Whose System is This?

[Frank Kneeland]

First off I'm not a good vp player, just avg if that. I do it for a fun break. I was commenting on what your post implied, in a good way. It kind of gives a player the idea that "all it takes" is 20 grand to win at quarters. (I really don't understand that, especially when B. Dancer said the starting point was something like 6 grand for him.) 25c players are never going to have that kind of a bankroll, and it's so out of proportion with what one would really do with that kind of money. In my mind, a player is not any kind of a professional if he uses 20 g's to make a profit gambling on a 25c game, $100 g's to make anything on a dollar game, etc. IMHO it just isn't anything smart to do with your money.  If people make money playing the 25c game that's great, but i'll bet most or all of them just play as serious recreational players, not pros, and not with a $20 g's bankroll. Ah...I'm glad you elaborated on your position. Now I completely understand your objections and can explain what I was trying to say. Sorry the fault was indeed mine.The amount I was stating was intended to be on the high side and represent a starting bankroll for a pro that would yield a nearly zero chance of going bust, no matter how badly they ran. Only 1 out of a thousand people would bust out starting at $20,000 playing positive games with correct strategy.Yes you could do it with far less and a little more risk. I just hate risk.I started with $10,000 playing 4-6% edge games all those years ago.Turned out $3,000 would have been enough for me. That was the biggest down-swing I experienced. I went 9 months without a Royal on a particular game called Rapid-5-Way. Then I hit 3 RF's in one day and caught up to almost exactly expectation.I also agree with you that the amount of money needed to safely make a living playing VP I somewhat disproportionate to the earning potential. I guess it is what it is.It's possible to make a living at VP, but it is becoming more and more of a novelty, rather than a good job. It was never a great one.Have fun!~FK   

[shadowman]

It's also important to understand there are differences in returns that can yield far different results. Frank mentioned a 4-6% edge. Remember, anything over 100% is a positive game, however, a small edge is not what pros are looking for. Look at this example. Let's say you're playing quarters with a 5% edge. Every time you put the $20K bankroll through the machine you would make $1,000.  At $1.25/hand that is 16,000 hands. A person playing a 800 hands/hour would require 20 hours of play (or half of a 40 hour week). So, assuming a full week's play, you'd earn $2,000/week and it would take you 10 weeks to double your money. Yes, that's 100% return on your investment in just 10 weeks. Doesn't sound so bad when you look at it this way.  Now, consider a .5% advantage (much more realistic). Now it's going to take 10 times as long to double your money. Instead of 10 weeks it would take 100 weeks or almost 2 years. Earning $20K over 2 years would not be much of a job. Just shows how important the amount of an advantage is to making money.

[backsider]

It's also important to understand there are differences in returns that can yield far different results. Frank mentioned a 4-6% edge. Remember, anything over 100% is a positive game, however, a small edge is not what pros are looking for. Look at this example. Let's say you're playing quarters with a 5% edge. Every time you put the $20K bankroll through the machine you would make $1,000.  At $1.25/hand that is 16,000 hands. A person playing a 800 hands/hour would require 20 hours of play (or half of a 40 hour week). So, assuming a full week's play, you'd earn $2,000/week and it would take you 10 weeks to double your money. Yes, that's 100% return on your investment in just 10 weeks. Doesn't sound so bad when you look at it this way.  Now, consider a .5% advantage (much more realistic). Now it's going to take 10 times as long to double your money. Instead of 10 weeks it would take 100 weeks or almost 2 years. Earning $20K over 2 years would not be much of a job. Just shows how important the amount of an advantage is to making money.
 Yes, but i could also say at a 10% edge and it would only take 5 weeks to double your money. It's all so nice to see conjecture on paper, even almost enuf to make your mouth water. Given any edge, who plays that much without making mistakes? I goof up I know and i play pretty slow. Then, if a player finds something worthwhile, what casino would allow him to sit there and take their money at will? I read all the time about players who say they know players who've been thrown out, although who knows if the stories are true. If it's true, then how could anyone follow through on this path?

