gamerfreak
gamerfreak
Joined: Dec 28, 2014
  • Threads: 30
  • Posts: 1073
July 11th, 2017 at 5:42:59 AM permalink
Quote: KevinAA

Is this a serious question or am I wasting my time trying to contribute to this forum?


Betting systems do not get a great response as most people contributing here are looking for strategies that change the House Edge of a game. Betting systems and money management can change variance, but cannot change a -EV game into a +EV game.
OnceDear
OnceDear
Joined: Jun 1, 2014
  • Threads: 26
  • Posts: 1846
July 11th, 2017 at 6:07:54 AM permalink
Quote: KevinAA

Is this a serious question or am I wasting my time trying to contribute to this forum?

thanks for trying to contribute.
Please don't be offended that regulars here do not give any credence to 'systems'. This is largely a maths based forum and we know that no such system will, on balance, have merit apart from making the process of chucking money away a bit more fun.
Systems, stop losses, win goals, etc etc will all be derided. It's a free service provided to keep the unwise from believing in the cr4p that gets peddled.
Embrace the Variance Good news: I was once at a lifetime Blackjack Profit of £18K Bad News: Gravity prevailed.
monet0412
monet0412
Joined: Feb 18, 2016
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 556
July 11th, 2017 at 7:15:48 AM permalink
Yes Yes... but that comment about taking laps inside the Casino was pretty funny. I laugh every time thinking about it. What's even more funny is if you take a lap or bathroom break you have to start at step one again when you get back to the machine!

NXNXNX XxOOxxX NXNxxNnX
QFIT
QFIT
Joined: Feb 12, 2010
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 272
July 11th, 2017 at 7:18:30 AM permalink
Yes, but how do you calculate the optimal number of laps?
"It is impossible to begin to learn that which one thinks one already knows." -Epictetus
KevinAA
KevinAA
Joined: Jul 6, 2017
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 27
July 11th, 2017 at 10:03:03 AM permalink
Quote: OnceDear

thanks for trying to contribute.
Please don't be offended that regulars here do not give any credence to 'systems'. This is largely a maths based forum and we know that no such system will, on balance, have merit apart from making the process of chucking money away a bit more fun.
Systems, stop losses, win goals, etc etc will all be derided. It's a free service provided to keep the unwise from believing in the cr4p that gets peddled.



It would help if people would read the contents of the post rather than just the title with the bad words "betting system" and then post a snarky reply. Would it have been better had I titled it "objective method of deciding when to press the cash out button on slot machines"? That's more wordy, and the content is exactly the same.

Here is a copy of what I wrote in my initial post, with emphasis added:

Quote: KevinAA

Using free on-line slot machines as a guide, I came up with a betting system that provides a decent probability of winning. If you play slot machines and insist that you either win something or lose all of it, the probability of losing is quite high. This strategy increases the probability of winning in exchange for accepting the possibility of losing half or 20% of your bankroll. What you do with that is up to you (take the cash and go home, play something else with it, it doesn't matter).

Obviously you cannot guarantee a win. This "betting system" is a way to guide you in a completely objective manner as to when to press the cash out button (rather than relying on emotions which favor the casino), so that you don't give back winnings too often, but also don't give up too soon and walk away with a very small win.



I know I've only recently joined, but I've read at least 100 times as many posts as what I've made. It seems to be that the asshole-to-population ratio on this forum is quite high. That's sad.

I have compiled the following statistics of replies in this thread:

user       description
Mosca okay
OnceDear okay
QFIT asshole
micheal99000 pretentious jerk
FinsRule dumbass
gamerfreak didn't read
OnceDear okay
monet0412 dickhead
QFIT asshole again


Only 1 in 3 replies were not asshole replies. 2/3rds of the replies are useless and indicate a high level of idiocy. Sad.
beachbumbabs
Administrator
beachbumbabs
Joined: May 21, 2013
  • Threads: 77
  • Posts: 9111
July 11th, 2017 at 10:56:46 AM permalink
Quote: KevinAA

It would help if people would read the contents of the post rather than just the title with the bad words "betting system" and then post a snarky reply. Would it have been better had I titled it "objective method of deciding when to press the cash out button on slot machines"? That's more wordy, and the content is exactly the same.

Here is a copy of what I wrote in my initial post, with emphasis added:

Quote: KevinAA

Using free on-line slot machines as a guide, I came up with a betting system that provides a decent probability of winning. If you play slot machines and insist that you either win something or lose all of it, the probability of losing is quite high. This strategy increases the probability of winning in exchange for accepting the possibility of losing half or 20% of your bankroll. What you do with that is up to you (take the cash and go home, play something else with it, it doesn't matter).

