Keeping track of the huge swings on the new vp machines

[olds442jetaway]

I think its too much of a short run to be meaningful. Just my opinion, but in a short run I and many others see the most insane events happen. I can’t attempt to think what a long run might be. Why? Because in over 25 million lifetime hands played, I am still under Royaled by around 50 percent. That means only one thing as far as I am concerned. Either the RNGs are not true RNGs or 25 million hands is still a short run. I have posted many times that I believe a long run to be approaching infinity.

[Eduardo]

I am not sure at all that I understand how using a timer would aid you during game play.

it would give an accurate indicator which 1,000 credit bankroll would last longer from game to game

Yeah, just the other day I saw a guy check his watch for the time and the casino goons dragged him out back and beat him senseless.

Another guy had to remove his pacemaker to set foot in the casino because it's an electronic device.

You're being ridiculous (in more ways than one).

[onemoretry]

There are a lot of things concerning gambling that don't change much over time. Still, if I were looking for a book to further educate myself on the subject, I probably would not choose one written by someone who died more than 34 years ago.

[stevel96a1]

i don't believe it matters if he died 1 minute ago or 100 years ago, what matters is if the information is accurate, he states 1,000 coin in monitored carefully will be a indicator 95% of the time.

[onemoretry]

A lot of the discussion earlier in this thread centred around new RNGs versus previous generation ones. Are you now stating that it doesn't matter?

[stevel96a1]

yea and the RNG revolves around the span of your bankroll why one RNG gives certain life span one bankroll while other RNG gives shorter. one way to find out assuming the payschedule is the same is to test it with a 1,000 coin in theory

this theory can be tested stated in his book claimed 95% of the time granted slot machine and poker machine are different but still machine

[onemoretry]

.. one way to find out assuming the payschedule is the same is to test it with a 1,000 coin in theory

But, 1000 coin in represents a mere 200 hands, which, as others have pointed out, is an absolutely meaningless number of hands upon which to make any conclusions.

[Tedlark]

aspirin.jpg (6.81 KiB) Viewed 3491 times

[stevel96a1]

200 hands is small i give it that, but i plan to play 1000 credits through until double or nothing and the machine that yields the longer time played will be my choosing i am already predicting which 1 will out last the other

[Tedlark]

200 hands is small i give it that, but i plan to play 1000 credits through until double or nothing and the machine that yields the longer time played will be my choosing i am already predicting which 1 will out last the other

In my opinion double or nothing is too big of a goal to reach, in either direction. I'm not saying that doubling your money won't happen (it can but when playing a game like JOB you are looking to hit 1 hand in particular) but why not put a more achievable goal of 33%-50% into focus and not let greed decide your fate when you are at or near this number?

I took a trip over to Hollywood Casino in Aurora, IL this past Saturday night to play some Quick Quads and I got lucky playing TDB hitting AWAK 3 times (twice at .50 denom and once at .25 denom) quad aces once and quad 4's with a kicker (at .50 denom) once. A man sat down at the machine next to me and he began to play Triple Play DDB at 1 dollar denomination, seeding the machine with $500.00. Within 30 minutes he had gotten his meter up to just over $1,000.00. He then continued to play and eventually walked about another 30 minutes later, completely busted.

My point here is not to brag about my hits but at what point does a player (any player actually) lose discipline and evaporate a 100% profit and walk away busted?

Why set a goal so dramatic as "double or nothing?"