"It's not whether you win or lose"?
I think one of the administrators here has this by-line. I ask WTF? Where am I going wrong?
I've said I was "in training" to be a good video poker player. Today I felt knowledgeable enough to go up to quarters because I've been practicing DDB on B. Dancer's software plus playing it for nickels in a few casinos.
I found what I know is a more than 100% game, 10/6 DDB. I played two 3 hour sit downs. I lost $250 in the first session and $200 in the second. I got no quads at all! I used my slot card and had $40 in free play to go along with this. It's not a lot to lose really, but I kept thinking if I were playing $1 or $2 or even $5, what a loss!
So why would anyone say it doesn't matter if you win or lose but if you made good bets? Huh? I made good bets every hand I played, didn't I? But YES, it certainly DOES matter if I won or lost, and for more than one reason. I just don't get the uncommon sense about ap video poker play. How can anyone not care if they win or lose? What good does it do if good bets are made and you still lose? How is that supposed to make up for a loss that could have been in the thousands of dollars if I played higher limits? Please help!
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceDon't overplay your bankroll. This is where Kelly comes in. Problem solved!
But I didn't. If I had played to my bankroll I would have lost at least 8-20 times what I did. If you're saying keep on pumping,within my bankroll and it'll all be alright in the end, I don't get that either. Where's the guarantee?
Quote: tournamentkingBut I didn't. If I had played to my bankroll I would have lost at least 8-20 times what I did. If you're saying keep on pumping,within my bankroll and it'll all be alright in the end, I don't get that either. Where's the guarantee?
Not overplaying your bankroll means that your bets drop as your bankroll shrinks, and it rises as your bankroll rises.
Go you the Wizard's site. Find the standard deviation for the game that you are playing. Divide your edge by the standard deviation. Never, under any circumstances, bet more than this percentage of your bankroll.
So, say you have a 0.5% edge (the game returns 100.5%). Say that the standard deviation for this game is 7 bets. That means that you can't bet more than 0.5%/7 = 1/35 of 1% of your bankroll on any one bet. That means that to play the game for dollars ($5 per hand) you need a bankroll of over 3500*$5=$17,500. Really, it means that if your bankroll ever drops below that point, you need to stop playing and drop down in denominations, and not play again until you are back up above that point.
Some may find this approach too aggressive. Certainly, if you are ever taking money out of your bankroll for expenses, it is WAY too aggressive. In other words, you need an even bigger bankroll. You need over $17,500 that you can devote to gambling AND NOTHING ELSE. This is key, and it's something that a lot of people fail to consider.
Also, are you sure that you have the edge that you think you have? It's one thing for a game to return a certain percentage if you play optimally. It's another to actually play optimally. Almost everyone makes occasional mistakes. You need to take this into consideration when calculating your edge. If the game returns 100.5% but you make 0.2% worth of mistakes then your edge is only 0.3%, not 0.5%. If you make 0.6% worth of mistakes you don't have an edge any more.
It's not merely "one of the administrators" with that tag-line. It's the Wizad himself.Quote: tournamentkingI think one of the administrators here has this by-line. I ask WTF? Where am I going wrong?!
But you only quoted half the tag-line. Here's the whole thing:
Quote: Wizard's tag-lineIt's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
Sure, whether you in or lose is important. It's VERY important.
The point was, having a good bet is more important.
lay off that thin edge high varisnce crap, tk. Will give full answer when i get home sunday.Quote: tournamentkingSay WHAT?
I think one of the administrators here has this by-line. I ask WTF? Where am I going wrong?
I've said I was "in training" to be a good video poker player. Today I felt knowledgeable enough to go up to quarters because I've been practicing DDB on B. Dancer's software plus playing it for nickels in a few casinos.
I found what I know is a more than 100% game, 10/6 DDB. I played two 3 hour sit downs. I lost $250 in the first session and $200 in the second. I got no quads at all! I used my slot card and had $40 in free play to go along with this. It's not a lot to lose really, but I kept thinking if I were playing $1 or $2 or even $5, what a loss!
So why would anyone say it doesn't matter if you win or lose but if you made good bets? Huh? I made good bets every hand I played, didn't I? But YES, it certainly DOES matter if I won or lost, and for more than one reason. I just don't get the uncommon sense about ap video poker play. How can anyone not care if they win or lose? What good does it do if good bets are made and you still lose? How is that supposed to make up for a loss that could have been in the thousands of dollars if I played higher limits? Please help!
