Hatred on this Forum

[MaxPen]

Quick hypothetical question for you AP pros.

Let’s say you guys put me on a play that mathematically is worth $100.00 per hour. I play exactly as required for max advantage. Yet, for the first day of play, I play for 10 hours and end up losing $100.00 dollars per hour for a total loss of 1K. I go back the following day and unfortunately the same results happen. These same results sadly repeat for the whole week. I’m now down 7K.

The following week I only lose 4K under the same conditions. I’m now down 11K. The following week I lose another 6K. I’m now down after 3 weeks and 210 hours of play a total of 17K. All my free play went down the drain the same way, and I ate all the free comped food and still had to pay out of my pocket for most of it. Amazingly everyone around me are hitting all kinds of good shit, royals, etc.

How long should I expect to grind it out on the same play to recover the 17K I lost in cash along with the 21K I should have won, plus the additional $100.00 dollars per hour I should be winning to recover these losses to become mathematically sound again? Do I now have 38K plus expenses in the accumulated EV bank?

Then for an added hypothetical situation I eventually after months of endless 10-hour days on this play eventually end up losing my whole 100K bankroll. Should I get a loan knowing eventually I have to recover my banked accumulated EV along with all the profits the math said I must have?

Personally, I would not play something that had that scenario in the range of possible outcomes. This is the same reason why you don't see AP teams targeting progressives that are 1 in millions shots even though they are +EV.

[Bill Yung]

So you're saying my totally mathematically possible conditions above can't and never happen?

The casinos didn't exactly lose with the advent and popularization of, eg, card counting. Didn't casino-surveillance expert Bill Zender write that there are only about 100 persons around the world who can hurt a casino with card counting?

In fact, the casinos can already stop all card counting, anytime they want to. There is a camera system to automatically determine a counter after about twenty hands? There are CSM's, and poorer variants of blackjack. Why don't they?

It's more profitable to let the Crimm's think that they have some sort of impact.

[regnis]

Let say you played for a year "accumulating" lots EV, however, you ran super duper bad and lost a shit ton and then you died. What would happen to that accumulated EV? Did you leave it to your brother in your will? If you leave all your accumulated EV to your mom and she doesn't play, how will she collect and what happens to that accumulated EV?

I also gave an example of nickel VP player accumulating 5 mill in EV on a fluke play. Perhaps you can comment on that.

"Accumulated EV" is past tense not future tense.

If we go back to when KJ originally brought this up, it sounded as if he was ok with a 8,800 loss because he had accumulated lots of EV and it would avrage out and he would get back that loss plus his accumulated EV. IMO, It was getting dangerously close to the dueness theory.

He had good value. And of course, If he keeps putting himself into good value situations eventually good things should happen.

I just have a problem wrapping my head around if an individual can accumulate EV and what exactly does one mean by that? It might be the wrong term to use.

I agree. Kewl made it sound like the accumulated EV was worth something in hand. I think it is actually very clear what he really means and whether the terminology was perfect is a different story. But the way he first presented it it did seem like there was an expectation that he would now win after the big loss. That expectation should be based upon playing games with an edge (which still isn't automatic), not accumulated EV.

If you have an edge and play games on which you have an edge, you have a good chance to win. Still no guaranty. But I think when you phrase it as if you have something called accumulated EV to cash in later, you are deluding yourself. If you had a 2% edge on the hands during the losing streak, you still have a 2% edge on the next hand (obviously subject to a very favorable count, etc.). The accumulated EV hasn't changed your edge.

It may be a number that you find useful for other reasons as you have previously described, and that is fine. I would think that with all of your experience you know what your Ev is and what your edge is and don't need to monitor the number. But WTF do I know.

[blackhole]

Quick hypothetical question for you AP pros.

Let’s say you guys put me on a play that mathematically is worth $100.00 per hour. I play exactly as required for max advantage. Yet, for the first day of play, I play for 10 hours and end up losing $100.00 dollars per hour for a total loss of 1K. I go back the following day and unfortunately the same results happen. These same results sadly repeat for the whole week. I’m now down 7K.

The following week I only lose 4K under the same conditions. I’m now down 11K. The following week I lose another 6K. I’m now down after 3 weeks and 210 hours of play a total of 17K. All my free play went down the drain the same way, and I ate all the free comped food and still had to pay out of my pocket for most of it. Amazingly everyone around me are hitting all kinds of good shit, royals, etc.

How long should I expect to grind it out on the same play to recover the 17K I lost in cash along with the 21K I should have won, plus the additional $100.00 dollars per hour I should be winning to recover these losses to become mathematically sound again? Do I now have 38K plus expenses in the accumulated EV bank?

Then for an added hypothetical situation I eventually after months of endless 10-hour days on this play eventually end up losing my whole 100K bankroll. Should I get a loan knowing eventually I have to recover my banked accumulated EV along with all the profits the math said I must have?

