Bankroll amounts

[Frank Kneeland]

Brmcc74When a poster writes a many paragraph posting, they are bound to say something that some players will agree with, while other players will not agree with.  I tried to cover several points in my posting, without going too far off topic.  If one of my phrases was funny to you, and gave you a good laugh, then I am happy for that.Some months back, one of the regular posters and I discussed hitting a jackpot of a RF.  From what I remember, the chances of doing this were less than 40%.  So, from memory I am going to say that while Frank and his team may be doing what they claim to be doing, when I try to apply Frank’s example to my own life, or try to make an explanation based on someone else’s math, I come up with the idea that most players, like you and I will leave the casino a loser at least two times out of three, and maybe worse.If my theory is true, then if is reasonable to start with a large bankroll, and session after session it will grow - yes grow smaller.   Sure, there will be wins, when they hit a jackpot.   And with the passage of time that bankroll will become small.  I never said that Frank did not make money at what he is doing.According the Shadowman I am banned from doing math again.  This is the kind of absurdity that I encounter over the internet.  If this were said in a conversation, perhaps, it would be less offensive to me.  Some folks lack the smoothness to be diplomatic.  But, beyond their lack of diplomacy, they have an abundance of arrogance towards others, who choose to think differently than they do.I will leave it to a math expert to tell us how a person plays a 8/5 game.  By this I mean, that if you spending $5 per hand, what is your expected loss per hour, even if you are playing at 100 % accuracy.  Since Frank is playing 2,000 hands per hour, I would imagine the losses to be mounting up quickly.Now, lets move away from Frank and his team of expert players.  After all, his situation is not representative of what you and I face in a casino. Again, I call on a math expert to prove my point.  If I am playing a 99 % pay back machine, and playing it 99 % accurately.  And I am playing 500 hands per hour, at the dollar denomination, how much is a reasonable loss expectation per 10 hour session.Frank has written a response to your post.  And the way he explains things sounds reasonable, with just one fault.You and I are not playing progressive jackpots of $12,000 or more.  The largest jackpot I have even seen in my gambling district was about $6,600 dollars.  Perhaps Frank will plug the number $6,600 into his formula and show us how this produces a different result.  Additionally, about 95% of the time you and I are playing a non progressive machine.  Again, the results would be so different from Frank’s situation.
Good post Jim. No, my results are not representational of what regular players would experience. We had a team of 68 players, locked up all the seats and played in shifts until the Jackpot fell...and we did this exclusively on massively high progressives where we profited after JP 80% of the time.If you were playing 8/5 JoB at less than $9,000 Royals amounts then indeed your bankroll would dwindle even if you were hitting your fair share.They way we did things (past tense) was a valid business model. What people are doing today seems a lot like gambling to me...never have figured out why people do it...What we did was to gambling, what strip mining is to your 5 year old playing in a sandbox.~FKP.S. Oh and Jim please keep doing math, that's the only way any of us ever get better at anything, by doing.

[shadowman]

Some months back, one of the regular posters and I discussed hitting a jackpot of a RF.  From what I remember, the chances of doing this were less than 40%.  So, from memory I am going to say that while Frank and his team may be doing what they claim to be doing, when I try to apply Frank’s example to my own life, or try to make an explanation based on someone else’s math, I come up with the idea that most players, like you and I will leave the casino a loser at least two times out of three, and maybe worse.
 
That's actually very close to the correct number. It varies by variance and return of the games.

If my theory is true, then if is reasonable to start with a large bankroll, and session after session it will grow - yes grow smaller.   Sure, there will be wins, when they hit a jackpot.   And with the passage of time that bankroll will become small.  I never said that Frank did not make money at what he is doing.

According the Shadowman I am banned from doing math again.  This is the kind of absurdity that I encounter over the internet.  If this were said in a conversation, perhaps, it would be less offensive to me.  Some folks lack the smoothness to be diplomatic.  But, beyond their lack of diplomacy, they have an abundance of arrogance towards others, who choose to think differently than they do.
 
When you make claims based on gamblers NEVER winning then you reap what you sow. Now you are being more reasonable but you are still missing a basic understanding of statistics that comes into play.

I will leave it to a math expert to tell us how a person plays a 8/5 game.  By this I mean, that if you spending $5 per hand, what is your expected loss per hour, even if you are playing at 100 % accuracy.  Since Frank is playing 2,000 hands per hour, I would imagine the losses to be mounting up quickly.
 
Yes, but Frank would not be playing unless the game was positive overall. He will typically lose until he hits the royal. Since the royal is extremely high to make the game positive, it most often covers all the losses plus providing a tidy profit.

Now, lets move away from Frank and his team of expert players.  After all, his situation is not representative of what you and I face in a casino.

Again, I call on a math expert to prove my point.  If I am playing a 99 % pay back machine, and playing it 99 % accurately.  And I am playing 500 hands per hour, at the dollar denomination, how much is a reasonable loss expectation per 10 hour session.
 