Quote: mickeycrimmlay off that thin edge high varisnce crap, tk. Will give full answer when i get home sunday.
I'll take thin edge, high variance. Where can I play $5 10/6 DDB?
Teddy, I'm concerned as to why making a "good bet" is more important than winning. I'm missing something key here. I feel like a loser jerk after getting pounded by a 25c machine today. Knowing I made "good bets" does nothing for me now. It did BEFORE I played, but after when it counts I'm feeling let down. How do you vp players take these kind of beatings, then still believe in hearts and flowers for tomorrow? My confidence in being even or ahead after 100,000 hands or whatever, stinks right now.
I believe my error rate is miniscule, but who knows?
Quote: DJTeddyBearBut you only quoted half the tag-line. Here's the whole thing:
Sure, whether you in or lose is important. It's VERY important.
I'm not sure that it's very important.
Say you are walking by an empty craps table. The pit boss calls you over, and offers you the chance to roll the dice one time. You have to bet $5, and if you roll snake eyes you get $1000. Anything else, and you lose, and you can't bet again (you get one shot only). Two things are clear:
1. Assuming that you have $5 with which to gamble, you'd be an idiot not to take this bet.
2. You will probably lose.
The point is, it doesn't matter that you will probably lose. Because, it's not whether you win or lose that is important. It's only important that you have a good bet, and this is a very good bet.
Quote: tournamentkingI think one of the administrators here has this by-line. I ask WTF?
Personal insult -- three-day suspension. Keep in mind whose house you're in.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI'll take thin edge, high variance. Where can I play $5 10/6 DDB?
Oh, wait, I take that back. 0.07% edge?? f-that. I thought it was a quarter percent or something.
To the OP:
I suspect that you are playing above your bankroll here, regardless of the size of your bankroll. Are you that confident that your errors are not costing you a tenth of a percent?
Quote: DJTeddyBearIt's not merely "one of the administrators" with that tag-line. It's the Wizad himself.
But you only quoted half the tag-line. Here's the whole thing:
Sure, whether you in or lose is important. It's VERY important.
The point was, having a good bet is more important.
I would put it the other way round .I think the main reason for gambling is to win money and entertainment is secondary
.I think the Wizard is wrong here- and also in his Einstein quotation.
Quote: scepticusI would put it the other way round .I think the main reason for gambling is to win money .
That's why winning or losing a particular
bet in irrelevant. If you have a good bet
selection, you'll win more than lose. Bet
selection is everything in gambling, it
trumps anything else. Proper bet selection
is god, and the bane of the casino.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceOh, wait, I take that back. 0.07% edge?? f-that. I thought it was a quarter percent or something.
To the OP:
I suspect that you are playing above your bankroll here, regardless of the size of your bankroll. Are you that confident that your errors are not costing you a tenth of a percent?
I expect significantly over half of the people who play 10/6 DDB in Vegas make enough errors to make their edge completely vaporize, maybe as high as 90%. 99.94% accuracy by return isn't trivial to achieve. I currently couldn't do it, I don't think. And if I could, it wouldn't be at a super fast pace.
And tk may also not realize how swingy DDB is. After six hours, if you haven't got quad Aces, 2s, 3s, or 4s all day, it's probably a losing day.
Speaking of swinginess of DDB, I am running a 5000 trial simulation of 125,000 single line hands each right now of 9/6 DDB (98.98% with flawless play). I'm doing this because a person on another forum claimed he has had a 95% return in the last 125k hands. Will any of these 5000 sims show up below 95% (aka 4% below expectation)? I know my guess.
Incorrect. This is a (less well known) form of Gambler's Fallacy.Quote: DRichIf you continue playing that game for six hours a day for the next three years your loss should be close to $0. Assuming you play it 100% correct.
Actually, the more you play, the further it will be from zero. Deviation grows with the root of number of tosses.
Example: fix a range (-x $ \ +x $) of what you consider "close to zero". The probability of ending in this range diminishes when you play more rounds.
It is only your average that is going close to zero. But who cares about his average loss per game when he has lost $1000 in total?
but the public perception andQuote: kubikulannIncorrect. This is a (less well known) form of Gambler's Fallacy.