Personally, I would not play something that had that scenario in the range of possible outcomes. This is the same reason why you don't see AP teams targeting progressives that are 1 in millions shots even though they are +EV.

So you wouldn't play something that should profit $100.00 per hour? What do you mean in the range of outcomes? Where and when in my example did progressives come into play?

What the FUCK are you talking about?

[Alan Mendelson]

Okay you're telling me you can add up expected value? Then add up the expected value of just five (5) hands of blackjack. Show your work.

As an example of what I want to see, I'm going to throw a single die five times:

5 + 1 + 1 + 4 + 2 = 13

Now can you add up your five hands of accumulated EV?

Five hands of blackjack? Five rolls of the die? (I would have said dice, but I went with your usage)

Herein lies the problem. Alan, you think short term in every situation. Gamblers think short-term. Short term involves variance and everything you say and seem to focus on is about short term variance. The wins. The daily losses. The royal hits.

AP's think longterm. We know that short-term results....wins or losses, are just variance. We want to get past the variance and get to the long-term where the math takes over and if we are playing with an advantage, we will realize that advantage and our actual results (wins) will be pretty close to expectation.

It is as simple as this: Someone who only thinks short-term can't possible understand AP concepts involving the long term. They just can't! They are wired differently. YOU are wired differently (short term thinking).

So there really is no sense in going over and over and around in circles. You are not going to understand or accept. You are an earth is flat guy (short-term thinker) and no matter how much you are shown proof that the earth is round, you come back to the same response of "yeah but if it was round, I would fall off".

There just in no sense in continuing this or most discussions any more. There has to be a time that we give in to the true definition of insanity.

No it has nothing to do with short term. I was making it easy for you.

Okay Mr Genius. Add up 100,000 hands of accumulated EV if that's what you want to do. I can add up 100,000 rolls of a DIE but you can't add up 100,000 hands of EV because it's impossible.

I'll tell you what you can do. You can say "I have an expected value of $12.45 on every $10 I play." (I picked those numbers at random.) BUT YOU CAN'T ADD THEM. The same EV carries over from one hand to the next.

Your theory is bogus. Frankly I think you thought it up in an attempt to compete with Shackleford who tossed you out. I'm sure if you posted this drivel on his site he'd tell you you're all wrong.

Congratulations on being a good player and winning. Just don't mess with the English language.

[Alan Mendelson]

Let say you played for a year "accumulating" lots EV, however, you ran super duper bad and lost a shit ton and then you died. What would happen to that accumulated EV? Did you leave it to your brother in your will? If you leave all your accumulated EV to your mom and she doesn't play, how will she collect and what happens to that accumulated EV?

I also gave an example of nickel VP player accumulating 5 mill in EV on a fluke play. Perhaps you can comment on that.

"Accumulated EV" is past tense not future tense.

If we go back to when KJ originally brought this up, it sounded as if he was ok with a 8,800 loss because he had accumulated lots of EV and it would avrage out and he would get back that loss plus his accumulated EV. IMO, It was getting dangerously close to the dueness theory.

He had good value. And of course, If he keeps putting himself into good value situations eventually good things should happen.

I just have a problem wrapping my head around if an individual can accumulate EV and what exactly does one mean by that? It might be the wrong term to use.

I agree with you AxelWolf 100%.

I also think kewlj needs to take a break from this forum. This previous statement by him shows he's got some issues:

If you understand what I was getting at, then don't play devil's advocate. It only emboldens Alan. I can guarantee when he read you say "there is no such thing as accumulating EV", Alan jizzed in his pants from excitement.

[Alan Mendelson]

"Accumulated EV" is past tense not future tense.

If we go back to when KJ originally brought this up, it sounded as if he was ok with a 8,800 loss because he had accumulated lots of EV and it would avrage out and he would get back that loss plus his accumulated EV. IMO, It was getting dangerously close to the dueness theory.

He had good value. And of course, If he keeps putting himself into good value situations eventually good things should happen.

I just have a problem wrapping my head around if an individual can accumulate EV and what exactly does one mean by that? It might be the wrong term to use.

I agree. Kewl made it sound like the accumulated EV was worth something in hand. I think it is actually very clear what he really means and whether the terminology was perfect is a different story. But the way he first presented it it did seem like there was an expectation that he would now win after the big loss. That expectation should be based upon playing games with an edge (which still isn't automatic), not accumulated EV.

If you have an edge and play games on which you have an edge, you have a good chance to win. Still no guaranty. But I think when you phrase it as if you have something called accumulated EV to cash in later, you are deluding yourself. If you had a 2% edge on the hands during the losing streak, you still have a 2% edge on the next hand (obviously subject to a very favorable count, etc.). The accumulated EV hasn't changed your edge.

