Double up or not

[BobDancer]

Like I originally stated, I am still on the record:  I believe every word of brilliance that I see in his posts.

Would you care to go on the record comparing the number of "words of brilliance you see in DB's posts" to the number of "total words in DB's posts"?That would let us understand what percentage you are actually believing.

[advantage playe]

I must learn how u db and others get so much in 1 post.as u all know I require several!oh by the way I was not shot at sunrise.wardens pardon!!

[Vman96]

My response was to Vman.  He is not that wordy and gets to his points rather quickly.


You must not read my trip reports...

[New2vp]

Would you care to go on the record comparing the number of "words of brilliance you see in DB's posts" to the number of "total words in DB's posts"?That would let us understand what percentage you are actually believing.Wow, Bob, I never thought of it that way!  Thanks for the comment.  So many posts!  So many words!  Maybe it would be best to wait for new software to count them up!  Maybe I could come up with a number and have others guess to see who can come the closest.I am certain the proportion is somewhere on the positive portion of the number line.  Of course the estimate of the ratio would be somewhat subjective and I do generally prefer to focus more on objective measures.Going through all that trouble might not be productive anyway, because I think your conclusion that you would then understand what percentage I believe is not quite right.  You see in order for you to know the total percentage that I believe, I would also need to release an estimate for the proportion of belief of the non-brilliant words.  I never made a pronouncement about them.  And I'm certain that there may be a non-brilliant word or two scattered throughout the many posts that I would drop in the believable category.  I haven't given any thought to what that latter percentage would be.Total percentage of words believed = (# of Words of Brilliance Divided by Total Words) x 100% + (100% - # of Words of Brilliance Divided by Total Words) x (% of belief of non-brilliant words)By the way, Bob, I didn't reread the column of yours about doubling up before posting the hyperlink here, but I remember reading it a couple years back.  If there is anything in that column that you would care to revisit or emphasize or even if you had some other comments that were not in that column about doubling up, I'm sure that some forum followers might find some interest in it (I think it was June 9, 2015).  Please be sure and include some words of brilliance.Thanks again for reading and commenting.

[New2vp]

[QUOTE=New2vp]
My response was to Vman.  He is not that wordy and gets to his points rather quickly.


You must not read my trip reports... [/QUOTE]I do look at the pictures!!

[New2vp]

I must learn how u db and others get so much in 1 post.as u all know I require several!oh by the way I was not shot at sunrise.wardens pardon!!Well, AP, someone said "brevity is the soul of wit," so you may be on to something.  On the other hand, I don't think the guy that said that was either brief or funny, so who knows?

[pokerforme]

I love your trip reports Vman. Usually read the entire thing.
This thread has taken a great turn, thanks guys!

[Tedlark]

I once proposed something that could wipe out our national debt: a tax on long winded posts that don't really add up to too much. Too bad this bill never reached our President's desk for signature.

[DaBurglar]

  , come on, Vman, you don't think our DaBurglar would ever stretch the truth just a little to speak more about rigged video poker like the long line of clones that we used to have on this forum before DB abruptly arrived and became one of the most prolific posters, do you?I want to go on record as saying I believe every word of brilliance that I see in his posts.  Clearly, he is the most intelligent person in the room, some room anyway.  He's made that clear in any number of posts, explaining his exploits in other areas from chess to live poker to politics and math.  He is so smart that here he was able to conduct a statistical test to determine that the double up feature was clearly not a fair game in Las Vegas.  And he was so smart that he was able to record over 100 times as many cases as any statistician would have needed to arrive at that conclusion given results like 65% losers while only 35% win or tie.And let's not forget that there was real money involved in doing this.  Anyone care to guess how much money was lost in conducting this test?  Well, he gives us a clue letting us know his favorite game is Jacks or Better, while also playing some similar games, and that he doubled on all outcomes less valuable than a full house.He was so smart that he lost somewhere in the neighborhood of $15-$16,000 by running this experiment more than 100 times longer than necessary to determine a bias.  And who knows how much was lost in the times when he used double-up before and his note-taking was not so painstakingly detailed.  And he still occasionally used the double-up feature in Atlantic City, without recording results, mind you!?!  What dedication!  Sacrificing his own fortune just so he could valiantly warn us of the evils of rampant video poker rigging!  What a guy!And if we remember correctly, he was a very successful gambler in Vegas before his Atlantic City travails.  How he was successful when exposing more than 95% of his winners* to the 30%+ house edge that he observed in the Vegas double-up feature is just staggering to comprehend.  Like I said, this must have been some brilliant maneuvering!So truth or fiction?  Brilliant or challenged?  What is the simplest set of facts explaining posts like this?Like I originally stated, I am still on the record:  I believe every word of brilliance that I see in his posts.[QUOTE=DaBurglar]
I have, at various times throughout my player history going back to 1995
when I first encountered the double up option, regularly utilized it
for any win on a video poker hand below full house.....that is to say, I
used to consistently hit "YES" on double up for any Jacks or better, 2
pair, 3 of a kind, Straight or flush when playing video poker;   I
played this way from about 1996 thru 1998, then I stopped using it for a
while, then started using it again in 2002 thru 2004, then reduced to
only sporadic usage.Almost ALL my play during the above time
periods was in Las Vegas and/or Reno, and most of my play was on JOB
(9/6 and even a few 10/7 machines which could still be found as late as
the mid 2000s in a few Nevada locales;  I also played a fair amount of
Bonus Poker and DDB as well.....I used to keep detailed and
copious records of my play back then, and I can confidently state that
my success rate at hitting double up functions on the games I played up
through 2004/2005 was around 33%.......no where near 50%, and it goes
beyond this mere statistical summary/average:     During one stretch
from May 2002 thru MArch of 2003, I played a total 21,500 hands that
involved me hitting the double up feature ...during this stretch my
success was a little higher than my average (I won or tied about 35% of
the time), but amongst the 65% hands that I lost, almost 60% of those
were hands that I either hand NO chance of winning or drawing (meaning
ALL the cards amongst the four choices were losers), and about 10% ONLY a
chance of a draw (whereby at least ONE of the four was a "draw"). . . .
. very very fishy to me.....Even these last few years in AC,
while I do not REGULARLY utilize double up, of the few times I have used
it, I definitely have lost more often than I won......and I do not know
any single person who can report differently.


