my findings

[stevel96a1]

if you are talking about R.S then yes , moving up in by betting bigger will CERTAINLY result in bigger losses by the massive size you or i bank accounts can not support, it has been proven, at home, proven at the casinos and proven on the simulations, varying your bet is the solution. but if you do it rapidly like he says it  will turn you into a broke degenerate gambler

[FAA]

Taking down the house is highly risible. What we can feasibly accomplish is limiting their admissions cost. This also has a salutary financial benefit, albeit one that we only begrudgingly acknowledge. The math indeed works backwards. Stay out of major conflagrations. Both your trip and mood shall improve.

[FloridaPhil]

The first thing that needs to be cleared up is the false assumption that CS is in conflict or in competition with math or Mr. Dancer's VP strategy.  This is totally untrue.  If you only read a few sentences of what I say, jump to conclusions and fire off a nasty reply, you will never understand CS.I believe Mr. Dancer's VP strategy as defined in all his books, posts and everywhere else is 100% correct.  He says he only plays net positive games... check.   He says he can play 100% computer perfect forever... check.  He says he has a bankroll big enough and is determined and disciplined enough to stick with his plan no matter what happens.... check.  He says he makes a nice living playing positive VP games...  got it!CS is an alternative VP strategy for players who lack at least one or all of those requirements which includes the majority of players.   If you play VP in Mississippi or Cherokee NC for example, you must play negative games or you don't play VP at all.  All over this country casinos are full of negative VP games.  Positive VP games are like Miami Dolphin Super Bowl wins.  They existed somewhere in the past, there's a chance you might find one, but the odds are very slim.  If you want to argue about the existence of 100% games, fine.  I can't play everywhere.  I can only report on what I see where I play.CS also does not claim to be the only strategy you can use on these games.  It has some unique advantages, but so do other loss limiting strategies.  I made a profit playing CS on negative VP games for nearly two years.  My wife, who uses a completely different strategy made money in 2017 playing negative VP games.   What happens in a calculator or on a spreadsheet doesn't necessarily happen when you play VP in a casino.  Long term calculations have little influence on short term results.The overriding goal of CS is to limit your losses when playing negative VP games.  What's "dangerous" about that?  The only danger is to the casino's bottom line.   Mr. Dancer's strategy is to never play negative VP games under any circumstances.  Boycotting casinos into offering positive games has not worked.  If anything VP game odds are worse now than ever.   I think the best way to send a message to the casino is to take up a seat and play cheap.I hope we can have this discussion in peace without outside interference.  Shutting down all strategy discussion except one is not what an open forum is about.  Let's talk about video poker games that actually exist.  If you disagree with something I say, let's do so without calling each other lairs or morons.  If we can do so we will have a frank useful discussion and we all might learn something from each other.

[FAA]

We are already in the danger zone upon entry, surrounded by negative machines. May as well make the best of it. Play 80-95% CS, take a half dozen or so pot shots and leave about even. Shrug off comp accrual.

[DaBurglar]

Mr. Unmentionable's book from cover to cover at least three times.  He makes a few good points especially about human VP play being short term.  However, in my opinion most of what he says is pure fantasy.  His premise that you can catch back up when you are behind by betting bigger or by moving to a higher variance game is truly dangerous.   Mr. Unmentionable obviously has an axe to grind with math based VP experts.  I do not.


Who the Fark is "Mr unmentionable"? Video poker equivalent of Voldemort...? Who's Dumbledore, webman?

Hello? *Tap tap*

[Tedlark]

I'm in no means choosing sides but doesn't Mr. Dancer also say to play max coins? And if one does not play max coins then wouldn't CS - be in conflict with Mr. Dancer's philosophies?

[FloridaPhil]

