Playing Without An Edge
Quote: SingleCoinVPFrom the very beginning, all I ever wanted was an open and fair discussion of negative video poker games, the games most people play. I didn't want our discussions to interfere with the Advantage Play Forum, so I asked for a separate forum and my request was granted. The Recreational Forum is the most popular Forum, even now.
Dancer could easily have been helpful to players who play negative video poker. He could have discussed these games objectively. He could have concentrated on advantages other than profit. Instead, he chose to respond with condescending comments and outright insults. He followed up by touted the superior intelligence of Advantage Players. Time and time again, recreational video poker questions and comments were disregarded or treated with contempt. The final straw for me was his article stating he would be please if his daughter married a professional gambler. What response was he expecting?
It's not what Dancer says that annoys people, it's how he says it. Gambling is a sensitive topic. A teacher should take this into consideration. Limiting your discussions to professional play and angering a host of others is not a way to win friends or converts.
I have said some things about Dancer that I regret. For that I am sorry. I think he needs to switch gears and talk more about everyday video poker, not just games with an advantage. He won't take my advice that's for sure. I doubt he cares anything about players who play 97% games. I do and will continue to talk about them as long as I am allowed to.
Dancer's goal is to teach others to play VP with an advantage (for whatever reason, I have no idea). I'm not into the whole "make it easy for my competition to beat me" thing, but to each their own. I say tomato you say tomato.
His podcast is called "Gambling with an Edge" (keyword: edge). It's not "Gambling at a minimal cost" nor "Gambling for Entertainment" and it's certainly not "Gambling Podcast so I can win Friends".
What is there to talk about with -EV games? It sounds like you have it all figured out -- play single coin on the lowest denom at a slow speed and enjoy yourself. If you want to flip the odds in your favor so you're playing with an advantage, it's going to take more than listening to podcasts and reading forum posts or blogs. It means you gotta go out and find stuff. Admittedly, it's not the easiest thing to do and it's certainly more difficult if you don't know what to look for if this isn't the type of stuff you're used to doing.
But don't blame Dancer for talking about advantage play when a huge majority of the listeners/readers are there for that exact topic.
What about the 99% who can't play with an advantage? Dancer is often described as "The world greatest video poker expert". Perhaps his title should be "The world greatest advantage play expert"?Quote: RSBut don't blame Dancer for talking about advantage play when a huge majority of the listeners/readers are there for that exact topic.
If you are going with the first title, I think you should talk just as much about negative video poker as advantage games. The majority of players will play any game put in front of them. Why? Because they go to the casino to be entertained not to pay their bills. They know there is a cost to play. It's at the end of the day when their wallets are empty that they feel regret. Long term, this an inevitable consequence of playing negative games. There are proven ways to slow or reduce the cost. That's what I want my expert to talk about.
Quote: SingleCoinVPFrom the very beginning, all I ever wanted was an open and fair discussion of negative video poker games, the games most people play. I didn't want our discussions to interfere with the Advantage Play Forum, so I asked for a separate forum and my request was granted. The Recreational Forum is the most popular Forum, even now.
Are we talking about this forum?
Quote:Dancer could easily have been helpful to players who play negative video poker. He could have discussed these games objectively. He could have concentrated on advantages other than profit. Instead, he chose to respond with condescending comments and outright insults. He followed up by touted the superior intelligence of Advantage Players. Time and time again, recreational video poker questions and comments were disregarded or treated with contempt. The final straw for me was his article stating he would be please if his daughter married a professional gambler. What response was he expecting?
With all due respect, and I suppose you would have no way of knowing this, but I don't read the videopoker.com forums. I've certainly seen them and been directed to them, on occasion, but they seem pretty dead for the most part and there is very rarely anything said there that is of any concern to me.
You say, "He could have concentrated on advantages other than profit." Here's the thing: You're not using the word, 'Advantage,' the same way most savvy gamblers would. If there is no profit and not anything else making a situation at least subjectively a +EV one, then by definition, it is not an advantage.
