krava
krava
Joined: Aug 31, 2016
  • Threads: 16
  • Posts: 65
February 10th, 2017 at 9:29:39 PM permalink
Most of my bigger wins have come on the first $20 that I put in the machine. I was wondering if some people are like that also or most of the other people took awhile? My biggest win $1750 came when I put $220 into the $5 double top dollar. I still had credits left after I cashed out. I think I had 13 or so left. That is still pretty quick considering $10 a spin. I so miss playing that but it is so dangerous to play. I lost $400 driving 4 hours to caushatta to play. 20-30 min and never a bonus.
rsactuary
rsactuary
Joined: Sep 6, 2014
  • Threads: 23
  • Posts: 1901
February 10th, 2017 at 9:47:47 PM permalink
Quote: krava

Most of my bigger wins have come on the first $20 that I put in the machine. I was wondering if some people are like that also or most of the other people took awhile? My biggest win $1750 came when I put $220 into the $5 double top dollar. I still had credits left after I cashed out. I think I had 13 or so left. That is still pretty quick considering $10 a spin. I so miss playing that but it is so dangerous to play. I lost $400 driving 4 hours to caushatta to play. 20-30 min and never a bonus.



Congrats Aimee, but you're describing variance.
mcallister3200
mcallister3200
Joined: Dec 29, 2013
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 3015
Thanks for this post from:
Wizardofnothing
February 10th, 2017 at 10:22:24 PM permalink
Never play with haircut money.
sabre
sabre
Joined: Aug 16, 2010
  • Threads: 2
  • Posts: 1172
Thanks for this post from:
CasinoKiller
February 10th, 2017 at 10:41:43 PM permalink
Why is this person allowed to post?
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 133
  • Posts: 15279
Thanks for this post from:
RogerKintbeachbumbabs
February 10th, 2017 at 10:49:28 PM permalink
Quote: sabre

Why is this person allowed to post?



What would my grounds for a ban be, 'Discussing gambling?'

There are either shared IP's or there are not and there are not. If you want someone who has not violated any rules not to post, then might I suggest not responding in that person's threads, especially when that response calls for a response from an Admin.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219
krava
krava
Joined: Aug 31, 2016
  • Threads: 16
  • Posts: 65
February 10th, 2017 at 11:41:29 PM permalink
Not sure what the problem is. I have been on boards for years. I am on Clublexus Acurazine Oakley Forum etc under this nick. I guess I don't ask good questions on here or something?
Nathan
Nathan
Joined: Sep 2, 2016
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3430
February 11th, 2017 at 5:07:20 AM permalink
Quote: rsactuary

Congrats Aimee, but you're describing variance.



I don't think that Krava is Aimee. Aimee was "Cutesy" whereas Krava comes off as serious.
In both The Hunger Games and in gambling, may the odds be ever in your favor. :D "Man Babes" #AxelFabulous "Olive oil is processed but it only has one ingredient, olive oil."-Even Bob, March 27/28th. :D The 2 year war is over! Woo-hoo! :D I sometimes speak in metaphors. ;) Remember this. ;) Crack the code. :D 8.9.13.25.14.1.13.5.9.19.14.1.20.8.1.14! :D "For about the 4096th time, let me offer a radical idea to those of you who don't like Nathan -- block her and don't visit Nathan's Corner. What is so complicated about it?" Wizard, August 21st. :D
SiegfriedRoy
SiegfriedRoy
Joined: Sep 23, 2014
  • Threads: 19
  • Posts: 437
February 11th, 2017 at 7:27:29 AM permalink
Quote: Nathan

I don't think that Krava is Aimee. Aimee was "Cutesy" whereas Krava comes off as serious.



I +1 that. Krava also doesn't have a killer Avatar.
Nathan
Nathan
Joined: Sep 2, 2016
  • Threads: 65
  • Posts: 3430
February 11th, 2017 at 7:48:48 AM permalink
Quote: SiegfriedRoy

I +1 that. Krava also doesn't have a killer Avatar.