It may be a number that you find useful for other reasons as you have previously described, and that is fine. I would think that with all of your experience you know what your Ev is and what your edge is and don't need to monitor the number. But WTF do I know.

You know a lot and this was well said.

[AxelWolf]

I just hope Dr Evil doesn't figure out how to steal our accumulated EV.

[RS__]

Quick hypothetical question for you AP pros.

Let’s say you guys put me on a play that mathematically is worth $100.00 per hour. I play exactly as required for max advantage. Yet, for the first day of play, I play for 10 hours and end up losing $100.00 dollars per hour for a total loss of 1K. I go back the following day and unfortunately the same results happen. These same results sadly repeat for the whole week. I’m now down 7K.

The following week I only lose 4K under the same conditions. I’m now down 11K. The following week I lose another 6K. I’m now down after 3 weeks and 210 hours of play a total of 17K. All my free play went down the drain the same way, and I ate all the free comped food and still had to pay out of my pocket for most of it. Amazingly everyone around me are hitting all kinds of good shit, royals, etc.

How long should I expect to grind it out on the same play to recover the 17K I lost in cash along with the 21K I should have won, plus the additional $100.00 dollars per hour I should be winning to recover these losses to become mathematically sound again? Do I now have 38K plus expenses in the accumulated EV bank?

Then for an added hypothetical situation I eventually after months of endless 10-hour days on this play eventually end up losing my whole 100K bankroll. Should I get a loan knowing eventually I have to recover my banked accumulated EV along with all the profits the math said I must have?

Personally, I would not play something that had that scenario in the range of possible outcomes. This is the same reason why you don't see AP teams targeting progressives that are 1 in millions shots even though they are +EV.

So you wouldn't play something that should profit $100.00 per hour? What do you mean in the range of outcomes? Where and when in my example did progressives come into play?

What the FUCK are you talking about?

It's going to be tough to explain anything to you since you don't know anything about AP. It'd be like trying to explain to a dog why 2^3=8, when the dog doesn't even have a concept of numbers, let alone math.

[Bill Yung]

You know a lot and this was well said.

KJ thinks that, as long as he's counting a few cards, the gambler's fallacy (and other things he just makes up about math, and his earnings) doesn't apply to him.

[Bill Yung]

I just hope Dr Evil doesn't figure out how to steal our accumulated EV.

Shackleford is the biggest "shill" going. Why do you think that they call him "the Manboy"? A bunch of crooks set him up with a 2.3 mil stack of chips that aren't his own, and told him to put himself in a box from which to try to think out of the box. He's still in the box.

Now we have RS__ talking about teaching math to a dog. I can actually see that happening the other way around. The dog will learn faster than him.

[Rob.Singer]

These are the tough questions, and we all know how kew reacts to the tough questions.

To any sensible, thinking, halfway intelligent person however, it's no mystery how much of kew's tit got stuck in the wringer when he crafted the silly term "accumulated EV". He did this first to try and sound smart, then to impress. But in the typical "make it up on the go" methodology used by this phony, he never, ever thought anyone would challenge--or even question--him on such an idiotic gaming assertion.

At the end of ANYONE WITH A BRAIN'S DAY, what he knows he really was talking about was being "due", which put him smack dab into Gambler's Fallacy territory.

He is such a complete moron in basically every which way he presents himself....

[MaxPen]

These are the tough questions, and we all know how kew reacts to the tough questions.

To any sensible, thinking, halfway intelligent person however, it's no mystery how much of kew's tit got stuck in the wringer when he crafted the silly term "accumulated EV". He did this first to try and sound smart, then to impress. But in the typical "make it up on the go" methodology used by this phony, he never, ever thought anyone would challenge--or even question--him on such an idiotic gaming assertion.

At the end of ANYONE WITH A BRAIN'S DAY, what he knows he really was talking about was being "due", which put him smack dab into Gambler's Fallacy territory.

He is such a complete moron in basically every which way he presents himself....

You are all to familiar with the fallacy of being due. Your whole system is built around it. To bad playing VP with -EV always results in losses long term. As you fall asleep in the camper do you often wonder why you were so stupid?

[Alan Mendelson]

Okay MaxPen you win. Rob's system includes "being due" to hit a big winner... and kewlj's "accumulated EV" is about being due to hit winners as well.

[mickeycrimm]

Let say you played for a year "accumulating" lots EV, however, you ran super duper bad and lost a shit ton and then you died. What would happen to that accumulated EV? Did you leave it to your brother in your will? If you leave all your accumulated EV to your mom and she doesn't play, how will she collect and what happens to that accumulated EV?

I also gave an example of nickel VP player accumulating 5 mill in EV on a fluke play. Perhaps you can comment on that.