I addressed his post on the so-called, "Superior intelligence," I disagree. I would probably stipulate that almost all advantage players are of at least average intelligence.
Are you referring to this article?
https://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/gambling-with-an-edge/dad-im-going-to-marry-a-professional-gambler-we-want-your-blessing/
If Bob Dancer is a professional gambler, does it not stand to reason that he should not automatically have a problem with his daughter marrying one? Would a lawyer automatically have a problem with his daughter marrying a lawyer?
Quote:It's not what Dancer says that annoys people, it's how he says it. Gambling is a sensitive topic. A teacher should take this into consideration. Limiting your discussions to professional play and angering a host of others is not a way to win friends or converts.
Dancer claims he does not play -EV games unless the overall proposition is such to be positive. In Million Dollar Video Poker he did it once, by accident. Why would he not limit his discussion to professional play? What possible interest do you expect him to have in recreational play? He writes video poker columns, plays professionally and is a co-host of a show called Gambling with an Edge. I tend to discuss both, don't get me wrong, but I'm a general gambling writer. I don't see why Dancer should be compelled to write about something he does not care about.
Quote:I have said some things about Dancer that I regret. For that I am sorry. I think he needs to switch gears and talk more about everyday video poker, not just games with an advantage. He won't take my advice that's for sure. I doubt he cares anything about players who are stuck with 97% games. I do and will continue to talk about them as long as I am allowed to.
You should go on record as taking back that he ever implied a guarantee of anything, that's for sure.
Anyway, this is not the first time I have seen an opinion that his posts come off as condescending. He can write his posts in whatever way he wants to. You can choose not to read them, do they not have a block feature over there like we have? For example, he recently made this post:
https://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/gambling-with-an-edge/multiple-drawing-entries/
It talks about a casino that decided to do 10x drawing tickets all day, every day, for that particular promotion and how recreational players mistakenly took it for an advantage. He said:
Quote:I have a really good handle on how smart players analyze casino promotions. I’m continually amazed how these same promotions are analyzed by not-so-smart players!
Anyway, any savvy person can basically tell you that everyone is just getting the same number of entries based on coin-in as long as they are hitting the threshold amounts correctly. You could make it 0.1x drawing entries and it's all the same thing. 1x, 10x, 100x, 1000x, 0.1x, doesn't matter.
I think the only caveat I would have put in that article is suppose you are a player who plays a good bit, but is usually not available to play during the tickets multiplier times...in that event, this promotion benefits you. Essentially, you don't have to worry about the people who come in and hammer the coin-in during the designated time periods for a tickets multiplier, (the sort of advantage or perceived advantage that Dancer and/or other players would be looking for) because the appointed number of coin-in is going to be worth whatever number of tickets.
So, for the players who can't make the designated times, their coin-in is just as good as the coin-in for anyone else (from a ticket standpoint) regardless of the time the machine is being played. Ergo, I would argue that this promotion benefits any player who intends to be present for the drawing, but is otherwise unable to put coin-in during the multiplier times.***
***There is a certain point where this is no longer true, but it would require the player's equity (number of tickets in thew drawing relative to the total) to be less than it otherwise would be when the drawing works the normal way. For example, if the 10x all the time (as the casino is hoping) draws more substantially more coin-in from everyone, (as the guy in the article and the bartender discussed) then it is possible the equity for a given player will go down.
For a simple example, let's pretend that there are only five players, only one of whom would be playing during the normal 10x entry hours:
Player 1: 100 Tickets
Player 2: 200 Tickets
Player 3: 100 Tickets
Player 4*: 100 Tickets * 10 = 1,000 Tickets
Player 5: 300 Tickets
So, focusing on Player 1, we see that his equity in the drawing is 100/1700 = 5.88% of whatever the drawing is for. (Rounded)
Okay, so now we are going to give 10x tickets to everyone even though it is the same thing as giving 1x tickets to everyone:
Player 1: 100 Tickets * 10 = 1000
Player 2: 200 * 10 = 2000
Player 3: 100 * 10 = 1000
Player 4: 100 * 10 = 1000
Player 5: 300 * 10 = 3000
We now see that the equity for Player 1 improves to 1000/8000 = 12.5% of whatever the drawing is for.