[royal flush]

your bankroll must be large enough if you are shopping for large progressives with lower base payouts the best one might be 8/5 bp dollar game with 8000 pot edge about 1.2% but 4% of the payout based upon royal

[royal flush]

well put shadow vp has mostly played out few fpdw games with 3/4% edge plus comps. i got to know one guy playing 2 games at once and playing correctly i knwe him as "marcus" a tough way to go for a 14 dollar job with no benifits and financial risk. the days of good promotions like miss a royal by 1 card get 125 credits are gone. the "banked slots" like one former poster described are gone. i play more live poker like omaha 8 or better and grind it out. i am not a pro as i was playing 21 and counting cards but i like playing with an edge making a few bucks for something i like

[backsider]

I think the best way to look at this is to figure out how to snip a few casinos regularly from time to time? Counting cards is ok but will they spot you?

[shadowman]

 Given any edge, who plays that much without making mistakes? I goof up I know and i play pretty slow. Then, if a player finds something worthwhile, what casino would allow him to sit there and take their money at will?
 Everyone makes mistakes. Over time mistakes will reduce a player's edge. However, you seem to assume that this makes positive play impossible. Have you ever player against a program that computes the cost of your mistakes? If not, then I suggest you give it a try. Might open your eyes.

[backsider]

[QUOTE=backsider]
 Given any edge, who plays that much without making mistakes? I goof up I know and i play pretty slow. Then, if a player finds something worthwhile, what casino would allow him to sit there and take their money at will?
 Everyone makes mistakes. Over time mistakes will reduce a player's edge. However, you seem to assume that this makes positive play impossible. Have you ever player against a program that computes the cost of your mistakes? If not, then I suggest you give it a try. Might open your eyes.[/QUOTE]
 I do practice at home. I never said or implied mistakes make positive play impossible, just not very worth it IF a player can really keep up with it every time they play. I think that's why so very many people sell that method, it's so arbitrary and no one has to go through getting called on any results they claim. "Just open the book to page 6" is all it usually takes to push the idea. It's pretty sharp really because the math is the math, wish I thought of it first.

[brmcc74]

This will continue to be a hot topic. A few things that I have learned over the years..............1.  VP is very kind to certain people who rarely ever lose
2.  The math and randomness can work against you and kill your bankroll
3. If you played 20K thru a 9/6 JOB mach doesnt mean that you will see a 99.54% return on your investment............over the life of the mach it SHOULD pay these numbers as expected values but no guarantees................
Ive spent years and hours sniffing through vp software+ all these books and its all the same

[New2vp]

Seeing that different people come up with radically different conclusions subjects like this, starting from the same evidence,at first was mind-boggling to me.  Of course, I think my conclusions (which I won't state here) are obvious from using clear logic and an open mind.  Thus, I then expected other fair-minded people to come up with the same conclusions with the implication being that others who come up with different conclusions are either illogical, not fair-minded, or even worse, just plain dishonest.I've since come up with the thesis that the reason many people come up with different conclusions is that they bring a different set of beliefs to the table that cause them to view and evaluate the evidence differently.  Those beliefs have a great effect on those conclusions.  Thus, I wonder if threads like this actually change significantly many people's viewpoints.It is a bit like the way conservative and liberal thinkers can view the same evidence and come up with totally different conclusions as to cause-and-effect or policies to improve our way of life.  If you watch the same news story on MSNBC and FOXNEWS, you often must deduce that one of them must necessarily be very wrong since it doesn't seem possible that both could be correct.In the preceding paragraph, it is not my intent to spur political discussion or which news outlet has it right except as an analogy for this topic and I think I have been careful in not favoring one side over another in this analysis.  But of course, I suppose I am biased by my own beliefs in this regard even when trying to be open-minded.Briefly continuing with the political analogy, I wonder how many independents who hadn't made up their mind yet prior to this thread are swayed one way or another.  I'll hazard a guess that there are very few.Anyone?