I can't comment on the nickel VP example because I am not really a VP or machine type AP. As you know my experience in this area was very limited, with the +EV coming from the disproportionate bonuses in monthly mailers, which has been on the decline. For this and other reason (partner passing and I wanting to focus more on blackjack), I am all but out of the machine play supplemental stuff I was doing.

But I will comment on your first example. Died after an extended losing period of a year? Come on...you are being absurd. Pick the most extreme example you can come up with while don't you. You really seem to be crossing over into Alan territory here. What is that about?

OK, lets say you have a low limit card counter(his EV is $2 an hour). He finds a casino in the middle of BFE. The casino if offering drawing tickets for certain hands on blackjack. The drawing is for a 5 million. The dude has 99% of the tickets, but he gets snapped off. What becomes of his 4.95 mill of accumulated EV? How in the hell will a $2 CC ever avrage out? He won't even get 500k of that accumulated EV, let alone the full amount. Someone allready got his EV.

He had a bad day just like KJ described in the $8800 loss day.

[mickeycrimm]

Why is it you dunces always talk about losing on positive plays but always talk about winning on negative plays?

This is actually a great way to sum up the AP stuff. You guys lose out on all the great things of life while embrace the casino nonsense.

Look at all the great things in life you missed out on while flipping burgers at work.

[Bill Yung]

What? Putting rocks in socks to hurt black persons in riots? I did miss out on that part of life.

Ha, one day I slept in, and was late for the pizza store rush-hour at lunchtime. About as close as I came to a riot.

[mickeycrimm]

Let say you played for a year "accumulating" lots EV, however, you ran super duper bad and lost a shit ton and then you died. What would happen to that accumulated EV? Did you leave it to your brother in your will? If you leave all your accumulated EV to your mom and she doesn't play, how will she collect and what happens to that accumulated EV?

I also gave an example of nickel VP player accumulating 5 mill in EV on a fluke play. Perhaps you can comment on that.

"Accumulated EV" is past tense not future tense.

If we go back to when KJ originally brought this up, it sounded as if he was ok with a 8,800 loss because he had accumulated lots of EV and it would avrage out and he would get back that loss plus his accumulated EV. IMO, It was getting dangerously close to the dueness theory.

He had good value. And of course, If he keeps putting himself into good value situations eventually good things should happen.

I just have a problem wrapping my head around if an individual can accumulate EV and what exactly does one mean by that? It might be the wrong term to use.

When I read KJ's post my take was he was having a day where he was quickly getting into and staying in heavy positive counts. The kind of thing you would like to see everyday but don't. But it was a bad day for results just like a casino has shitty days at roulette even though they have a massive edge.

Now for "accumulated EV." I'm always measuring expectation and comparing plays to see which one I should concentrate on or play off first. Then I "play off the expectation." That's the term I use. That's the same thing as saying "accumulating expectation." One thing I know for sure, if I don't "play off/accumulate" the expectation I don't have a chance at making any money.

In no way did I think KJ meant that he could cash in the accumulated EV on a later day. That thought never crossed my mind. That bullshit was concocted by Alan just so he could fuck with KJ. Then Argentino jumped in with the "due to hit" bullshit. This from an asshole that in the past has used the term "rising probability."

[mickeycrimm]

What? Putting rocks in socks to hurt black persons in riots? I did miss out on that part of life.

Ha, one day I slept in, and was late for the pizza store rush-hour at lunchtime. About as close as I came to a riot.

Did you miss the part about having to sleep under my bunk to keep from being clubbed in the head by a sock full of rocks. Those assholes got what they deserved.

[mickeycrimm]

Quick hypothetical question for you AP pros.

Let’s say you guys put me on a play that mathematically is worth $100.00 per hour. I play exactly as required for max advantage. Yet, for the first day of play, I play for 10 hours and end up losing $100.00 dollars per hour for a total loss of 1K. I go back the following day and unfortunately the same results happen. These same results sadly repeat for the whole week. I’m now down 7K.

The following week I only lose 4K under the same conditions. I’m now down 11K. The following week I lose another 6K. I’m now down after 3 weeks and 210 hours of play a total of 17K. All my free play went down the drain the same way, and I ate all the free comped food and still had to pay out of my pocket for most of it. Amazingly everyone around me are hitting all kinds of good shit, royals, etc.

How long should I expect to grind it out on the same play to recover the 17K I lost in cash along with the 21K I should have won, plus the additional $100.00 dollars per hour I should be winning to recover these losses to become mathematically sound again? Do I now have 38K plus expenses in the accumulated EV bank?

Then for an added hypothetical situation I eventually after months of endless 10-hour days on this play eventually end up losing my whole 100K bankroll. Should I get a loan knowing eventually I have to recover my banked accumulated EV along with all the profits the math said I must have?

1. What's the bet size?
2. What's the starting bankroll size?
4. What's the variance?
5. What's the risk of ruin percentage?