Actually, the more you play, the further it will be from zero.
almost all gambling folks that can do math (RIP Alan K)
actually believe as 100% truth that the actual $$$ lost the more you play will approach the $EV for the number of trials played.
even poker players believe this.
maybe 2 do not, but I won't name names.
the math, they say, is that simple for $EV
examples are meaningless and uselessQuote: kubikulannIt is only your average that is going close to zero.
But who cares about his average loss per game when he has lost $1000 in total?
to those who believe on their truth based from expected value only.
variance is just a word.
reminds me of the song line
"But what a fool believes ... he sees
No wise man has the power to reason away"
using your example of a loss value,
how possible would it be playing a VP game that returns 1.000670 with a sd of 6.4943
say playing
6 hours a day, 400 hands per hour perfectly, for 3 years and playing max quarters
to actually lose $1000? or more?
what does the clt say about that
The OP may believe that playing what 2 sessions
should show a profit playing with +EV
maybe he just does not understand the
expected value and standard deviation relationship?
relationships
Quote: 7crapsbut the public perception and
almost all gambling folks that can do math (RIP Alan K)
actually believe as 100% truth that the actual $$$ lost the more you play will approach the $EV for the number of trials played.
Perhaps you should raise your bar for "can do math" :)
I'm not sure how it is that you play progressive $ slots without even worst fluctuation then VP. Unless you are doing some crazy hit and run system where you don't play for any prolonged period of time or you are playing some banking bonus machine. Slots should be worst fluctuation then Video poker.Quote: tournamentkingI look forward to Crimm's answer later. I understand the safe bankroll point and I will never bet outside my roll. Right now I'm in the $5 video poker bankroll territory with a good margin for safety. I don't plan on playing that high until I get this all figured out. Beardgoat ot whomever, said I'm calling out Wizard. Not at all, he just doesn't know the difference between confusion and ignorance. But he'll learn.
Teddy, I'm concerned as to why making a "good bet" is more important than winning. I'm missing something key here. I feel like a loser jerk after getting pounded by a 25c machine today. Knowing I made "good bets" does nothing for me now. It did BEFORE I played, but after when it counts I'm feeling let down. How do you vp players take these kind of beatings, then still believe in hearts and flowers for tomorrow? My confidence in being even or ahead after 100,000 hands or whatever, stinks right now.
I believe my error rate is miniscule, but who knows?
If you truly have some incredible slot system, I would seriously stick with slots and leave VP at bay.
You need much more then just finding some machine that has a small advantage. There is so, so much more to it then that. I would say that most of the VP AP's started out with something fairly juicie ;)( I better check JJ thread) and build there knowledge from there, one game, one play at a time.
When you hear people like Bob D are playing some high denomination with a thin edge, you should ignore that they started out with huge advantages . Its to my understanding he had backers when he started playing huge denominations.
I repeat, you are not going to make money sitting around playing some 10/6 machines.
If you are going to play VP I would learn 9/6 jacks or better before you learn anything. Then I would learn DW.
You played 6 hrs with out a 4 of a kind? How fast did you play? You defiantly ran bad I would be upset if it happened to me when I first started playing. Luckily I played something where I could practicality never lose over a days worth of play. I can imagine what would have happened if I lost the first 3 or 4 times out.
Let me give you some advice TK. Lose the undeserving ego, stop arguing and fighting with everyone, especially the AP's who are doing the things you want to learn. No matter how much you think you know about slots, you don't know everything. No one dose. Always take what you think you know and divide it many times. Good Luck Perhaps one day you can change your make to Videopokerking.
Wouldn't it be time to buy a new keyboard, with capitals and punctuation? That would help a lot those who try to understand what you write.Quote: 7crapsusing your example of a loss value,
how possible would it be playing a VP game that returns 1.000670 with a sd of 6.4943
say playing
6 hours a day, 400 hands per hour perfectly, for 3 years and playing max quarters
to actually lose $1000? or more?
what does the clt say about that
The OP may believe that playing what 2 sessions
should show a profit playing with +EV
maybe he just does not understand the
expected value and standard deviation relationship?
relationships
Quote: WizardPersonal insult -- three-day suspension. Keep in mind whose house you're in.
I couldn't figure out why my "post" function wasn't working Fri and Sat, but I think I finally found it here. Is this right, I was suspended? Huh? How does "personal insult" make sense? I didn't label anyone, and I even said I didn't know which admin. had the by-line, so a personal insult was impossible. Besides, I was asking a question and voicing my still novice video poker opinion. How is this?
As for the subject matter, go back to that $50000 four threes winner that was discussed. I looked up the pay table for that game, and 9/7 is full pay for it, but even that's not 100%. He hit the winner on a 9/6 version, and according to all logic I'm reading, that was a bad bet. So who would ever say it doesn't matter if he won $50k or lost $125 on the hand? Would anybody here turn that down and give the money back if you were given another chance to play that hand on one of those over 100% machines just so you could feel better about having made a "good bet"?
Quote: tournamentkingWould anybody here turn that down and give the money back if you were given another chance to play that hand on one of those over 100% machines just so you could feel better about having made a "good bet"?
Heck no, I don't think even the Wizard wouldn't give back the $50k. The difference is that most people versed in the math wouldn't play a machine like that unless there was a good reason for doing so. For example, if that particular machine would give 4% bounceback cash (very doubtful in reality), then it would be worth playing.
The problem with Rob generally is, his teachings can mislead others that playing -EV games like this with his methods will lead to long-term success. But in reality, most (not all) will lose with his methods. Those who don't lose just had a lucky horseshoe up their butt. Man, I really need one of those...haha
Each "session" could go either up or down, but combine enough sessions on a 100%+ game and you'll get the number of hands played x advantage in terms of money. Play enough 103% games and you'll end up $30k ahead after coining in $1mil.
Good lord. *facepalm*Quote: tournamentkingUnderstood. But really, isn't video poker winning all about getting lucky?
No, it's NOT about getting lucky, if you're on the right machine with perfect play.
Naive? Mr. Pot meet Mr. Kettle.Quote: tournamentkingDepending on actually sitting down at a pay-happy machine just because it pays five more credits for one of those full houses, is terribly naive in my opinion.
Quote: tournamentkingUnderstood. But really, isn't video poker winning all about getting lucky? I mean, how can you count on any machine being "in the moment" or whatever, just because it was YOU who sat down at it, and you really really needed it to cooperate? I understand the long run aspect you're talking about, but from what I've read more often than not a vp player will lose for the day. Depending on actually sitting down at a pay-happy machine just because it pays five more credits for one of those full houses, is terribly naive in my opinion.
Is this a serious question?
No, it is not just about getting lucky. If you make enough bets with the edge, and bet within your bankroll (so you don't go broke before you get the chance to make enough bets) then you will win money. This is how casinos win money. Do you think that owning a casino is all about getting lucky? No, it's about setting up games with the odds in your favor and getting people to bet them repeatedly.
Why do you care how often you lose for the day? This is why you need to bet within your bankroll, so that losing for the day does not wipe you out, and, for that matter, losing for a month does not wipe you out. It does not matter how many days you win or lose; it only matters how much money you win or lose.
Here is an unrealistic example: If you lose 9 days out of 10, but on your losing days you lose $500 and on your winning days, you win $50,000, are you going to turn that down because you lose almost every day? Sometimes you might go 20 or 30 days without winning, but, if you have the bankroll to sustain this, who cares? Sometimes you will also win 2 or 3 days in a row. At the end of the year you will be up a lot of money. This is not "getting lucky", any more than the casino "gets lucky" when they win money at roulette.
BTW, paying "5 credits more" for one of those full houses is worth about 1% at most games. That's about the house edge in baccarat. If the casino can keep the baccarat room open, and give people free suites and free food and free drinks and free limo rides and (for really big bettors) free private jet rides to get to the casino, and loss rebates, and pay all their employees, and STILL make a healthy profit, all on that 1%, do you really think that it's wise to ignore it?
Quote: Beethoven9thGood lord. *facepalm*
No, it's NOT about getting lucky, if you're on the right machine with perfect play.
Naive? Mr. Pot meet Mr. Kettle.
So you're saying if you sit down at one of those better than 100% machines and play perfectly, you'll win? I don't think so. I read that ap's can expect to lose more often than they win. I believe I made no mistakes when I played those six hours, and even if I did or didn't, I didn't hit any quads so I would have lost anyway.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceIs this a serious question?
No, it is not just about getting lucky. If you make enough bets with the edge, and bet within your bankroll (so you don't go broke before you get the chance to make enough bets) then you will win money. This is how casinos win money. Do you think that owning a casino is all about getting lucky? No, it's about setting up games with the odds in your favor and getting people to bet them repeatedly.
Why do you care how often you lose for the day? This is why you need to bet within your bankroll, so that losing for the day does not wipe you out, and, for that matter, losing for a month does not wipe you out. It does not matter how many days you win or lose; it only matters how much money you win or lose.
Here is an unrealistic example: If you lose 9 days out of 10, but on your losing days you lose $500 and on your winning days, you win $50,000, are you going to turn that down because you lose almost every day? Sometimes you might go 20 or 30 days without winning, but, if you have the bankroll to sustain this, who cares? Sometimes you will also win 2 or 3 days in a row. At the end of the year you will be up a lot of money. This is not "getting lucky", any more than the casino "gets lucky" when they win money at roulette.
BTW, paying "5 credits more" for one of those full houses is worth about 1% at most games. That's about the house edge in baccarat. If the casino can keep the baccarat room open, and give people free suites and free food and free drinks and free limo rides and (for really big bettors) free private jet rides to get to the casino, and loss rebates, and pay all their employees, and STILL make a healthy profit, all on that 1%, do you really think that it's wise to ignore it?
Thank you. I understand this and will reread it as necessary.
How is it that you say, you understand slot so wel,l but don't understand VP? There is no such thing as a pay-happy Video poker machine OR a pay-happy slot machine. Slots and video poker work the same way basically. The only real differences is slot machines are set to a lower payback percentage because you cant make mistakes when betting max. And one can't easily calculate the payback percentage, unless they have par sheets or track the machine for along period of time.Quote: tournamentkingUnderstood. But really, isn't video poker winning all about getting lucky? I mean, how can you count on any machine being "in the moment" or whatever, just because it was YOU who sat down at it, and you really really needed it to cooperate? I understand the long run aspect you're talking about, but from what I've read more often than not a vp player will lose for the day. Depending on actually sitting down at a pay-happy machine just because it pays five more credits for one of those full houses, is terribly naive in my opinion.
Quote: tournamentkingI believe I made no mistakes when I played those six hours
You're basing your opinion on a mere SIX hours of play???? *facepalm*
Quote: tournamentkingIs this right, I was suspended? Huh? How does "personal insult" make sense?
If you said "wtf" to something your father said, how would he have responded?
let's say you and i agree to flip a coin. if it's heads, you pay me $1000. if it's tails, i pay you $2000. We both give the money to a mutually trusted third party and we both certify the coin is fair.
It comes up heads. You pay me $1000. Am I a genius for making $1000 in a single flip? Or am I a moron for having a ridiculously bad bet?
Results do not matter when evaluating gambling. The only thing that matters is what you can control, whether you had a good bet or not.
Quote: Beethoven9thYou're basing your opinion on a mere SIX hours of play???? *facepalm*
Moreover... why do you think you made no mistakes when you played those 6 hours? Are you including obscure penalty card plays here, or do you just mean that you followed a basic strategy perfectly?
How long did you practice before you played? Playing 6 hours with no errors is not easy. Certainly, people can do it, but most can't do it on their first time out. I'm not saying that it's impossible, but it seems kind of unlikely.
I seriously doubt that would of had much if any effect on his bad run.Quote: AxiomOfChoiceMoreover... why do you think you made no mistakes when you played those 6 hours? Are you including obscure penalty card plays here, or do you just mean that you followed a basic strategy perfectly?
How long did you practice before you played? Playing 6 hours with no errors is not easy. Certainly, people can do it, but most can't do it on their first time out. I'm not saying that it's impossible, but it seems kind of unlikely.
Are you implying since this this is your house, you are our daddy?Quote: WizardIf you said "wtf" to something your father said, how would he have responded?
If that's the case, I think if you ever meet up with JJ, you should lead with, "Who's your daddy"
Quote: WizardIf you said "wtf" to something your father said, how would he have responded?
That depends on what my age was when I said it. As a teen, he would have slapped me silly. In my adult years, he'd have asked where the problem was, then he'd have listened to whatever I had to say about it. If we still disagreed and it started to get heated, well, I outgrew him in my 20's.
You are a genius and I'm currently offering this bet at my house along with some razzle-dazzleQuote: sodawatertournamentking --
let's say you and i agree to flip a coin. if it's heads, you pay me $1000. if it's tails, i pay you $2000. We both give the money to a mutually trusted third party and we both certify the coin is fair.