Obviously you cannot guarantee a win. This "betting system" is a way to guide you in a completely objective manner as to when to press the cash out button (rather than relying on emotions which favor the casino), so that you don't give back winnings too often, but also don't give up too soon and walk away with a very small win.



I know I've only recently joined, but I've read at least 100 times as many posts as what I've made. It seems to be that the asshole-to-population ratio on this forum is quite high. That's sad.

I have compiled the following statistics of replies in this thread:

user       description
Mosca okay
OnceDear okay
QFIT asshole
micheal99000 pretentious jerk
FinsRule dumbass
gamerfreak didn't read
OnceDear okay
monet0412 dickhead
QFIT asshole again


Only 1 in 3 replies were not asshole replies. 2/3rds of the replies are useless and indicate a high level of idiocy. Sad.



What's sad is that you can't tell you're promoting a system, even though you yourself called it one.

What's even sadder is that you don't know the difference between a personal insult and a reasonable defense of your system.

Here's a learning opportunity. If I did a strict Martingale (system), as is the disciplinary standard here, you'd be nuked for, oh, 6, no, 7 separate personal insults. But I'm going to give you a chance and make it 7 days, as a single offense with special circumstances. Edit: "special" is not a good thing: normal 1st offense is 3 days, but you earned a harsher penalty.

As it happens, I agree there is merit in setting stop-loss points when playing slots. But there are several logical fallacies in your, or anyone's, suggestion that this can lead to overall winning, by any arbitrary cutoff point or interval, any percentage per session cutoff with more sessions anticipated, or any dollar figure.

You also have at least one directly wrong statement in your system, in saying that it doesn't matter how much you bet. The large majority of machines only pay their full RTP with maximum bet on maximum lines. There are various ways of programming this: some pay progressive amounts only on max bet, some pay a premium on symbols hit on the last line, some add more high-value symbols for higher bets, some add features for extra fees beyond the per - line bet, some have patterns that favor the higher numbered lines, some hit more frequently at max bet, etc.

So generally speaking, the best payoff on any machine occurs at max bet. If you can't afford it, you need to move down to a denomination where you can.

Another contention you made was that the Law of Large Numbers kicks in around 100 bets. Oh, if only. 100 spins is laughable. 100 million, maybe. On slots, variance can be your friend (it has been, if you're seeing 97.2x return on anything, even a free slot). It has to be, because nobody's going to get enough spins in a lifetime to approach the LoLN amount. But some people still win.

Look forward to hearing from you on the other side.
Last edited by: beachbumbabs on Jul 11, 2017
"If the house lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game."
Mission146
Administrator
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 104
  • Posts: 9322
July 11th, 2017 at 11:47:15 AM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs



What's sad is that you can't tell you're promoting a system, even though you yourself called it one.

What's even sadder is that you don't know the difference between a personal insult and a reasonable defense of your system.

Here's a learning opportunity. If I did a strict Martingale (system), as is the disciplinary standard here, you'd be nuked for, oh, 6, no, 7 separate personal insults. But I'm going to give you a chance and make it 7 days, as a single offense with special circumstances.

As it happens, I agree there is merit in setting stop-loss points when playing slots. But there are several logical fallacies in your, or anyone's, suggestion that this can lead to overall winning, by any arbitrary cutoff point or interval, any percentage per session cutoff with more sessions anticipated, or any dollar figure.

You also have at least one directly wrong statement in your system, in saying that it doesn't matter how much you bet. The large majority of machines only pay their full RTP with maximum bet on maximum lines. There are various ways of programming this: some pay progressive amounts only on max bet, some pay a premium on symbols hit on the last line, some add more high-value symbols for higher bets, some add features for extra fees beyond the per - line bet, some have patterns that favor the higher numbered lines, some hit more frequently at max bet, etc.

So generally speaking, the best payoff on any machine occurs at max bet. If you can't afford it, you need to move down to a denomination where you can.

Another contention you made was that the Law of Large Numbers kicks in around 100 bets. Oh, if only. 100 spins is laughable. 100 million, maybe. On slots, variance can be your friend (it has been, if you're seeing 97.2x return on anything, even a free slot). It has to be, because nobody's going to get enough spins in a lifetime to approach the LoLN amount. But some people still win.

Look forward to hearing from you on the other side.



Wait a minute, I thought I was the merciful one! J/K

With respect to the slots, what I can say is that this thread has generated some good conversation in that regard, so I kind of want to add a few of my own observations to the remainder of BBB's post.