Lol. Aimee's bikini avatar! :)
In both The Hunger Games and in gambling, may the odds be ever in your favor. :D "Man Babes" #AxelFabulous "Olive oil is processed but it only has one ingredient, olive oil."-Even Bob, March 27/28th. :D The 2 year war is over! Woo-hoo! :D I sometimes speak in metaphors. ;) Remember this. ;) Crack the code. :D 8.9.13.25.14.1.13.5.9.19.14.1.20.8.1.14! :D "For about the 4096th time, let me offer a radical idea to those of you who don't like Nathan -- block her and don't visit Nathan's Corner. What is so complicated about it?" Wizard, August 21st. :D
Mission146
Mission146
Joined: May 15, 2012
  • Threads: 133
  • Posts: 15279
February 11th, 2017 at 8:59:26 AM permalink
I don't believe the bikini avatar was the subject matter of the OP, is there anything to discuss with respect to the subject matter of the OP? I think slots are operated by an RNG and they hit when they hit, I don't believe they care how much money you stick in there or how long you play them for.

If you typically hop from machine to machine and put in $20 at a time, and only put more than that in a single machine every once in a while, then yes, I could see where it is more likely that you will hit a big win off of one of those twenties as opposed to loading it up with more. That should really come as no surprise.

For an example, look at reverse Martingaling the Pass Line at Craps, if I reverse Martingale with the goal of turning $5 into $80 300 times, and I do it with the goal of turning $20 into $80 three times, then I am more likely going to have more instances in which I was successful with the $5.

Probabilities:


Two-Step Reverse Martingale ($20-$40, to profit $60):

(.4929 * .4929) = .24295041

3 * .24295041 = 0.72885123

In three attempts, I am expected to succeed less than once.

Four-Step Reverse Martingale ($5-$10-$20-$40, to profit $75):

(.4929)^4 = 0.05902490171

0.05902490171 * 300 = 17.707470513

In three-hundred attempts, I expect to be successful about 17.7 times.

___

Which means that if I do it three-hundred times, I am going to succeed with the four-step reverse marty much more often than I will with the two-step marty attempted three times.

And, when I do succeed, if I feel like being really silly, I could say, "Well, whoop-dee-do, look at me, I made $75 in profit with that four-step marty and a base bet of $5 compared to the two-step marty with a base bet of $20 that, I've, like, totally never won, amirite?"

And I could pat myself on the back and feel great about that except for a few things:

A.) If I've done it three-hundred times, of course I would succeed more often than doing the other three times.

AND

B.) Craps is a negative expectation game upon which the expected loss is whatever I bet on the Pass Line multiplied by the house edge, so in terms of expected loss, it will always be relative to my total overall action.

So, if you have fun playing slots and jumping around from machine to machine, then go ahead and do that. Unless you know what the return of each machine is, then you have no idea if your $20 is better in one machine than in another, but I seriously doubt any of the machines you are playing has a return of over 100%.

The one thing I can say is that, if you typically only put $20 in a machine and are making spins $2 at a time, or whatever it is, and if for every fifty times you would stick $20 in a machine and then move on if nothing hits you only stick $100, $200, $300, whatever, in a machine once or twice, yes, you are more likely to see a decent pay on one of the twenties.

But, it's not because the machine cares at all how much money you are sticking into it at one time. I can assure you, the machine, as a non-living entity, is completely unconcerned with that. It is because $20 fifty times represents $1,000 in total base bets and $100 nine or fewer times is $900 or less, $200 four or fewer times is $800 or less and $300 three or fewer times is $900 or less.

If you really want to prove your theory, or even that there is a potential theory to prove, then load a machine with $200 about five hundred times ($100,000 total) and log all of your results, play until each $200 is gone. After that, load $100 into a machine 1,000 times, and play until each $100 is gone, log the results of every spin. Finally, load $20 into a machine five thousand times and play until each twenty is gone, log the results of every spin.

If, after that, the $20's (with all starting amounts being equal) have resulted in a remarkably greater number of, 'Good hits,' then you might have gone somewhere towards proving your theory. Although, at $2 bets, that would be starting with 50,000 total base spins for each load level...so it still might not be enough data to absolutely PROVE anything.

Also, don't do that because it would be a complete waste of money. Further, don't do that because it would be all in an effort to prove a theory that is complete and total crap to begin with.

Either way, I thank you for the OP, and I am sure your casino of choice thanks you for your patronage, whether it be $20, $50, $100 or $200 at a time.
https://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/gripes/11182-pet-peeves/120/#post815219

  • Jump to: