RNG Questions

[olds442jetaway]

Hmmmmm! I sometimes increase my bet when a pretty brunette walks by. Unless it is the Mrs. Then I have to decrease it before she sits down next to me. I don’t want to even think about the consequences if I increased my bet when a pretty blonde walks by when she was playing or visiting beside me.

[notes1]

don't contradict yourself. you say you play for fun, you know you play on machines that have negative paytables, and yet you declare you will win/break even 50% of the time. you do not know that. in fact, you are more likely to lose over time.

sometimes i feel sorry for you when a 'gang' attack you. but, now i think you either enjoy it or you cannot figure out why they do it. they are looking for any misstatement, any inconsistency from someone and then they attack. this is their fun in life. this is what social media has become. according to stats from twitter, 80% of all comments come from 10% of posters. CHOOSE your words carefully, THINK before you type. STOP beating the same subjects over and over and over. remember, some of the biggest advocates for stating one can win on VP, if the overall percentages are in their favor, may likely be the biggest losers.

better yet, take a month off from posting. enjoy life.

[Tedlark]

I'm glad there are a few members of this forum who play video poker for the same reasons I do. Playing for profit is a totally different game than I am playing. What bugs me are those members who won't recognize that fact. I know there are more of us than the players who complain the loudest when we talk about having fun over profit. We never hear from the majority because they are afraid of being ridiculed.

I don't remember a time when video poker games were positive. I came into the game seriously around 2005, long after the so called good times. I've been to Vegas, Reno and AC. I intentionally went there to find and play positive games. When I found some, I played them. My results were the same as the 97% games I play at home. I couldn't play them long term, so I can't comment on what may have happened if I did.

My issue on this forum has always been the intolerance of Recreational play strategies. We are allowed to play any way we wish as long as we don't talk about it. In the mean time, the "for profit only" players can make any claims and statements they want with no disagreement allowed. This is blatantly unfair. To remedy this situation I asked for a separate forum thinking it would solve the problem. The strategy bullies followed and we are where we are today.

This problem will not be solved until the management of this forum stops allowing Recreational Forum posts to be trolled. All we want is a forum free from self appointed experts. If I want to increase my bet when a blond walks by, what business is it of anyone else? As long as I don't claim that strategy will beat the casino, who cares? If it produces a short term profit, it's not a threat to anyone or anything but my own bankroll.

Until then, I will continue to play as I do. I will break even or make a profit in well over 50% of my trips. At the end of the year, I will have played over 250,000 hands of VP for less money than it costs me to play golf or buy season tickets to the Dolphin's games. I think that's a bargain.

Phil -

You wrote of "increasing your bet when a blond walks by as long as you don't claim that strategy will beat the casino."

When you were heavily pushing your "Cheap Strategy" (CS), were you not claiming the CS would beat the casino? Please remember that you may have also stated that betting less money per hand was, in fact, beating the casino.

When you just now stated that you "will break even or make a profit in well over 50% of your trips", aren't you again: making a claim?

It is statements like this that get misinterpreted (or flat out get taken as truths) by novice players and those others who may not know better.

It is also statements like this that you make which get disected and questioned by other forum members.

Edited to add: Other "Recreational Players" who play like you who may not post for fear of being attacked by a gang do not make claims or statements such as you do either.

[OTABILL]

Really good two posts Notes.

[FloridaPhil]

When you were heavily pushing your "Cheap Strategy" (CS), were you not claiming the CS would beat the casino?

I never made that claim. I always said playing with CS reduces losses when playing seriously negative video poker games. I also said it made a cheap game more exciting. It does both.

I did make a small profit over the two years I played CS. This occurred because CS saved me money leaving more money for pot shots. A few of my pot shots paid off. This was due to pure luck and solid proof luck exists. I have explained this on this forum many times.

As far as leading players astray with my comments, I want players to know playing negative VP games costs money. I don't believe that will deter anyone from playing them. If they do play them, I want players to know the more hands they play or the bigger they bet, the more they will lose. Contrast this to saying "Don't play negative VP!" Anyone making this statement is skirting the issue because they don't want to reveal the facts. Players will play the games they have. At least I'm telling them to play smaller instead of telling them nothing.

If you are going to use math to prove a case for beating the casinos, you can't ignore it when it tells you something you don't wish to hear. Millions of people play negative VP games. Only a tiny few can play positive games. If the experts would use math to show how best to play the games most people play, we wouldn't be having these discussions. So far I have not read that post.

So, is anyone up to my challenge?

[Waiting4RF]

Contrast this to saying "Don't play negative VP!" Anyone making this statement is skirting the issue because they don't want to reveal the facts. ... If the experts would use math to show how best to play the games most people play, we wouldn't be having these discussions. So far I have not read that post.

Well that didn't take long.

[Tedlark]

Contrast this to saying "Don't play negative VP!" Anyone making this statement is skirting the issue because they don't want to reveal the facts. ... If the experts would use math to show how best to play the games most people play, we wouldn't be having these discussions. So far I have not read that post.

Well that didn't take long.

Waiting, remember that webman was talking in the singular while Phil mentioned the plural. Expert and experts. To me; the only place the S makes a difference is the one across Superman's chest.

[notes1]

thanks otabill! not sure it did any good. i really did feel sorry for him, after the constant beating he was taking.

i/m/o, worst of all, he gives seniors a bad name, by his constant, repetitive lecturing/preaching on the same crap, over and over. older americans do have knowledge and experience that could benefit some younger folks. instead, they hear his rants, and all they hear is blah, blah, blah. over 5000 posts, many on the same few topics.

this is not to condone what happens on this site and from what i understand, most other social media sites. there is a small, but dedicated group who take such pleasure in beating down others. not much of a man, to sit behind a keyboard and pound on someone. wonder how many have the cahunas to say the same things to someone's face. you know who you are!

[FloridaPhil]

Seniors are not stupid. Most of my friends are seniors. When I go to the casino, I see mainly seniors. We have more time than younger players. Most of us don't have as much money to gamble with. We have saved all our lives to enjoy life at the end and we don't know how long it will need to last.

Seniors don't go to the casino to make a profit. All the seniors I know are well aware that gambling in a casino is long term loser. All they want is a few hours of entertainment with their friends. The smartest seniors know the math. They play small, so they get more entertainment for less. My friend Jack is a good example. He is a millionaire that could never spend all his money. He sold a bank in Virginia and retired about 10 years ago. My wife sold him a huge house on the lake and we became good friends. This man could easily bet $5 or $10 a coin. He chooses to play penny slots. While I am playing video poker, he is walking around playing with Buffalos, Leprechauns and Knights in Armor. Once in a great while, he makes a little profit. Mostly he loses. He gets what he wants without math or strategy books and walks out happy.

Jack and I both look forward to our trips to the casino. Neither of use makes a long term profit. Would we enjoy it more if we lost more? I don't think so.

[Vman96]

It is statements like this that get misinterpreted (or flat out get taken as truths) by novice players and those others who may not know better.

Recently I had to try to set the record straight because a poster on another one of my forums suggested that the slots on a Game King bartop were a good choice to grind points if you got the slot point rate (often you don't) because they have higher payback than other slots.

This guy often words things like Phil does and it actually made some newbie think that the slot games on the bartops actually pay back just as much as VP does.

I obviously had to point out that was not the case. And I added this analysis from the Wizard of Odds to show that these games can be set to not payback great at all.

https://wizardofodds.com/games/slots/lionfish/

Well the dude that originally posted his claim said that the wizard of odds ASSIGNED a 90% payback to the machine in that article. And didn't believe he actually determined the long term payback even though he recorded every possible reel position. Wtf?