That's 5,000 hands at $5 a hand for a total investment for $25K. Assuming average luck and no royal you are giving up 3-4% for a loss of $750-$1000.

Frank has written a response to your post.  And the way he explains things sounds reasonable, with just one fault.

You and I are not playing progressive jackpots of $12,000 or more.  The largest jackpot I have even seen in my gambling district was about $6,600 dollars.  Perhaps Frank will plug the number $6,600 into his formula and show us how this produces a different result.  Additionally, about 95% of the time you and I are playing a non progressive machine.  Again, the results would be so different from Frank’s situation.

 
The amount of the Jackpot has to be combined with the return of the game. With an 8/5 JOB game (97.3%) the $6600 will not make the game positive and you would expect to lose. However, on an 8/5 BP game (99.17%) the $6600 would make the game positive. If we assume  a 2% value for the $4000 RF then you increase the return by 1.3%. Add that into the 99.17 yields 100.47%. I doubt Frank would play at that level without added benefits.

[OTABILL]

[QUOTE=jim18]Brmcc74When a poster writes a many paragraph posting, they are bound to say something that some players will agree with, while other players will not agree with.  I tried to cover several points in my posting, without going too far off topic.  If one of my phrases was funny to you, and gave you a good laugh, then I am happy for that.Some months back, one of the regular posters and I discussed hitting a jackpot of a RF.  From what I remember, the chances of doing this were less than 40%.  So, from memory I am going to say that while Frank and his team may be doing what they claim to be doing, when I try to apply Frank’s example to my own life, or try to make an explanation based on someone else’s math, I come up with the idea that most players, like you and I will leave the casino a loser at least two times out of three, and maybe worse.If my theory is true, then if is reasonable to start with a large bankroll, and session after session it will grow - yes grow smaller.   Sure, there will be wins, when they hit a jackpot.   And with the passage of time that bankroll will become small.  I never said that Frank did not make money at what he is doing.According the Shadowman I am banned from doing math again.  This is the kind of absurdity that I encounter over the internet.  If this were said in a conversation, perhaps, it would be less offensive to me.  Some folks lack the smoothness to be diplomatic.  But, beyond their lack of diplomacy, they have an abundance of arrogance towards others, who choose to think differently than they do.I will leave it to a math expert to tell us how a person plays a 8/5 game.  By this I mean, that if you spending $5 per hand, what is your expected loss per hour, even if you are playing at 100 % accuracy.  Since Frank is playing 2,000 hands per hour, I would imagine the losses to be mounting up quickly.Now, lets move away from Frank and his team of expert players.  After all, his situation is not representative of what you and I face in a casino. Again, I call on a math expert to prove my point.  If I am playing a 99 % pay back machine, and playing it 99 % accurately.  And I am playing 500 hands per hour, at the dollar denomination, how much is a reasonable loss expectation per 10 hour session.Frank has written a response to your post.  And the way he explains things sounds reasonable, with just one fault.You and I are not playing progressive jackpots of $12,000 or more.  The largest jackpot I have even seen in my gambling district was about $6,600 dollars.  Perhaps Frank will plug the number $6,600 into his formula and show us how this produces a different result.  Additionally, about 95% of the time you and I are playing a non progressive machine.  Again, the results would be so different from Frank’s situation.
Good post Jim. No, my results are not representational of what regular players would experience. We had a team of 68 players, locked up all the seats and played in shifts until the Jackpot fell...and we did this exclusively on massively high progressives where we profited after JP 80% of the time.If you were playing 8/5 JoB at less than $9,000 Royals amounts then indeed your bankroll would dwindle even if you were hitting your fair share.They way we did things (past tense) was a valid business model. What people are doing today seems a lot like gambling to me...never have figured out why people do it...What we did was to gambling, what strip mining is to your 5 year old playing in a sandbox.~FKP.S. Oh and Jim please keep doing math, that's the only way any of us ever get better at anything, by doing.[/QUOTE]
 Frank: A couple of questions to satisfy my curiosity: 1 - How did you manage to lock up all the seats at a bank of machines with a high progressive? From my observations, such machines get filled up as the progressive rises beginnning at levels below what I would think was below your threshold for a likely profitable return. 2 - Having hit my only progressive royal this year a minute or so after someone else, I was wondering how often you and/or your teammates had a similar experience. Or did you immediately cash out precluding such as occurrence? Thanks for all your erudite posts. They are appreciated by me and others on this forum. Happy New Year.

[brmcc74]

Brmcc74

When a poster writes a many paragraph posting, they are bound to say something that some players will agree with, while other players will not agree with.  I tried to cover several points in my posting, without going too far off topic.  If one of my phrases was funny to you, and gave you a good laugh, then I am happy for that.