It comes up heads. You pay me $1000. Am I a genius for making $1000 in a single flip? Or am I a moron for having a ridiculously bad bet?
Results do not m
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceMoreover... why do you think you made no mistakes when you played those 6 hours? Are you including obscure penalty card plays here, or do you just mean that you followed a basic strategy perfectly?
How long did you practice before you played? Playing 6 hours with no errors is not easy. Certainly, people can do it, but most can't do it on their first time out. I'm not saying that it's impossible, but it seems kind of unlikely.
I followed basic perfect strategy with a set of those strategy cards just in case. I played fairly slow, as you may be able to tell from the amounts I lost in each three hour session with no quads. I practiced at least twenty hours in the weeks prior, but it was on three different games.
Quote: AxelWolfHow is it that you say, you understand slot so wel,l but don't understand VP? There is no such thing as a pay-happy Video poker machine OR a pay-happy slot machine. Slots and video poker work the same way basically. The only real differences is slot machines are set to a lower payback percentage because you cant make mistakes when betting max. And one can't easily calculate the payback percentage, unless they have par sheets or track the machine for along period of time.
Axel, by the time I get comfortable playing $2 and $5 and maybe even higher, you'll be BEGGING me to play for you. But I won't come cheap like the others.
Here's what a pay-happy vp machine is. It's one that wins more hands than it loses. My point was, vp ap's seem to believe if they have four awful losing sessions in a row, somehow their future machines will cooperate and get them to whatever their expectation theoretically should be. I call bs on that, for the simple reason that no one could possibly know if they'll constantly be sitting at machines that pay or just aren't paying, or whatever. It's all guess work, which in turn places an awful lot of emphasis on having very good luck. Am I wrong?
Quote: tournamentkingThat depends on what my age was when I said it. As a teen, he would have slapped me silly.
Thank you. If one of my kids said that to me I assure you they wouldn't say it twice. I'm not saying I'm anyone's father but there is something to be said for considering who are you saying "wtf" to, as I consider it to be very offensive.
The record has also shown no apology has been tendered.
I would hire you at any price, just so i could fire you.Quote: tournamentkingAxel, by the time I get comfortable playing $2 and $5 and maybe even higher, you'll be BEGGING me to play for you. But I won't come cheap like the others.
Here's what a pay-happy vp machine is. It's one that wins more hands than it loses. My point was, vp ap's seem to believe if they have four awful losing sessions in a row, somehow their future machines will cooperate and get them to whatever their expectation theoretically should be. I call bs on that, for the simple reason that no one could possibly know if they'll constantly be sitting at machines that pay or just aren't paying, or whatever. It's all guess work, which in turn places an awful lot of emphasis on having very good luck. Am I wrong?
Anyways, Right or wrong ........................How is this different then slots? please explain.
Quote: sodawatertournamentking --
let's say you and i agree to flip a coin. if it's heads, you pay me $1000. if it's tails, i pay you $2000. We both give the money to a mutually trusted third party and we both certify the coin is fair.
It comes up heads. You pay me $1000. Am I a genius for making $1000 in a single flip? Or am I a moron for having a ridiculously bad bet?
Results do not matter when evaluating gambling. The only thing that matters is what you can control, whether you had a good bet or not.
But when you gamble you are not EVALUATING it. All the analyses in the world won't make a coin or a card come up any which way. So while results do not matter when trying to figure out wtf should or might happen or not happen, results are the only thing that ultimately counts. Case in point: the guy who hit the four 3's. I'm sure he knew how he was playing a bad-bet machine. But was he playing that thing for a billion hands, or for just an hour or two? Likewise, I knew I was playing a machine just barely over 100% the other day. What good did it do, other than shock me into wondering how I'd feel if the beating happened on a $5 machine. This thinking that losing a few sessions means nothing in the overall scheme of things is loose at best. So I stayed well within my bankroll at 25c or $5. That takes no part of the pit I felt in my stomach away.
Quote: tournamentkingBut when you gamble you are not EVALUATING it. All the analyses in the world won't make a coin or a card come up any which way. So while results do not matter when trying to figure out wtf should or might happen or not happen, results are the only thing that ultimately counts. Case in point: the guy who hit the four 3's. I'm sure he knew how he was playing a bad-bet machine. But was he playing that thing for a billion hands, or for just an hour or two? Likewise, I knew I was playing a machine just barely over 100% the other day. What good did it do, other than shock me into wondering how I'd feel if the beating happened on a $5 machine. This thinking that losing a few sessions means nothing in the overall scheme of things is loose at best. So I stayed well within my bankroll at 25c or $5. That takes no part of the pit I felt in my stomach away.