1.) The idea of a, 'Stop Loss,' on slots for any other than pragmatic reasons (you simply do not want to lose more than x amount of money) is nonsense. The long-term expectation never changes regardless of what you do and is simply a function of dollars bet by the percentage house edge of the machine expressed as a decimal. Thus, if a machine holds 10% and you bet a total of $100, you have an expectation of -$10. If you bet a total of $1,000, your expectation is -$100.

When it comes to expectation v. what actually happens it becomes irrelevant in the long run because what actually happens will increasingly become more and more likely to not deviate too far (in percentage terms) from your overall expectation. That doesn't even necessarily have to come way of, 'Running bad,' for a prolonged period of time or as long as you may have, 'Run good.'

For example, if you run at +200% on $1,000 in total bets, you will be up 2k at the end of that run. Again, let's say the slot has a 10% hold. Now, let's say you run $100,000 more coin-in but you hit 90% just on that, your total will be:

-$10,000 on $100,000 coin-in.

AND

$2,000 on $1,000 coin-in.

For a total of -$8,000 on $101,000 coin-in. That's a return of $93,000/$101000, or 92.08%.

If you run more coin in at expectation, your overall return percentage will get lower and lower until it is virtually indistinguishable from the 90% long-term return of the machine, to wit, even if you don't fall below expectation for any sustained period of time, your initial, 'Good run,' will comprise an infinitesimal percentage over 90%.

So, you don't even need to run bad to balance out a good run, the mere running at expectation from there on out will almost entirely balance that out given enough trials.

The point is: Actual results only matter to your wallet, mathematically, the only thing that will matter in the long run is expectation.

There are a few exceptions, you could hit the MegaBucks jackpot, or something along those lines, but the only reason that won't balance out is because the hit will likely be so huge that (one would hope) you would never end up playing enough coin-in for it to be balanced out by running at expectation.

2.) I mostly agree with BBB's contention that it can matter how much you bet, but I'm not sure that is the case on the majority of slot machines. It's almost always the case with Video Poker.

I kind of say that for four reasons:

A.) There are a number of machines upon which it truly doesn't matter, and I would suggest that number is more than most people would think. This is because the payouts are what I term, "Perfectly Graduated," and also the reels don't change. There are a few examples of physical reel machines that operate this way...but they are DEFINITELY in the minority when it comes to physical reels.

B.) There are a large number of Progressive machines upon which the meter moves based on coin-in. However, some of these Progressives ARE winnable with a minimum bet, or certainly a bet that is less than the maximum. On some of these machines, betting up will often add to the BASE amount of the progressive(s) in question, (for example, $0.40 could have a base of $20, $0.80 could have a base of $40, $1.20 could have a base of $60...etc) but the amount added by way of the Progressive contribution is unchanged.

When that happens, you end up with a base that is relative to the bet amount, but say the $0.40 bet has a Progressive that is at $37.22, well, that's $17.22 in contribution by way of coin-in. The $0.80 bet level may have a base of $40, but with the contribution, the total progressive is $57.22.

IF all other things are equal on that device, and sometimes they are, then you are getting better value with the minimum bet. The $37.22 is 93.05x the bet amount whereas the $57.22 is only 71.525x the bet amount, so all else equal, the lower bet amount is going to have a better overall return.

C.) There are also a few progressive games, though not too many, where there is no change in the Progressive amount at all regardless of the amount bet once you have bet the minimum amount that qualifies you for the Progressive. Once again, only the base pays will change. Bell Fever (and very similar variants) is one example of a game that works this way, and it also works that way for a number of Keno Progressives, most notably on Spielo Pick 'N Play machines. Your best return will generally come from betting the least that still qualifies you for the Progressive. Since an increased bet will win only the SAME amount on the Progressive, your percentage return from that result will not be as high, and therefore, the house edge will be greater.

EXCEPTIONS:

There are several exceptions to this rule, so it is important to understand what machine you are playing. One notable exception is Quick Hit PRO which has Progressives for 5-9 Quick Hit symbols. The game has three games which are all essentially played as completely separate games, but Free Games for one is Free Games for all three screens.

On the version I am semi-familiar with, you can bet either $1, $2 or $3. Interestingly, betting more than $1 does not change the return of the Progressives AT ALL (the base is the same) but in order to get Free Games, you have to light up three money bags that are off to the right of each screen. The Rules screen states that doing this is more likely when you are betting MAX, but it does not quantify that in any way.

