Odds vs. Denomination

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=pokepokerpoker]If I had a 100K bankroll, I think I could be profitable at one of my
local casinos. The place has lots of good games and does a lot of
promos. Being that the place is a low-roller joint, a heavy player
could really "stuff the drum" in his favor.[/quote]I suppose there are places where you can make a "job" out of VP, but why would you want to do such a thing?  You would have to be pretty unskilled or uneducated to choose VP over a good paying profession.   I can see how a retiree could supplement his/her social security checks playing full pay quarters, but I would think any intelligent younger person could make enough money without moonlighting in a casino.  On the other hand, nothing wrong with getting paid to play if you can pull it off. This post is not about careers or who is foolish.  It's about playing VP in a world of seriously negative games that are soon to be coming to a casino near you. 

[Vman96]

I am totally confident that Bob Dancer if he were here would agree with me on this.   I wish he were back, but as it is we'll have to discuss this among ourselves.  If this discussion is applicable to your game, let's hear what you think.


No, Bob would tell you to not play at all as neither game is profitable even with perfect play.

If you're going to play negative games, my opinion is that you play the game that costs you the least AFTER valuing comps. This also assumes you have the bankroll to support either denomination.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=Vman96]No, Bob would tell you to not play at all as neither game is profitable even with perfect play.[/quote]Absolutely.  That is Bob's standard answer and he is 100% correct.  Over the years he has made a few rare comments on negative game strategies.   If he answered this post off line, I believe he would admit most players would benefit by playing "slow and betting low" to limit their losses.His public attitude is that ignorant, stupid or unskilled people should do what they do so advantage players can benefit.  The fact that the casinos benefit as well is never in the discussion.  There is nothing wrong with casinos making money,  I just don't want them to make it from me.This post has absolutely nothing to do with the few successful advantage players in the world and everything to do with the rest of us.  Most
players "think" they are APs when in fact they are far from it and never
will be even close.  I did not create this post to start an argument,  make a point or criticize anyone.  These are important questions that every VP player must make for himself.   In my opinion far too much time is spent talking about odds, comps and hand plays and not enough time on on the real world ramifications of miscalculating your opportunities and abilities.What we are talking about here is a common problem that Bob's strategies do not address.  The majority of VP players don't have access to positive opportunities, aren't all that concerned with comps and definitely can't play computer perfect forever.  Sure they may get a free room or a sandwich once in a while, but rarely do they earn enough comps to overcome their losses.   If every VP player in America immediately switched to quarters or nickels, can you imagine how much money the casinos would lose?I played next to a girl last Thursday that was playing dollar Bonus Poker.  She had no clue how to play and she was losing big time.  She hit 4 aces for $400 and I congratulated her.  She told me she was a waitress at a Road House and her boyfriend was a poker player.  I showed her Bob Dancer's website and suggested she buy some software and learn to play.  I also suggested she switch to playing quarters.  I won't go into it, but this girl was in big trouble.  She got hooked on VP and was seriously in debt.  Her relationship was in trouble and so was she.  Does anyone here think she would benefit from calculating her comps or the profit gained from making a three cent play?  When all your engines are on fire and you're heading to the ground, calculating your odds is not going to help you much.Not everyone is in trouble this deep.   I'm stating on record that the best financially advantageous way for most people to play negative VP games is to play as small as possible and as slow as possible.  I enjoy the game as entertainment.  It costs me long term to play VP and I'm OK with that.  I believe my cost to play is worth what I get and that increasing my bet to gain better odds is counterproductive.  You can not buy yourself into being an advantage player!Email this entire post to Bob Dancer himself or speak with him directly.  If he disagrees, I'll be the first to admit I'm wrong.  I like to believe he seriously wants to help small time VP players.  Telling them not to play at all does nothing, it side steps the issue.  I could be wrong and he's more concerned with maintaining the profits of the gaming industry.  Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and see what he says.  If he doesn't respond, you can draw your own conclusions.

[olds442jetaway]

The only problem I have with all of these discussions is how people view short term vs long term results. For me, my long term results representing millions of hands still have not bought me anywhere near the average number of hands played to hit a Royal. Therefore I still consider my results to be short term. For me long term approaches infinity and I won't be around to see the results conform to the averages unless I start hitting Royals every 10k hands for the rest of my life. Using that as an example I can see how some players do better playing a 97% game over most of their lifetime than other players like myself playing a 99.54% game. Every player of course will have different results but for me short term is longer than a lifetime.

[FloridaPhil]

Humans love to put things in boxes.  We want to believe we have control over our lives, science, math and Yes even random events.   VP strategies were invented to put you in position to best benefit from things going your way, but they can not control what actually happens when you play.  Who says that on each cycle a royal will happen?  Is there some rule of nature that states Phil or Billy must hit each one on time?  Of course not.  Some players in this game will win and some will lose.  The casino is betting they will and in most cases they do.   If you treat VP as a game and don't put too much faith in the chance things will come out as math predicts, I think you will have a better experience.  At least you won't walk around depressed because fate passed you by or you somehow fell short on skill or discipline.People play VP for all kinds of reasons.  Some like me just want to be entertained.  Some like Billy want to supplement their income and/or earn the pride of knowing they did the best they could.  Others want the thrill of getting a hand pay and don't care what it costs.  Whatever your reason, don't make your playing decisions just because someone else says you're wrong for doing so.  The truth is they probably don't play VP for the same reasons anyway.VP works for me because I work hard to control my impulses.  This is a continuous struggle because the casino is constantly pressuring me to bet more and bigger.   They have hired legions of consultants and experts to convince me that I can get rich playing this game.  I have been playing this game for a long time.  I've spent time in the high limit room and I've spent time playing single coin quarters.  I can tell you without hesitation that playing smaller costs less money long term regardless of the odds.  This may be due to the games I play, a lack of skill or some other shortcoming, but it's a fact backed up by many millions of hands played.  If someone else benefits from my experience, this post was worth the effort.  If members of this forum ignore this post and chalk it up as the ramblings of a loser, at least I tried.

[FAA]

Impulse control unravels after two hours for me. Minor Loser on quarter JOB. I could have simply kept on riding and bumped to fifty cents, which is bad enough. But the walk to the dollar side of the Borgata bar should have been booby trapped and saved me the bother. Big loser; toxic. Never again.

[billryan]

  I can tell you without hesitation that playing smaller costs less money long term regardless of the odds.
                                    Phil Fa La La La La.... La la la la.

   Who needs math or science when we have one persons personal observations to guide us.
I drove many cars for almost forty years and never had an accident. Then I rented a Dodge Charger and promptly had one.
Take it from me, if you want to avoid accidents, don't drive a Dodge Charger.
Pretty ridiculous, eh?
Almost as sad as someone claiming his personal experience trumps math.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=BillRyan]Almost as sad as someone claiming his personal experience trumps math.[/quote]I expected you would comment in this way.  You'll just have to learn what I've learned the hard way.   I can tell you enjoy believing you can beat the casinos.  I wish you well.   I have to admit the lure of the Dancer dream is pretty strong.  It's been crafted over a long time and it's brilliant.  I've wasted many many thousands of dollars chasing it.  Time for you to take up the mantle.

[FAA]

There was a bull on the loose in Las Vegas yesterday for a mile long stroll. It fit right in with all the biped bull.

[billryan]

I'm not sure what this obsession with Dancer you have is all about. Do you think you could go a week without mentioning him?
I don't.
Math is math. Nonsense is nonsense.