's looking for might believe, but not anyone with any common sense at all.

And now, he's going to run to his silly "cold cycle" detection nonsense. Absolutely hilarious. I wonder how the "math" for that is figured into this strategy. Bwah haha haha haha haha

What closes one mind opens another.

[Vegas Vic]

They're not secrets Vic. By your own admission and to paraphrase your meaning, it took a genius to develop such a strategy. With there being no one else like me in the industry, naturally the strategy won't be easy for any player to learn without me teaching them at the machines--or possibly, via video and a question/answer session afterwards.
Dancer's a public figure who puts himself out there by lying in his columns, pounding his sunken chest on the forums, and pretending to be a success playing vp when his only success is in the vp business. Arci's home medical issues are courtesy of a well-documented history of his poor choices and habitual behavior in gambling. And as you've seen, several people don't agree that the full-time RV lifestyle in retirement is so fabulous. We think it is and we believe there's no more fabulous a way to spend these years, if both are in good health and the finances are adequate.

Translation: "Vic, I can't explain in writing what I blather about in person, because then I'd be held to my word, and heaven forbid, that's the one thing I do my best to avoid. Things in writing can come back to haunt, ya know. I use the word "genius" a lot, but perhaps I'm blowing my horn again inasmuch even a "genius" would be able to formulate the words in a succinct manner and teach others. After all, Einstein didn't explain the Theory of Relativity in person or via video to everyone interested in it, now did he. But you see, my "genius quotient" is off the charts and Einstein and his theory crap is in my rear view mirror if you catch my drift.

Concerning the others, Dancer is public and I am public, but the difference is Bob is capable of explaining his VP methods in detail, and me...I'm capable of everything but. Can't help it...it's that genius thing. Arci? Well, I just enjoy being mean spirited and boastful whenever I can find someone who doesn't measure up to my lifestyle. Sure, there are others who are less fortunate in life for whatever reason, but you know what? I don't care. I'm a genius."

[Alan Mendelson]

the difference is Bob is capable of explaining his VP methods in detail, "

Rob did post that he was going to explain things in a lengthy post, if I recall, in October. Rather than criticize now, why don't we wait to see just what he does post? This will be a learning experience for all.

I only know a couple of things about Rob's beliefs and strategies and play.

I know some basics about special plays, I know his win goal system but I question it, and I know his beliefs about non random machines and I question that too. But I have no knowledge about his overall systems like SPS, SRTT, etc.

I'm willing to be patient to see what he comes up with. Either he will convert some people into seeing it his way, or he might give his opponents more reason to criticize him. Either way, waiting is a "no lose" proposition for everyone.

[arcimede$]

Yes, we are all waiting breathlessly to see how Singer proves that 2+2=5. Then again, some of us actually already know it doesn't and, in fact, might be much closer to 4 Waiting for someone to try and prove an impossibility is nothing but a complete and total waste of time. However, I do expect many from the flat earth society to be on pins and needles awaiting this disclosure.

[Rob.Singer]

Translation: "Vic, I can't explain in writing what I blather about in person, because then I'd be held to my word, and heaven forbid, that's the one thing I do my best to avoid. Things in writing can come back to haunt, ya know. I use the word "genius" a lot, but perhaps I'm blowing my horn again inasmuch even a "genius" would be able to formulate the words in a succinct manner and teach others. After all, Einstein didn't explain the Theory of Relativity in person or via video to everyone interested in it, now did he. But you see, my "genius quotient" is off the charts and Einstein and his theory crap is in my rear view mirror if you catch my drift.

Concerning the others, Dancer is public and I am public, but the difference is Bob is capable of explaining his VP methods in detail, and me...I'm capable of everything but. Can't help it...it's that genius thing. Arci? Well, I just enjoy being mean spirited and boastful whenever I can find someone who doesn't measure up to my lifestyle. Sure, there are others who are less fortunate in life for whatever reason, but you know what? I don't care. I'm a genius."

Now you're comparing me to Einstein. This stuff is well below his capability.

And Vic, the reason I like explaining things in person is because the math-oriented people, the gurus, and most players are mostly incompetent when it comes to understanding what's behind this, and all they'd do is what a confused arci has done for years out of his frustration with not being able to comprehend it: namecall, exhibit raging envy (as you are prone to doing) lie, and look up terms and theories on the Internet to kill all that time he has on his hands. You explain something face-to-face, and you can tell if they got it or not.

All Dancer does is repeat what others before him have said. Just like arci, he hides behind the math books, and he cannot see that vp is a game that has much more to it than math.

[Alan Mendelson]

Without knowing what the heck Rob is going to post about his overall "system" I am going to offer this: If you play "by the book" you are going to get the long term results as determined by the pay table. If you are playing a machine that has an expected payback of 100.17% that's what you're going to get 100.17%. But if Rob can show a way to get more than that long term theoretical, I'm all for considering it. I don't want a return of 100.17%. I want a return of ten percent or twenty percent or fifty percent.

Rob's "win goal" system by itself appears to have a win goal of about 5% and that is so much better than 100.17% or whatever "positive" VP games you might be playing.

[arcimede$]

Without knowing what the heck Rob is going to post about his overall "system" I am going to offer this: If you play "by the book" you are going to get the long term results as determined by the pay table. If you are playing a machine that has an expected payback of 100.17% that's what you're going to get 100.17%.

Not really, you will get a result based on your strategy as well. The 100.17 is the MAXIMUM you can expect. Of course, all results will form a bell curve so you could do either better or worse than expected.

But if Rob can show a way to get more than that long term theoretical, I'm all for considering it. I don't want a return of 100.17%. I want a return of ten percent or twenty percent or fifty percent.