Imagine that Player 4 instead says, "This is BS, I cannot believe they are not giving any kind of advantage to those who play during select times, so I am no longer playing," and drops out completely. Here we go:
Player 1: 100 Tickets * 10 = 1000
Player 2: 200 * 10 = 2000
Player 3: 100 * 10 = 1000
Player 4: 0
Player 5: 300 * 10 = 3000
Now, the equity for Player 1 improves to 1000/7000 = 14.29% of whatever the drawing is for. (Rounded)
Anyway, the only way this doesn't benefit a player who normally could not play during the multiplier times is if the coin-in of all other players (tickets, combined) goes up so substantially relative to Player 1 that Player 1 ends up with less equity than he otherwise would have. I imagine there is a good chance that many players at whatever the casino in question is will end up with more equity than they otherwise would have, however, because there are no players who can get 10x the equity that they are for the same amount of coin-in.
The only players who are decidedly harmed by this are the ones who would have made it a point to be playing during the special ticket multiplier times, or at least, would have just happened to be doing so.
Quote: SingleCoinVPThe final straw for me was his article stating he would be pleased if his daughter married a professional gambler.
I'll give the link again because it may have blended in with Mission's other content above:
https://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/gambling-with-an-edge/dad-im-going-to-marry-a-professional-gambler-we-want-your-blessing/
Where did Bob say he would be pleased? He said he would give his blessing if he judged the guy to be legit. But Bob also said he doesn't recommend pro gambling to anybody.
Quote: RS. If you want to flip the odds in your favor so you're playing with an advantage, it's going to take more than listening to podcasts and reading forum posts or blogs. It means you gotta go out and find stuff. Admittedly, it's not the easiest thing to do and it's certainly more difficult if you don't know what to look for if this isn't the type of stuff you're used to doing.
Have to disagree with you here. In Las Vegas, there is only a little more nuance to playing video poker with an advantage than putting money in the machines and hitting buttons. There are probably at least 20 casinos that have signs that say "over 100%" or something similar. Anyone can get a strategy chart on their phone. All the information about how to find them is online and if someone has found wizardofvegas and is familiar with Bob Dancer, they should have no difficulty finding machines that give the player the advantage. Recreational players can very easily be advantage players. It is weird that SCVP does not recognize that -- and even seems to want to fight against that idea.
Quote: SingleCoinVPWhat about the 99% who can't play with an advantage?
The percentage of video poker players who do not have any access to playing with an advantage is far less than 99% you claim. To put it in perspective, the number of people who visit Las Vegas every year is double the population of Florida.
Quote: SingleCoinVPWhat about the 99% who can't play with an advantage? Dancer is often described as "The world greatest video poker expert". Perhaps his title should be "The world greatest advantage play expert"?
Flawed assumption. You should have asked, "What about the 99% who choose to play with a disadvantage?" -EV video poker is only tangentially related to anything Dancer does in the sense that they are both video poker. It would be like demanding a prosecuting attorney (who is a writer) to write from the point of view and for the benefit of defense attorneys. Why would she do that? What sense does it make? Other defense attorneys should write about defense attorney stuff.
Anyway, I think there are plenty of venues for the discussion of -EV Video Poker such that it is not incumbent upon Dancer to discuss -EV if he does not wish to do so. On that note, why should anyone have to discuss anything they don't want to talk about?
Here's an article you might like to read wherein Mr. Dancer and I had a few comments back and forth:
https://wizardofvegas.com/articles/surprising-dancer-article/
Anyway, that was just a promotion that he wrote off as not advantageous whereas I wrote a counter that there were REALLY strong advantages to be had. Anyway, I apologized because the article might have come off as a shot at him, but that's not how it was meant. The intent behind the article was just to let advantage players and would-be advantage players know that you don't always need to rely on video poker to take advantage of a promotion.
