Would I have still hit?

[BillyJoe]

I play a lot of golf. I know I will never be a pro. That doesn't stop me from playing and enjoying what the game does provide.
Hey, Shadowman. I will be in Vegas March 8-15 for a casino-supplied golf getaway. A lesson @ Butch Harmon's school, 2 rounds @ Cascata, and 1 round @ Rio Secco.
I don't recall - are you a Vegas local? If so, maybe we can get together some time for a round of golf..

[Frank Kneeland]

p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }a:link { }

New2VP comments In <> with my replies after each of his paragraphs.
<Hey Frank, You can create a quote
box like the one above by hitting the quote button on the message
from which you want to quote. Then you can delete some words and
leave the words on which you want to focus. You probably shouldn't
add any words in...some people don't like others putting words in
their posts.>


I wondered how to do that. Thank you.
In the future I'll use that format. For this reply in-line seemed
best, since it is long.<Your response begs the question
as to what is inferior or superior. I agree that people should do
what they consider superior. But different
people will find different things as superior and can think of
different things as superior at different times. It is superior to
take an umbrella with you when you expect rain, but not so much at
other times.>

I agree, especially with your umbrella
comment. That decision is usually made at the beginning of the day,
and based on the chance of rain. If the chance of rain doesn't
change, and no new information comes the way of the outdoor traveler,
one expects their decision to take, or not take an umbrella, to at
least last the day. This doesn't seem to happen with VP players.<I
gave you a hint in the previous message of when the max EV play is
not superior, but you totally chose to ignore the word "volatility"
in your response.>

Oops you missed it. I said, “If you
decide a game is better for you, because of volatility and bankroll,
then it becomes the better choice and stays that way until the
equation changes.” All further references in my post to “for you”
were referring to this comment. And I completely agree.<If
a game has a lower EV but lower volatility, it may indeed be a better
play depending on how long you plan on playing. Your reference to
Risk of Ruin in other posts when you're recommending Paymar's or
Dancer's products, indicates an understanding that volatility is an
important consideration and that there are other things besides EV on
which to make decisions.>


In my non-team career, I picked higher
percentage wins on smaller denominations, over higher hourly ears on
more volatile games. I also stuck with that decision for 9 years.
Changing the plan in the middle of my day was so off my radar, I'm
not sure I was aware choice was an option. Actually it wasn't. Before
changing games, I would have had to hash things out with my partners.
I have only been a solo independent for less than 3 months in my
whole 21 year career.<You say you don't get why
anyone would ever choose anything other than max EV, though you cite
instances in your book when your team didn't maximize EV. You might
choose lower cost of your target jackpot at some times; you might
choose lower expected time to hit your target jackpot at
others.>First: thanks for reading my whole book. Hope you
liked it.

Second: Yes I agree with that. We
didn't always choose max EV, but we stuck with whatever we choose was
right for us, based on both earn and volatility. Not only did we
never switch games, we never considered it. To consider it, would
have suggested that our initial choice was wrong. And “choice” is
really a bad word here. We came up with parameters on what we wanted
for a play, and allowed the equations to select the machine type and
play numbers. Picking a machine type to play, isn't something you
want to leave up to “choice” or preference. We dispassionately
followed what the math told us we should do. Choice, preference, and
“want” have no place in my career.

<Plus you say it is a better
suggestion to "Just not play" on a positive progressive
play if you cannot stay until the jackpot is hit. It is clearly a
higher EV strategy to play a 102% game for a couple of hours than to
pass on it completely. But I understand in this case that volatility
considerations might have caused you to make that suggestion.>Well
as you know the subheading in my book on why you should “Do or Do
Not, There is No Try” is very long, but yes, I advocate (for many
reasons) staying down on a progressive until it hits, once you
commence the play. All of those reasons are mathematical. It is
simply the best way to play them, and I don't advocate doing anything
but what's best. Now this is just my opinion, I would rather pass on
a play, if I can't play it to the best advantage. I take no pot
shots...ever!

<And certainly on some complicated
strategy plays it is "superior" to ignore the max EV play
and make the play that is more convenient to remember. (I understand
your buddy Paymar likes to recommend this more often than your other
buddy Dancer. By the way, do they get along with each other? I've
seen some contentious dialog posted in the past on that subject.)>

I believe they have reached a détente.
I don't ask, they don't tell. Yeah, Paymar's thing is Optimization.
Dan's new OpVP version is making optimized strategies without
penalties .00004% off perfect, for some games. He's not giving up
much for simplification. Hard to argue with that.
<Other people, who don't make a
living by playing vp or recommending products, will have different
goals. I understand your radio partner, Bob Dancer has a degree in
economics, so he could help you with this. People have different
preferences and those preferences are subjective. I have no
problem with presuming that all should prefer higher EV...other
things equal (economists like to say ceteris paribus; but,
since that phrase has more syllables than "other things equal,"
I don't know why. Maybe they have a higher preference for showing
erudition rather than exercising oral efficiency).>

Best paragraph I've read in awhile.
Perhaps they just don't want to become amanuensis.<But
"other things" are rarely equal, so there's room for other
things besides EV to aid in making the choice as to what is
considered superior.>

I was never suggesting that people
choose a game based only on max EV. Sorry if I wasn't clear. People
should make a choice on what to play based on all the issues that
matter to them. And then they should stick with their decision. I
don't know if you realize this; second guessing oneself after
commencing a play, can greatly increase the opportunity for stress
and other less desirable mental issues. If you aren't sure you are
making the right choice, I believe you shouldn't make it at all. To
do so invites doubt, a killer to the psyche.<For vp (or
investments): some prefer lower volatility and some prefer higher
volatility. And if you have a goal to tell your partner in life
whether you won or lost today (that might be more important to having
a nice evening than short-term fluctuations in cash on hand), you may
follow up losses on low volatility machines early in the day with
high volatility machines to increase the probability of marital good
will in the evening. Or with early wins on higher volatility
machines, you may want to lock up the chance of winning for the day
by finishing play on lower volatility machines. Some might quit, but
others might have a preference to kill more time on a machine.>

If you know my stance on gambling and
life partners, I recommend not including them at all unless they are
math savants. Also, I cannot relate to a day's play making any
difference in ones life or being any point of concern whatsoever. If
one is playing anything where the minute to minute, hour to hour
results matter to them, they shouldn't be playing. What happens in
the course of a day is irrelevant. Completely irrelevant! It's
impossible for a single person to play enough in a day to come
anywhere close to expectation. Therefore, daily results should only
be tallied, with all major decisions being made on a monthly or
yearly basis. All small business advice books I've read, recommend
starting your business with enough money to operate at a loss for two
years before opening your doors. I recommend the same for
gambling.<Of course you could lie to your partner, but
some might have a higher preference for telling the truth.>

No, not lying, never lying. But your
partner should only be concerned about whether or not you made a good
decision on what to play, not what your results were. And making a
good decision on what to play and sticking with it, would help with
this. If they aren't savvy enough to understand that bad results
don't invalidate a good decision, then you should:

A: Not include them
B: Switch professions
C: Get a new life partner

If your partner worries about your
results, rather than your initial decision, it is actually considered
to be a cognitive bias, know as Outcome Bias, and can result in
serious cognitive distortion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outcome_bias
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: I don't know how much of
this advice applies to non-professionals. I have little to no
experience with recreational gambling. All I have to offer
VideoPoker.com is my professional take on things like this. My goal
is to show non-pros how the other side thinks...not to convert people
to my way of thinking. Trust me, you don't want to be me.

Much love,

Frank Kneeland

[Frank Kneeland]

OK that makes sense to me. Thank you. I keep forgetting people do my job for fun. Gosh, I really don't see it.From my POV, it would be like going to New York to have fun, and trying your hand at garbage collecting as a recreation. I make good money, don't get me wrong. And so do waste disposal technicians. I just don't see it as a past time.~FK

[EDC1977]

If I ordered the enchiladas instead of taquitos, would it have been more filling? Who cares, it was delicious either way!   All goes according to filling and quantity ordered my friend. Nevertheless, Pure Eduardo! Some people would rather have a full stomach than a full house.

[New2vp]

<Other people, who don't make a
living by playing vp or recommending products, will have different
goals. I understand your radio partner, Bob Dancer has a degree in
economics, so he could help you with this. People have different
preferences and those preferences are subjective. I have no
problem with presuming that all should prefer higher EV...other
things equal (economists like to say ceteris paribus; but,
since that phrase has more syllables than "other things equal,"
I don't know why. Maybe they have a higher preference for showing
erudition rather than exercising oral efficiency).>

Best paragraph I've read in awhile.
Perhaps they just don't want to become amanuensis.Thanks for the detailed response and the compliment.  It's nice to read words from someone with so much passion and conviction.  You're right in that I missed the use of "volatility" in your 1st response to me.  I incorrectly interpreted your response as a defense of your original statements (shown below) rather than observing that you indeed had changed your stance.On any multi-game machine, one of the games will
have the highest return. You should always play the one with the highest
return and never switch. At least I can think of no reason to.Good word, too...but since you say "they don't want to become," with "they" being plural, shouldn't it be "amanuenses"?