Some months back, one of the regular posters and I discussed hitting a jackpot of a RF.  From what I remember, the chances of doing this were less than 40%.  So, from memory I am going to say that while Frank and his team may be doing what they claim to be doing, when I try to apply Frank’s example to my own life, or try to make an explanation based on someone else’s math, I come up with the idea that most players, like you and I will leave the casino a loser at least two times out of three, and maybe worse.

If my theory is true, then if is reasonable to start with a large bankroll, and session after session it will grow - yes grow smaller.   Sure, there will be wins, when they hit a jackpot.   And with the passage of time that bankroll will become small.  I never said that Frank did not make money at what he is doing.

According the Shadowman I am banned from doing math again.  This is the kind of absurdity that I encounter over the internet.  If this were said in a conversation, perhaps, it would be less offensive to me.  Some folks lack the smoothness to be diplomatic.  But, beyond their lack of diplomacy, they have an abundance of arrogance towards others, who choose to think differently than they do.

I will leave it to a math expert to tell us how a person plays a 8/5 game.  By this I mean, that if you spending $5 per hand, what is your expected loss per hour, even if you are playing at 100 % accuracy.  Since Frank is playing 2,000 hands per hour, I would imagine the losses to be mounting up quickly.

Now, lets move away from Frank and his team of expert players.  After all, his situation is not representative of what you and I face in a casino.

Again, I call on a math expert to prove my point.  If I am playing a 99 % pay back machine, and playing it 99 % accurately.  And I am playing 500 hands per hour, at the dollar denomination, how much is a reasonable loss expectation per 10 hour session.

Frank has written a response to your post.  And the way he explains things sounds reasonable, with just one fault.

You and I are not playing progressive jackpots of $12,000 or more.  The largest jackpot I have even seen in my gambling district was about $6,600 dollars.  Perhaps Frank will plug the number $6,600 into his formula and show us how this produces a different result.  Additionally, about 95% of the time you and I are playing a non progressive machine.  Again, the results would be so different from Frank’s situation.

For the record, all I said was that was the best post for the year. Im not even gonna begin to dissect and chop this thread to pieces. I simply dont care to. Some people play on different realms and/or planets then others. I never singled out anyone out. I merely made an observation by quoting another post. As far as Shadow is concerned, Ive found very few people who have been as diplomatic as me and him have been to eachother. He is an informative player whom I know is banging the buttons just like I do so I value his opinion. Happy new year

[Frank Kneeland]

 Frank: A couple of questions to satisfy my curiosity: 1 - How did you manage to lock up all the seats at a bank of machines with a high progressive? From my observations, such machines get filled up as the progressive rises beginning at levels below what I would think was below your threshold for a likely profitable return. 2 - Having hit my only progressive royal this year a minute or so after someone else, I was wondering how often you and/or your teammates had a similar experience. Or did you immediately cash out precluding such as occurrence? Thanks for all your erudite posts. They are appreciated by me and others on this forum. Happy New Year.
Many long years spent as a tick on the butt of society, really glad to be of service. Thanks for the kind words.1. Even in the late eighties and nineties locking up a bank was as much art as it was a science. And no we didn't  always get all the seats. Usually, but not always. Sometimes we'd get most of the seats and post people waiting behind the "live" seats. Live seats were any seats not being played by real pros or enemy team players. We knew all the faces and if they weren't pros they rarely lasted more than a few hours. Sometimes we started our plays in the middle of the night when most of the world sleeps. Other times we employed misdirection and made the enemy teams think we were going one place when we were really going somewhere else. Successfully locking up banks was a huge part of running the team and it was non-trivially complicated2. As soon as the progressive hit a loud and thunderous "It's Down" was usually trumpeted by our team crier, and all the players were instructed to immediately announce the jackpot and tell all those around them to stop playing. Even so, at least three times, that I can remember, we got an extra Royal at reset 1 second after the big one hit. And I seem to remember a couple of times when the enemy team hit the big one and we got the small meter. I remember this happening at the Stardust for sure at least once. Funnier: A new scout I was training, that didn't know all our team players, got the job of telling people a Royal was down and went around dutifully instructing EVERYONE to stop playing. This time we didn't have all the seats, but even so everyone listened to him and stopped. Several minutes later I walked by and a regular customer asked me, "can I start playing again?" Not skipping a beat I said, "Yes the issue has been resolved, you may resume play." It was no small task to keep a straight face, so I left quickly. When I caught up with my new scout I told him of his obvious leadership qualities and said, "hay as long as they seem to do whatever you tell them, could you have them pump the meter back up to $12,000 and then ask them to leave." Well it was funny to us...I have also employed call girls to coax determined male players off really high progressives so we could get all the seats. It's hard to express in words what it was like "back in the day". Another time another place. Those were the days...Beating the casino was the easy part. At the time there were only a handful of pro VP players not part of the large teams and no one including the casinos and game manufactures had any idea what the real return of VP machines were. The Teams were holding all the cards.