Quote:If you are going with the first title, I think you should talk just as much about negative video poker as advantage games. The majority of players will play any game put in front of them. Why? Because they go to the casino to be entertained not to pay their bills. They know there is a cost to play. It's at the end of the day when their wallets are empty that they feel regret. Long term, this an inevitable consequence of playing negative games. There are proven ways to slow or reduce the cost. That's what I want my expert to talk about.
You really seem to miss that he can talk about whatever the heck he wants to. He doesn't have any REAL experience with playing -EV Video Poker, for one thing. Aside from strictly math-based or online promotions, I don't write much about table games...why? I have little to no experience in that regard. If I started talking in detail about table games play (aside from in strictly mathematical terms) it would take people two paragraphs to figure out that I was talking completely out of my @$$.
Again, here is the best way to reduce the cost: Don't play. Please tell me what is difficult about the concept of, "Don't go to the casino."?
I get it, people play for entertainment. Yes. I write some stuff for such people. But, if you want to talk about the best way to minimize costs, the only answer is don't play. Cost: $0. You don't even have to put any gas in the tank. I have just written everything there is to write about the best way to reduce costs, reduce them to $0 by not playing.
Here's an example of what I am talking about. In today's casinos it is very common to find better games at the dollar denomination than at quarters. We play deuces wild exclusively. The quarter single line deuces wild odds are commonly 97.055% at max coins (5). If you step up to dollar play, you can play 98.9% deuces wild. The 98.9% dollar deuces wild game at single coin is 97.686%, one half percent better than max coin quarters. Isn't it better to play single line dollars at this casino?
Switching denominations mid play can be a blessing or a curse. Over the years, I have had both. I have learned if I am going to move up, I should only do it at the end of the day. Why? Because it's easier to walk out with any profit.
There are as many legitimate questions about playing negative games as their are players. Ignoring those questions does nothing to help anyone.
The mote in your neighbor’s eye, etc. . .
Sounds to me like we need more than one expert? I'm not one. I'm one recreational player amidst the millions who have questions.Quote: unJonOk I’ve come around. This thread is all getting slightly absurd. It is not Bob Dancer’s chosen profession to help people play -EV games, and it is no one’s place to say that he should choose that as his profession. SCVP, it appears you’ve identified a niche that is not currently served by the market. You could choose to make that your new profession and help all the people you think Dancer should help.
Quote: SingleCoinVPSounds to me like we need more than one expert? I'm not one. I'm one recreational player amidst the millions who have questions.
You give off the impression that you are sure you have all the answers
I honestly cant remember anyone who admitted they play -ev ever asking me how they can continue to go on losing, just slower and more satisfactorily.
Perhaps that is why your repeated requests for such info seem strange.
99% of the population PLAY -ev but they never ask how they can continue to lose!
It like asking a health food guru to please address McDonald's and other fast food eaters how they can be healthier REMAINING on their diet of Big Macs. What answer would you expect from the health food guru?
Add in, and how many times, and then you will know how we feel about you.Quote: SingleCoinVP
It's not only what Dancer says that annoys people, it's how he says it.
Quote: SingleCoinVPExcept for an email we exchanged about ten years ago, the only direct communication I have ever had with Dancer has been through Videopoker.com. I do listen to his radio show on occasion. When I said "he says", I meant on that forum.
Here's an example of what I am talking about. In today's casinos it is very common to find better games at the dollar denomination than at quarters. We play deuces wild exclusively. The quarter single line deuces wild odds are commonly 97.055% at max coins (5). If you step up to dollar play, you can play 98.9% deuces wild. The 98.9% dollar deuces wild game at single coin is 97.686%, one half percent better than max coin quarters. Isn't it better to play single line dollars at this casino?
Isn't it better to play single-coin quarters than single coin dollars? Isn't it best not to play at all? If you play zero hands, then your expected loss is nothing.
Again, there are two potential goals (aside from entertainment) that I can identify: The first goal is to play at an advantage, the second goal is to lose as little as possible. If one is playing for the second goal, then the best way to achieve the second goal is to just not play at all. If you don't play, then you won't lose and won't be expected to lose.