Games that return more usually have higher pays for lower hands, therefore you're able to stretch out your session bankroll further. 10/7 DB gives you that extra credit or two on full houses as well as the flush, so playing the high returning game is a better bet. Same for FPDW and getting 5 for 4oak as opposed to 4 on NSU
Quote: AxelWolfI would hire you at any price, just so i could fire you.
Anyways, Right or wrong ........................How is this different then slots? please explain.
Poor business acumen axel. Sometimes, firing the wrong unvetted guy just for the fun of it means accountability and consequences.
It's already been said: ap'ing slots properly usually has very little to do with EV calculations in the spirit of how vp is analyzed.
Quote: WizardThank you. If one of my kids said that to me I assure you they wouldn't say it twice. I'm not saying I'm anyone's father but there is something to be said for considering who are you saying "wtf" to, as I consider it to be very offensive.
The record has also shown no apology has been tendered.
I'm no teen. But if anyone tells me they were offended by how I delivered a criticism, then I apologize.
I'm not asking about how they are analyzed or why. Most people will tell you that slots are far harder to analyze then VP. The swings should even be bigger and more frustrating then VP. So I dont understand how it is you dont get how slots and VP are much different when it comes to the fluctuation aspect you are complaining about. Its simple, you ran bad on 4OAK on the video poker, just like you can run bad on sevens or what ever, 4 of a kind, like symbols, on a slot.Quote: tournamentkingPoor business acumen axel. Sometimes, firing the wrong unvetted guy just for the fun of it means accountability and consequences.
It's already been said: ap'ing slots properly usually has very little to do with EV calculations in the spirit of how vp is analyzed.
Quote: tournamentkingAxel, by the time I get comfortable playing $2 and $5 and maybe even higher, you'll be BEGGING me to play for you. But I won't come cheap like the others.
Here's what a pay-happy vp machine is. It's one that wins more hands than it loses. My point was, vp ap's seem to believe if they have four awful losing sessions in a row, somehow their future machines will cooperate and get them to whatever their expectation theoretically should be. I call bs on that, for the simple reason that no one could possibly know if they'll constantly be sitting at machines that pay or just aren't paying, or whatever. It's all guess work, which in turn places an awful lot of emphasis on having very good luck. Am I wrong?
Yes, because either you've read poorly explain Video Poker AP'ers or you've misunderstood what they've said.
As the number of trials increases the relative actual value comes closer to the relative expected value. By -relative- I mean expressed in %age terms, rather than absolute dollar values.
If you are playing a 101% game and lose $400 on $20,000 coin in, you are running at 98% actual value. You still expect over the next $80,000 coin in to profit $800. Thus over $100,000 coin in you've gained $400. And run at 100.4% actual value.
There's no magical gamblers fallacy in that. If however someone says 'I lost $400, but I'll make $1400 on the next $80,000 coin in to make it up', then just ask them where that extra 0.75% EV is coming from.
In short, the more you play, the more the Actual Value comes in line with the Expected value as a percentage. One can work out the variance over their hands, see how bad they've run according to the book and re-evaluate. Maybe if they are 3 standard deviations away from book values, they might wanna review their play, or their assumptions on the game they are playing.
Quote: thecesspitAs the number of trials increases the relative actual value comes closer to the relative expected value. By -relative- I mean expressed in %age terms, rather than absolute dollar values.
If you are playing a 101% game and lose $400 on $20,000 coin in, you are running at 98% actual value. You still expect over the next $80,000 coin in to profit $800. Thus over $100,000 coin in you've gained $400. And run at 100.4% actual value.
There's no magical gamblers fallacy in that. If however someone says 'I lost $400, but I'll make $1400 on the next $80,000 coin in to make it up', then just ask them where that extra 0.75% EV is coming from.
In short, the more you play, the more the Actual Value comes in line with the Expected value as a percentage. One can work out the variance over their hands, see how bad they've run according to the book and re-evaluate. Maybe if they are 3 standard deviations away from book values, they might wanna review their play, or their assumptions on the game they are playing.
Well said. Absolutely beautiful.