There is no way to increase the expectation. The 100.17 is the MAXIMUM one can expect.

Rob's "win goal" system by itself appears to have a win goal of about 5% and that is so much better than 100.17% or whatever "positive" VP games you might be playing.

Except for those nasty losses that eat up the entire 5% leaving you with the same .17% expectation advantage as everyone else.

As I've explained before a progression will increase variance. For those who are lucky and have results on the right side of the bell curve the increased variance will increase profits. For those who are unlucky and on the left side of the bell curve, the increased variance will lead to significant losses.

For example, around 75% of the sessions will be won with a 5 level progression using 99% games. That requires a $17,200 bankroll. If you are unlucky you could lose your first 2 sessions (1 out of 16 chance) and lose $34,400 right away. That's where the risk comes into play. Much higher risk so you can *hope* to be one of the lucky ones. For those with logical minds that really isn't a very smart bet.

As it turns out my required bankroll for a <5% risk of ruin is less than what you could lose in only two sessions. I think I'll stay with my safer and profitable method of play.

[Vegas Vic]

Rob,

Jousting with you is now "exhibiting raging envy"? Obviously the bartender has been serving you narcissism doubles.

Seriously awaiting your alleged upcoming posts in October which will teach us all about your "system". It should be a life changing event if the Mayans don't act first.

[Rob.Singer]

Without knowing what the heck Rob is going to post about his overall "system" I am going to offer this: If you play "by the book" you are going to get the long term results as determined by the pay table. If you are playing a machine that has an expected payback of 100.17% that's what you're going to get 100.17%. But if Rob can show a way to get more than that long term theoretical, I'm all for considering it. I don't want a return of 100.17%. I want a return of ten percent or twenty percent or fifty percent.

Rob's "win goal" system by itself appears to have a win goal of about 5% and that is so much better than 100.17% or whatever "positive" VP games you might be playing.

No way I'll be showing anything in comparison to any long term theoretical nonsense. What you'll see is how it works out TODAY. Who cares how it might look over infinity? We all play individual sessions and that's all that matters when analyses are worked. It's the machines and the casinos that are concerned with long term results...along with very misguided wannabee winners, aka, AP's.

[Rob.Singer]

Rob,

Jousting with you is now "exhibiting raging envy"? Obviously the bartender has been serving you narcissism doubles.

Seriously awaiting your alleged upcoming posts in October which will teach us all about your "system". It should be a life changing event if the Mayans don't act first.

That's pretty selective for such an open and honest guy Vic, right?

Oct. is when I return to Pahrump, and there's no date set yet for when I, and I think jatki if he's still here, am going to have the time for the trip. The most exciting thing about it to tell you the truth, is being able to take the ZR1 out for a run while I'm there. But no date set. You see, you're not dealing with some slug you met at some video poker bar, some loser with nothing else to do like Mickey Crimm (and too bad he's broke btw) or a retiree who does nothing, like arci. plus I have a mobile wife and children/grandchildren, so this effort doesn't rank too high. I will, however, get the strategies up first. That oughta get your educational juices going as you wait for the backup.

[Rob.Singer]

Alan, I'll clear arci's misrepresentations up for you, realizing I hope that he doesn't understand a great part of how and why the strategy works and only sees what he wants to see or his limited knowledge will allow him to see. Granted, he has gobs of time to write his rambles because it gives him something to do, but he's been making the same uneducated guesses for years and still can't get close.

As I said earlier, the long term theoretical return means nothing to my strategy. I began the development by looking at that 100.17%, for instance, as TODAY'S ONLY return expectation, then proceeded to improve it. It'll all fall into place when you see it, and of course, after arci cries in his beer (if he's allowed to drink it, that is ). Similarly, whatever funny math he's using THAT HE NEVER EXPLAINS as he tries to impress you with lies about how the strategy works within its bankroll limitations. He knows how I'm laughing at him as he,writes these things, but the only important part of what he's doing, as I've explained, is to get you into long drawn out back-and-forths so he can fill in all that boring time he has on his hands and get the attention he craves so he doesn't crawl up the wall.

We're taking off in a few moments and I'll be concentrating on that for the next few days. Keep arci in line while I'm gone

[Alan Mendelson]

I think it's time to stop telling us what you're going to tell, and just tell us... or show us.

Perhaps we should all stop debating Rob's system till he presents his system so we have something that everyone can see so that everyone has something concrete to comment on.

Now, in the case of the special plays, and in the case of the articles that have been posted, and in the case of Rob's own comments here -- those are concrete items. We can read them and discuss them.

But until we see "the system" why don't we hold off till we see it here?

[arcimede$]

I think it's time to stop telling us what you're going to tell, and just tell us... or show us.

Never going to happen. All you will get is weasel words.

[jatki]

Never going to happen. All you will get is weasel words.

If there were ever someone who's bracing for something they will never be able to handle arc, you da man!

[arcimede$]

If there were ever someone who's bracing for something they will never be able to handle arc, you da man!

That's the difference between you and me. You believe in fairy tales, Santa and Singer. I have already seen the proofs that apply to the game of VP. I have nothing to wait for as I know as an absolute fact that Singer cannot provide anything relevant. He cannot provide anything that makes 2+2=5 and only a complete fool would believe he could.

[jatki]

Arc, you are nervous. & what is this you do, sit nervously at the keyboard all day long waiting to make more foolish statements that you never ever support or back up? Is Singer really right, are you so bored with life that that's all you can do? Man. No wonder he makes you mad, he never misses the nail.

[Alan Mendelson]

Arc I just don't understand why you keep returning to this theme that you believe Singer is saying 2 + 2 = 5 ??? Where the heck does this come from??

Please give me a clear answer. I really want to know where you think he said the math of video poker is wrong??