Quote:Switching denominations mid play can be a blessing or a curse. Over the years, I have had both. I have learned if I am going to move up, I should only do it at the end of the day. Why? Because it's easier to walk out with any profit.
There are as many legitimate questions about playing negative games as their are players. Ignoring those questions does nothing to help anyone.
I could see where the first thing might apply to you personally. Perhaps there is a player who leaves with any profit at any time, however small. First hand is a straight, okay, I'm leaving. (Depending on paytable, I guess) Perhaps there is a player who always leaves if he doubles the amount that he was willing to lose.
If we identify being expected to win as good and being expected to lose as bad, then there is no good way to play a -EV game...there are only less bad ones. I would identify less bad as losing the lowest possible amount, per hand, per hour, whatever. If you do not play, then you cannot lose, therefore I would identify not playing as neutral, which is better than bad or less bad.
One particular verbiage that Wizard has used many times on several WoO pages is, "If you must play..." I like that verbiage. The implication of that verbiage is that it is better not to play a -EV game than to play it. "If you must play," here is how you lose the least amount of money per decision. I have to run, but more on this in a few since you are so interested.
Playing video poker is not always about making a profit. If it were, few players would be left. There will always be opportunities for those who are motivated enough to seek them out. I'm seventy two years old. I want to spend the rest of my time sitting next to my wife of 54 years watching her smile. I can do that playing nickels, single coin quarters or $25 a hand. If I make a little money while I'm doing it, Great. I expect I won't and that's OK with me.
Quote: SingleCoinVPNot playing is certainly an option. For most people, probably the best option. If I chose that option, I would have missed a lot. I would have missed thousands of hours of great entertainment. I would have missed traveling all over the country on our video poker road trips. I would have missed the excitement of hitting four royals in one day. I would have never had the experience of staying in a casino luxury suite overlooking the city. Most of all, I would have missed all that quality time with my wife doing things together.
You certainly can't play video poker without playing video poker. Clearly, you find playing in a casino more entertaining than the multitudinous variety of free ways that you can play online and that's also fine. You know what the entertainment is costing you per hand, per hour and perhaps you even strictly control it in absolute (maximum $$$ lost) terms.***
***And, you know what, I think that's awesome. I wish return information had to be made known for all machines, or at least a minimum-maximum range based on the bet amount. If someone seeks out the information to know what the game is costing them and decides the entertainment cost is worth it, I think that is tremendous. I see it as no different than saying I will pay $60 for a ticket to xxxx concert, it's a steal if I can get it for $40 or less, but I am definitely not paying more than $60 to see x band.
I believe you can still travel across the country without playing video poker.
In any case, I take your point. You clearly love video poker, but believe that you can not play at an advantage in a way that is convenient to you, so you want to discuss how to play at the least disadvantage, or whatever.
Quote:Playing video poker is not always about making a profit. If it were, few players would be left. There will always be opportunities for those who are motivated enough to seek them out. I'm seventy two years old. I want to spend the rest of my time sitting next to my wife of 54 years watching her smile. I can do that playing nickels, single coin quarters or $25 a hand. If I make a little money while I'm doing it, Great. I expect I won't and that's OK with me.
I'm not confident enough to say there will always be video poker opportunities, but those who strictly play video poker at an advantage probably sure hope so. I guess everyone hopes so because certainly some (exclusively or majority) video poker AP's would try to figure out other AP methods, which would increase the competition on those.
Okay, if you want to lose the least amount of money, I feel pretty confident saying playing a single coin on nickels is the best way to go if we are assuming a -EV video poker game and no penny game available.
Now, you were interested in how to play at the lowest disadvantage. I have seen you talk about losing the least amount, but then you also talk about how the dollar machines have a better paytable than the quarters machines and what I am saying to you is those two points are incongruous. They are both right, but they are incongruous with each other.
Measuring Expected (or Actual) Loss
The first thing that I would want to note is that there are two ways that you could look at expected loss:
1.) Expected Value as a Percentage
-Okay, so most of the -EV gambling methods that are recommended (for lack of a better term) focus on playing the, "Best," game available from a standpoint of expected value as a percentage. House edge. Return-to-player. Whatever you want to call it.
-The goal of this is to identify the best game, or paytable of a particular type of game (such as video poker) and figuring out which one has the best return-to-player. (Hereafter abbreviated as RTP) If the RTP of a game is 98%, then you are expected to lose 2% of all monies bet.
-If this is the stated goal, the selected game is video poker AND this is the only consideration, then you would bet max coins on the best possible paytable at the best possible denomination (unless two or more are equal).
2.) Expected Monetary Loss
-Okay, so we have calculated a few of these throughout this thread. Assuming optimal play, playing at the same speed, etc. etc., then you can also look at expected monetary loss on a per hand or per hour basis. Once again, if this is the goal and nickels are the lowest denomination available AND you can play single line nickels for a single coin...then I believe this would almost always be your lowest possible expected monetary loss or loss per hour. The nickels game would have to be truly awful (or some other game near 100% EV or more than) for this not to be the case.
----
It sounds like you are trying to find some sort of balance of lowest expected monetary loss and expected percentage value of the game that you are playing. Again, that's fine, you can play however you want to. However, it does make it tough to identify a particular goal and determine the best way of achieving that goal when the goal itself is inconsistent.
If you wanted to say something like this for an example:
Quote: EXAMPLEI do not have fun playing video poker unless I am betting at least $1 per hand and no more than $25 per hand. Given these games that I like to play and the paytables for all denominations for which at least a dollar, but no more than $25 can be bet, which of these accomplishes the following:
-Has the lowest expected loss per hour given a fixed number of hands? Make bankroll last longest? (All kinds of variations)
-Has the best expected return percentage?
And, both of these are answerable questions.
You could identify a point at which you would, "Walk away," from a monetary standpoint and it could be identified (by simulation, probably, if not extremely intuitive) which game would give the most likely opportunity to be up by $XXX.xx, or more, at some point before losing the session bankroll.
So, any specific question is mathematically answerable and, if I think it is an interesting question, I may well answer it...as might many here. Bob Dancer likely will not, as is his right to choose not to do so. I may not if I don't care about the question at all or find it uninteresting.
But, everything that I have seen from you identifies two goals without defining which one takes priority. If lowest expected monetary loss takes priority, I can blindly say bet a single nickel (if no penny machines) and will be 95%+ confident I am automatically right.
At this time, I feel the chance of hitting a $1,000 royal flush is worth playing max coins. To limit the damage, I set a daily limit and stick to it. I have also been playing slower and going less often. I also quit switching denominations mid play. I will do this at the end of the day. Two weeks ago in Murphy NC, I had $30 left and hit a $1,000 dollar quad deuce while my wife was walking toward the door. I have tried everything you can think of to balance all these factors. Some worked, some didn't. If you look back you will see I have been posting on these forums for over ten years. Playing a minimum of one full day a week for that long, I have played a lot of hands. Some years I profit, some I don't.
Anyway, I wish to discuss playing the games I see. All of them are negative. When I go to the casino, I see a lot of players like me. I don't see many posting on these forums. Most are afraid of being ridiculed or being called names. I think that's sad.
Quote: SingleCoinVPMy goal is to play as long as possible at the lowest cost on any given day. However, there are other factors I must consider that affect how I play. One is comps and the other is entertainment value. If I play single coin quarters all the time, the casino will not comp our rooms. We use these comped rooms as mini vacations. My wife always plays max coin quarters, so she doesn't have to make those decisions. Through experience, I have learned how much coin-in is required to keep our comps. So far, they remain as they were.
Once again, your first sentence indicates goals that inherently conflict with each other. Also, I'm uncertain what you mean by, "Cost." If you are referring to expected cost, then you simply want to play the highest returning game, but that may conflict with the minimum amount of time that you wish to play. (If applicable)
Generally speaking, they say, "Don't play for comps," but in this case, you want the comps. You identify the comps as having subjective value. The comps, whether you are doing it directly or not, are calculated into what you consider to be your overall return.
Whether you know it or not, this is the same general concept that advantage players use in certain situations.
Okay, so you first determine, "What is the value of this room, to me?" You could look at all kinds of things. You could consider it as the actual retail value of the room, how much would the room cost if I just rented it? You could look at it as the most you would be willing to pay for the room if that amount is less than the retail cost. You could assign the room a value of $1. Like I said, assigning a value to a comp of that nature is going to be very subjective.
For me, if I am doing some sort of play at a local, I assign the room a value of $0.00. The reason is because I will use the room (often) if offered it, but I definitely have no interest in the room if it is going to cost more than $0. Thus, $0 value, as far as any calculations go.
Anyway, you could then calculate your expected loss based on coin-in, then subtract that expected loss by the value that you think the room is worth to achieve what your expected value of the overall proposition of playing that particular amount of coin-in is. How much coin-in will I put on single-coin quarters? How much on max coin quarters? How much on single coin dollars? How much on max coin dollars?
And, if you know those answers, you can arrive at your expected loss on the machine as well as your expected value taking into account those other factors.
The problem is that your goals are going to be different from those of other people in that regard and I certainly don't know the coin-in (or ADT) requirements to get rooms at your casino because I don't even know what the casino is.
From a purely expected value standpoint, you would just play max coins on the best paytable available. That said, very few recreational players actually play this way. In some cases, a player might say, "But, I have a greater probability (different from EV) of losing all of my daily bankroll before hitting the coin in requirements if I bet too high." That player might then plan his or her play accordingly, as you seem to do.
Quote:At this time, I feel the chance of hitting a $1,000 royal flush is worth playing max coins. To limit the damage, I set a daily limit and stick to it. I have also been playing slower and going less often. I also quit switching denominations mid play. I will do this at the end of the day. Two weeks ago in Murphy NC, I had $30 left and hit a $1,000 dollar quad deuce while my wife was walking toward the door. I have tried everything you can think of to balance all these factors. Some worked, some didn't. If you look back you will see I have been posting on these forums for over ten years. Playing a minimum of one full day a week for that long, I have played a lot of hands. Some years I profit, some I don't.
Sounds good, but with all due respect, I don't have time to read ten years of posts from one person. You seem to have a grasp of what it takes to accomplish your personal goals, though. That grasp won't necessarily help other players. For one thing, different casinos are going to have different thresholds of the type of straight coin-in (or ADT, in many cases) to get free rooms. In other words, it would be difficult to give any answers that are not highly specific to where you play because they will not always be correct.
Quote:Anyway, I wish to discuss playing the games I see. All of them are negative. When I go to the casino, I see a lot of players like me. I don't see many posting on these forums. Most are afraid of being ridiculed or being called names. I think that's sad.
I think it's more likely that most of them are not interested enough in video poker to seek out the forums. I ran into a guy who I believe was playing DDB at Rivers Casino in Pittsburgh on one occasion: He was incorrectly holding two pair with aces as opposed to just the aces, which was definitely an incorrect decision. I normally don't go around saying anything about incorrect decisions, but this was a bad EV hold that ALSO was costing him opportunities to hit a high-paying hand. Anyway, he didn't believe me and I wanted to bet $100 I could prove it, but he offered to bet a drink (I drank at the time) instead. I pulled up WoO and proceeded to prove it, he bought the drink but brought up that he had never seen or heard of WoO before.
Point is, if he doesn't know what WoO is, then he presumably does not know what WoV is which means he quite likely just goes to the casino and plays without looking for other sources of information outside of the casino. I think, most likely, the previous sentence applies to most players.
Quote: SingleCoinVP
Anyway, I wish to discuss playing the games I see. All of them are negative. When I go to the casino, I see a lot of players like me. I don't see many posting on these forums. Most are afraid of being ridiculed or being called names. I think that's sad.
Then this is probably not the venue for that. One would think you would realize that in less than a couple hundred posts, but I digress. Unfortunately for you most losers are about even or slightly ahead so they don't like talking about losing much.
Maybe you could annoint yourself the Wizard of Losing, start your own forum, and spread the word to the random degens you see in your casino travels and hope the new site gets some traction so you can have others to commiserate with.
"The Wizard of Losing Less" would be a better title.Quote: MaxPenMaybe you could annoint yourself the Wizard of Losing, start your own forum, and spread the word to fellow the random degens you see in your casino travels and hope the new site gets some traction so you can have others to commiserate with.
I did start my own forum. There was no Recreational Forum on Videopoker.com until I asked for it. I saw the need for a forum with less emphasis on math and more on entertainment. The owners of the website agreed and granted my request. That Forum was magnitudes more popular than the Strategy Forum. The Strategy Police wouldn't leave us alone. They trolled our posts and interrupted our threads. At one point, one of them stated single coin players should be killed. I assumed this was in fun.
Funny thing was, none of the members who were sowing discord were rocket scientists. One, who will remain anonymous, argued that the stock market was a bad place to invest and owning a home was a loser. I sometimes wonder how he feels about that today?
Quote: SingleCoinVP
Funny thing was, none of the members who were sowing discord were rocket scientists. One, who will remain anonymous, argued that the stock market was a bad place to invest and owning a home was a loser. I sometimes wonder how he feels about that today?
There is a lot of legitimate debate now about whether owning a home is a good investment.
Quote: Mission146Missed this, so I will respond and then I am done with this thread...
How do I feel about it today? Due to my buying spree in Bisbee, I have less in the market than a year ago and haven't followed it as closely as before. Still glad I rented in Henderson instead of buying. Still glad I sold my Tesla stock when I did, even though it's done well since I sold.
It was a beautiful 3 story mansion with 6 bedrooms, 2 baths and a fireplace.
Her Barbie dolls, she says fit inside perfectly
Quote: darkozI must admit I was happy buying a house a few weeks ago for my granddaughter.
It was a beautiful 3 story mansion with 6 bedrooms, 2 baths and a fireplace.
Her Barbie dolls, she says fit inside perfectly
Did it come with a helipad on the roof for Grandpa's visits?
Or just an extra large parking spot for the bus.😀
Quote: billryanHe is referring to me and is telling a half lie.
50% truthfulness. He's improving his average.
Quote: HugoSlavia50% truthfulness. He's improving his average.
Warning. You are strongly inferring an insult that has caused past suspensions. Please don't push it.
I've let this thread run, partly because there's some information worth hearing, but at the price of a huge amount of repetition and talking past each other, along with a lot of skid marks in the aspersions lane.
Some notes.
Hugo, and the others doing this: Stop bringing an argument from another forum here. Seriously. It's just rude. Obv it polluted the other forum - we don't need their posts repeated.
SCVP. Everyone on here is quite intelligent. Stop writing the same thing a dozen times, please. We get it. I can tell we're not very interested in your basic contention, since you're mostly drawing bored people into a contest to see how insulting they can be without getting popped.
That's all for now. Happy holidays.
How do you know Most of them?Quote: SingleCoinVP
Anyway, I wish to discuss playing the games I see. All of them are negative. When I go to the casino, I see a lot of players like me. I don't see many posting on these forums. Most are afraid of being ridiculed or being called names. I think that's sad.
Discuss away if you wish. I'm not really sure what else about it can be discussed without repeating the same thing over and over?
"Hey Dick Little, I like losing less playing 1 coin on jacks or better because my name is Jack Holf and Jack's are better includes the word Jack"
"He Jack Holf, I like losing more playing five coins on Deuces Wild because the bartender will only give me a free drink at the bar if I play at least $1. Not to mention, my name starts with a D and so does Deuces Wild ."
"Hey, Dick and Jack this is a very riveting conversation, can you please include some snapshots of your $2 off Buffet coupons next time?"