And who doesn't remember the few 10/7 Jacks or Better games that survived as late as the mid 2000's?  Boy, those must have been the days!By the way, Vman, nice calculating!  Sorry if my post was too far out of line with what you wrote.



[/QUOTE]It's 2:20 am and I see one person is sitting in the forum waiting for me to respond to this thread, which I just now read and see New2vp's effusion of pent up indignation at the way, and matters, I've posted about the last several years.Can you please briefly and clearly state what it is you want to debate exactly and I will indeed respond.......you are all over the place in your attempt to express your disdain and dislike for me.   I got that part, loud and clear......I'm at a loss what i did or said to you personally to elicit or cause this in you;   But I get it, you dislike the fact I like to write posts with conviction, with confidence, and certainty.   You can't just disagree with the actual content?    And for the record, YOU are the one constantly making the statement that "Da burglar is the smartest guy in the room. etc etc."   I never said that, and I never meant to say that.....all this pathetic "Words of brilliance" and "Smartest guy in the room" crap, just stop it.  What do you need or want me to say, "Oh listen up forum, I have arrived at the conclusion that New2VP is in fact much more intelligent than myself...sorry if I mislead or disappointed any of you, peace out."    Whatever valid points or arguments you may have are diminished by this childish hostile drivel.....What exploits exactly are you saying I posted about in Chess, Politics or poker?   I do not and have not posted excessively about chess exploits, I have simply mentioned several times that I like to play chess, used to compete and would love to find someone here who would play me.   What's the problem here?    Some goes for live POKER....surely you see the relevance of THAT topic here, and again I have not posted excessively about THAT topic.    As for Politics, yes i HAVE posted a lot about that.....but what "exploits" are you referring to???    Sorry, but if you are going to attack someone directly in this manner then you can't just throw sh*t and see what sticks.    I've even acknowledged I need to scale back on politics and I have, but I also fail to see why you can't just "NOT read those posts that annoy you" instead??WHere did I post about "math exploits"?  seriously, WHERE?!?!!? You completely stumped me with that one???After you get past that crap, then we can get to what I think is the real issue here, both my experiences and stats from 2002-2003 in Nevada, and the larger issue in general that I do not put blind faith in every casino and every casino game I encounter......and I have no qualms stating this.    I am not trying to convince anyone else, and I have explicitly conceded that I have NO definitive proof either way (I never said the data and info I collected manually back in the day was definitive proof of ANYTHING, I just based my own personal opinions and conclusions off of it(, and that like every one else here, this is just my opinion, based on my experiences and such......

[DaBurglar]

And I really would like an answer New2Vp, either in this thread or a new one that you can create in the "Anything/Everything? section.....What exactly did I do or say to YOU personally to cause you (especially in the last several weeks) to suddenly take up the cause to shred me personally?   Just be honest, I'm really asking.....I just want to know exactly how to respond as well. It's not the fact you simply disagree with my content or points......I'm talking about the obvious hostility and contempt in them .   Where or when did I direct that amount of CONTEMPT and hostility toward you?  

You're hyperbole, with your "he sacrificed himself and his bankroll to warn us all...!! Etc etc" underscores what I'm talking about here....who the hell are you all of a sudden? Your statements about how I'll just "not respond, lest this topic remain at the active status at the top" and your ruminating on "what my thought process is etc", that goes right back at you... you've obviously given this a Shiite load of thought, which means I should be honored or scared crapless, or both. Seriously, you don't need to go there...


I didn't want to disappoint pokerforme and not mention the "mean spirited" tone so obvious in them as well so I will..... hopefully the turd is still lhfao