Because of that, one would assume that betting Max would be best in terms of return percentage, but there essentially MUST be a point where betting the minimum is better for an individual Progressive Jackpot point, or combination of multiple ones. I don't know where that point is. I don't think the machine is worth studying in order to figure that out.

D.) What is Better?

I mean, we understand that there are many machines that have a better return percentage (lower house edge) when one is betting Max, but what does that really mean? How does the minimum bet compare to the max bet?

Let's say you have a machine that pays 2500 on a three-coin bet for the top result whereas it is 800 on a single coin bet and 1600 on a two-coin bet. Okay, we know that 2500/3 is 833.33 per coin, so objectively, we know the return must be better with the max bet. How much better, though?

Let's imagine the probability of hitting that result is 1/4000, so now that result at 800 coins is worth:

1/4000 * 800 = 0.2 or 20% of the return of the game.

AND:

1/4000 * 833.33 = 0.2083325 or 20.83325% of the return of the game.

Terrific, so the overall return increases by 0.833325%, but what does that do to the expected loss per play?

Let's say that the machine has a 70% return on all other results, so with a one-coin bet, you get a 90% overall return. With a two-coin bet, it is the same, 90%. With a three coin bet, you get a 90.83325% return. Let's look at expected dollars lost per spin:

1 * .1 = $0.10 (per $1 spin)

2 * .1 = $0.20 (per $2 spin)

3 * .0916675 = $0.2750025 ($0.27.5 per $3 spin)

The machine is negative expectation no matter what, and then you take a look at how much you are expected to lose per spin. Betting $3 is definitely the better percentage return, but betting $1 would have the lowest expected dollars lost per spin, in this case.

The $1 bet is better in every way EXCEPT percentage return and winning potential. You lose less $$$ per spin, you'll generally play much longer, if you consider that a worthy goal, etc.

There are probably circumstances, and certainly with progressives, where a Max bet is for the best in both percentage AND expected dollars and cents loss. All progressives (uncapped) have an expected win at a certain point, the likelihood of the machine ever reaching that point varies. But, the point is, on the example above, the machine would have to have a house edge of 3.3333% (or less) for you to be losing the LEAST money per spin by way of the $3 bet. In other words, that changed top payout would have to make a hell of a difference. Specifically, it would have to pay (based on the probability of 1/4000) 1,067 per coin bet (70% + 26.675% = 96.675% (House Edge 3.325%) for you to have a lesser $$$ expected loss per $3 spin, which means the progressive would have to pay about 3,201.

See, 3200 would be perfectly even:

(3200/3/4000) + .7 = 0.96666666666 (House Edge: 3.3333%, expected loss per $3 bet, $0.09999999999

---Anyway, my point is machines vary too much these days to really make a generalization.
Vultures can't be choosers.
billryan
billryan
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 63
  • Posts: 2348
July 11th, 2017 at 12:52:57 PM permalink
Quote: KevinAA

Is this a serious question or am I wasting my time trying to contribute to this forum?



I'm not sure, but I just wasted two minutes of mine reading it, although I do appreciate the happy ending.
It's what you do and not what you say If you're not part of the future then get out of the way
monet0412
monet0412
Joined: Feb 18, 2016
  • Threads: 9
  • Posts: 556
July 11th, 2017 at 2:44:51 PM permalink
I can't believe I just typed all that information out on Reels and what I thought about this Stop Loss BS and reread it and deleted it lol... anyways... forget it... WTF do I know?!
beachbumbabs
Administrator
beachbumbabs
Joined: May 21, 2013
  • Threads: 77
  • Posts: 9111
July 12th, 2017 at 12:22:16 AM permalink
Quote: monet0412

I can't believe I just typed all that information out on Reels and what I thought about this Stop Loss BS and reread it and deleted it lol... anyways... forget it... WTF do I know?!



Post of the year, your dissection, mission. I don't think we disagree except for what constitutes "the majority" these days, and I'll cede the argument to you, as you see many more machines than I do. Really appreciate your making the calculation relatively simple.

Should quote it below so you can't delete it. Lol...thanks for taking the time.

Fwiw, my take on Stop Loss is it keeps me from going on tilt, especially if I'm losing early in a trip. I have a $1000 towel from Atlantis (never used, hanging in a place of honor 20 years), and a 2am trip down the Black Horse Parkway because I didn't have enough cash left to pay the NJ Turnpike toll. Tilts from 20+ and 15 years ago. I don't kid myself that it will have any effect on whether I win.

Learning experiences all around.

monet, I wish you had left what you said about stop loss posted. Damn, man, you're an encyclopedia, and we could really use the perspective.
"If the house lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game."

  • Jump to: