The Gambler's Fallacy...

[FAA]

Somewhere along the greed continuum, my goal morphed into a quick $125 quad and ultimately the $4,000 RF. This leads invariably to a succession of triple digit loss trips. By the time the damn quad comes, I am reduced to min bet status. Just bad luck as VP gods laugh at my timing blunders. This fantasy has gotten much too expensive. Thrilled to bet max, killed losing max.

[FloridaPhil]

I honestly don't believe the majority of players care that much about odds or if they should play max coins or not.  All you have to do is walk around your average casino to see that. Given that and the fact that 99% of the VP games in the US are negative, I'm don't think the casinos have anything to worry about.From my experience, never play single coin when you are running out of money.  If you do, I guarantee you will hit at least one short coin royal and it will ruin your day.  If you are going to play short coin, start off that way and stick with it.   If you are worried about hitting a short coin royal, play max coins and it will never be an issue. 

[FAA]

I guarantee you will hit at least one short coin royal and
it will ruin your day.  If you are going to play short coin, start off
that way and stick with it.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Surely you must surmise by now that a great many short coiners never intended to play short coin in the first place. Trip misfortune of extended losing has forced this adjustment upon them. I did have a one coin RF three years ago; brutal. But even a short coin quad, yesterday's fate, has me incensed to no end.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=FAA]Surely you must surmise by now that a great many short coiners never intended to play short coin in the first place.[/quote]This is true.  It takes a completely different mindset to be happy playing single coin VP.  Playing single coin removes the one thing that drives most gamblers... the possibility of a big jackpot.  Few players wish to trade off this possibility to reduce their cost to play.   The hope that things will go your way is what keeps you pumping in max coins.I got into single coin play over a long period of time. I grew tired of contributing and ran some math of my own.  My calculations clearly showed that playing seriously negative games is a loser no matter how many great days you have.  The only thing that worked was to reduce my bet to a point where the loses didn't negatively affect me.   It's wasn't easy at first but it did have the desired effect.  I reduced my annual loss from thousands to hundreds and was able to play more hands in the deal.   What good does it do to win $4,000 if you give $10,000 or more by the end of the year?  Made no sense to me.The biggest disadvantage of playing small is comps.   If I play single coin quarters I get nothing.   By playing max coin 99% quarter games the casino gives me free rooms whenever I want and free play that is actually worth something.  The free rooms are in one of the nicest resorts in South Florida and my wife and I get a lot of enjoyment from taking these once a month mini vacations.  This offsets the increased cost of playing max coins.  We both consider this a good trade off and the casino seems happy with the arrangement.I learned all I know about VP from reading Bob Dancer's books and from discussions on this website.    I may have personal differences with some of the things he does, but I have no problem with his VP strategy.  I also realize my VP landscape is much different than that of a Vegas player and decidedly different from Bob Dancers.   This doesn't mean I can't learn from them as long as I apply this information correctly in my own world of VP.

[FAA]

Playing single coin removes the one thing that drives gamblers, a big jackpot. Few players trade off this
possibility to reduce their cost to play. Hope keeps you pumping in max coins. I got into
single coin play over a long period. I grew tired of
contributing and ran some math.  My calculations clearly
showed that playing seriously negative games is a loser no matter how
many great days you have.  The only thing that worked was to reduce my
bet to a point where the loses didn't negatively affect me. It did have the desired effect.  I reduced my
annual loss from thousands to hundreds, more hands
in the deal. Win $4,000 if you give back
$10,000?  Made no sense to me.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I am at this crossroads. My calculations posit losing $5,000 a year out of pocket for a $4,000 chance, as I can't constantly pump max. But even in this scenario I am a loser and must rely on a flukey 40,000 to 1 hit to even attain a nominal loss. Makes no sense to me. Tired of contributing, but lack your discipline.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=FAA]Tired of contributing, but lack your discipline.[/quote]Some members of this forum would disagree.  They say I lack discipline and that I promote seriously dangerous strategies.   Dangerous?  How can providing information to help them reduce their losses be dangerous?What players should do is sit down and seriously contemplate why they are gambling in the first place.  Is it the dream of making a lot of money?  Is it to have something to do?   Do you like playing a lot of hands?   Do you like air conditioning in the summer?  Whatever it is, adjust your mindset and your strategy to fit.   If you're honest with yourself, you may quit gambling altogether.   You can't have big wins, no losses, no stress and only happy days when you play VP.   It doesn't work that way.  I currently play max coins because by doing so the casino lets me stay in their resort for free, gives me some free play and provides a game that I can play for a reasonable cost.  If they stopped doing this, I would recalculate and change my strategy to fit the new rules.  If that meant switching back to single coin, I would do it.

[billryan]

Providing misinformation is dangerous.
Trying to prop up misinformation by using phony math examples is disingenuous, at best.
Claiming you learned this stuff by reading and studying Bob Dancer is simply dishonest.
Claiming a person is better off playing a game with a 97% strategy when proper play produces a much higher payback is not true.
I don't care if this is the recreational section, the voodoo section or Phil Singers very own section, there is no reason why anyone should not fact check statements and expose your nonsense for what it is. Utter garbage.

[FloridaPhil]

OK, lets examine your statements one by one so we can see who's telling the truth.Providing misinformation is dangerous.  - I do not provide misinformation.   You are misinterpreting or not reading what I say.  If you would like to post specifics, I will be happy to provide an explanation you can understand.Claiming you learned this stuff by reading and studying Bob Dancer is simply dishonest.
- I use Mr. Dancer's software to determine what cards I keep and throw away.  I did in fact use Mr. Dancer's software in the development of CS.  I use some of Mr. Dancer's suggestions to increase my comps.  Like almost everyone in this country I play negative VP games because I have not choice.  I do not subscribe to Mr. Dancer's theories of betting bigger in order to gain an edge.  Claiming a person is better off playing a game with a 97% strategy when proper play produces a much higher payback is not true.
- I have never once said that.  I said playing smaller reduces loses on a negative game.  Mr. Dancer has stated this many times.  I will be happy to repost his statements if you like.Billy, you are either the dumbest person who ever posted on this website, have ulterior motives in your posts or are totally incapable of read a complete paragraph.   Which is it?

[onemoretry]

I do not subscribe to Mr. Dancer's theories of betting bigger in order to gain an edge. 
This statement, or something quite similar, is often repeated by you. I do not recall ever seeing or hearing anything from him where he says that. What, exactly, are you referring to?

[billryan]

   I tried. I really did. Posted a rebuttal without using a single insult to try and change the general attitude here and get called the dumbest person ever, in a post full of lies.

Phil simply cant have a conversation. He posts lie after lie and rather than defend them attacks people who call him out. Then plays the victim card and says anyone who disagrees with his garbage systems has an ulterior motive.

I'm still waiting for his " math" that shows a player is better off playing his horrible system. The examples he has posted in the past have been refuted so often, only a very dishonest person would continue to use them as examples, unless that person has zero knowledge of how the game works.