OK, let's talk about my wife's winning 2017 strategy first. It's probably the closest to positive game strategy and the easiest to understand.She plays quarter single line deuces wild exclusively.  She likes this game because it is exciting, has a relatively low variance and the strategy is easy to learn.  She always plays max coins.   Odds don't mean much to her.  She plays 96.77% DW, NSU and everything in between.  She is aware of the strategy changes required for each pay schedule and makes the appropriate changes.  She does not concern herself with penalty cards or making any play with an error costing less than 5 cents a hand.   For those of you who are long time students of the game, she uses the old Dan Paymar Optimal play strategy.  She always keeps two card non deuce royal flush hands and goes for the royal or wild royal.  She always holds three deuces and discards the other cards no matter what.She sticks to this game exclusively, plays slow and deliberate, never varies her denomination and never takes a pot shot or drifts off into the high limit room.  If she is having a bad day, she quits playing and goes shopping.  She says she would rather come home with something to show for her money than memories.  She takes a phone photo of every royal and quad deuce she hits.  She also hits more royals and way more quad deuces than she is entitled to.  This is understandable because she goes for those hands when the computer would not.  She doesn't care what the computer does, she says she is not a computer.  She was very lucky in 2017.  Her bankroll grew by about $2K last year.  Some people are lucky and she is one of them.  She also doesn't make major mistakes, knows how to play and quits when she is ahead or seriously behind.   The key to her sucess is accepting what happens as part of the game.  If she loses, she accepts it as the cost of admission.  If she wins, it's a windfall.   She does not try to engineer wins, she sticks to her plan and stays the course.  She is fully aware that she had a good year and she is ready for whatever happens in 2018.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=Tedlark]I'm in no means choosing sides but doesn't Mr. Dancer also say to
play max coins? And if one does not play max coins then wouldn't CS - be
in conflict with Mr. Dancer's philosophies?[/quote]I am happy you brought that up.   Mr. Dancer would never ever play any video poker game where he did not have an advantage.  I have asked him numerous questions about negative VP games and he has told me over and over again that negative VP games are losers.  Upon further questioning he has agreed playing negative games slowly and one coin at a time will limit your losses.  Ask him that question yourself.   If he chooses to answer you, I'm am confident he will agree with that statement.  If you take Mr. Dancer's advice you won't find many games outside of Vegas to play these days.  I choose to play them and limit my losses.One important point.  He does not agree with CS or that changing denominations mid play can overcome negative odds.  I agree to disagree.

[FloridaPhil]

Before we get into CS, let's get a couple of things straight.   Negative VP games are negative.  That may sound obvious, but many players think they can beat negative games even when the casino keeps emptying out their wallets time after time.  These players know their ship will come in some day, all they have to do is keep max betting long enough.  Bob only plays VP when the odds are in his favor.  He needs to play max coins because he needs the royal bonus for the numbers to work. When you play negative VP games, the math is reversed.  The more hands you play, the bigger you bet, the bigger your losses.  Conversely, the smaller you play a negative VP game the less it costs to play.  If there was one cent VP, you could play 70% odds one coin at a time without much damage. VP mathematicians are fond of quoting odds, statistics, computer simulations and the like to prove playing a game of chance is not a game of chance.   Math can only provide an estimate of a range of results.  It can never predict with accuracy what exactly happens when you play.    Then we get into the short term vs long term debate.   We all know what short term is.  What is long term?  Is it a week, a year, 10 years or forever?   I have been lucky enough to hit 4 royals in one day.  At the time I was playing 7/5 Jacks or Better.  Didn't the game know the math said that wasn't suppose to happen? Funny I know, but some people cling to their math like it comes from above.The variance between what math predicts will happen and what actually happens when you play is called "Luck".   Luck can only be felt in your wallet if your good luck is significant enough to overcome your bad luck.   We have all seen this in real life when we hit a royal flush, then feed it back into the machines over the next three days.  Luck happens when you play negative games too.  It's only when you limit your losses can you gain from your good fortune.CS is not about mathematical formulas and odds calculations.  It's about keeping your losses low so you can spend your lucky hands instead of giving them back.

[Eduardo]

CS is not about mathematical formulas and odds calculations.  It's about keeping your losses low so you can spend your lucky hands instead of giving them back.




As you said, math does not predict a specific outcome, but predicts a
range of outcomes that could potentially happen. Luck determines where
in that range you will fall. As play increases, the influence of luck
decreases.CS is not immune to math. If you could fully
articulate a CS strategy, it could be simulated and you could get a
likely range of outcomes using the same methods as playing an AP
strategy.In the end, it's very simple. While you are betting
less, you will both lose less when you lose and win less when you win.
If you increase your bet more, you will lose more or win more. Since you
can't predict when the good hands are going to come along, this
strategy can't gain you any sort of edge.Bet less, lose less AND win less. It's that simple no matter what pay table you are playing. Bad pay table? Bet less so you don't lose so fast, but don't expect to gain an edge from it.