Check Everything

[Tedlark]

Phil, how can you say that you are not on this forum to teach people to play video poker? How about when you were pushing your "Cheap System", better known as "CS"? How can you further say that you are not on this forum to teach people to play video poker when you constantly preach about playing smaller denominations, short coin, whatever?

You say that you use expert opinion when it comes to investing but not when you play video poker. Why not? You spoke of going to the movies earlier and munching on popcorn; when you choose a movie to go see, do you do it based on the reviews of experts or do you go with your feelings?

[FloridaPhil]

Phil, how can you say that you are not on this forum to teach people to play video poker? How about when you were pushing your "Cheap System", better known as "CS"? How can you further say that you are not on this forum to teach people to play video poker when you constantly preach about playing smaller denominations, short coin, whatever?

You say that you use expert opinion when it comes to investing but not when you play video poker. Why not? You spoke of going to the movies earlier and munching on popcorn; when you choose a movie to go see, do you do it based on the reviews of experts or do you go with your feelings?

From the beginning, I have always said my purpose of being on this forum is primarily to report what happens when I play VP. I made money over a two year period using CS. Much of it was luck and I stated as much. Everything works until it doesn't. CS lost it's appeal to me when my wife started hitting $1,000 royals and I was doing the same thing for $62.50.

Some people would like me to stop posting about how I play VP. I suppose they want me to say I lost money playing single coin when I didn't? I didn't play single coin because I believed it would produce a profit. I played single coin to limit my losses when playing the negative games we have to play here in the Southeast and it did what I wanted it to do. The fact that I made a profit was an anomaly.

I believe most Recreational players should put more effort into limiting losses than making a profit. Very few people are going to beat the casinos. Chasing a dream that only a few players actually realize is paying most of the casino's bills, not someone playing single coin. That is why I suggest playing smaller not bigger. This sometimes puts me in conflict with the experts. Those experts are talking about playing with unlimited bankrolls over unlimited time. Most players can't afford or are not willing to lose unlimited amounts of money for unlimited periods of time waiting for math to make them a profit. I am one of them.

I enjoy these discussions as long as they don't turn into personal attacks. This forum runs out of topics frequently. This is expected as there isn't much to discuss that hasn't already been covered in a book. I play VP for the pure enjoyment of playing the game and the casino experience. I don't want to overpay for my entertainment. I can play a lot more hands of VP if I play quarters than if I play dollars. For me, more hands equals more entertainment.

As far as movies are concerned, I do not use critics to make my decisions on which movie to see. I like science fiction, action and adventure movies. Those are not always the movies that get the best ratings from critics. I hate movies about personal problems, conflict and depressing topics. I get enough of that on the news.

I play VP on this website every day. I am the top daily player on occasion. I play Triple Triple Bonus because there is no cost to me if I lose. If the experts will cover my losses, I would play any game at any denomination they told me to. So far, I have not received any offers.

[onemoretry]

I have always said my purpose of being on this forum is primarily to report what happens when I play VP.

What I find somewhat ironic is that you have often expressed concern that newbies will incorrectly interpret the advice of VP "experts" to mean that playing according to that advice will guarantee financial success, yet you do not hesitate to boast about "against the math" successful draws, with no apparent concern that those same newbies might think: if Phil can do it, so can I.

[FloridaPhil]

What I find somewhat ironic is that you have often expressed concern that newbies will incorrectly interpret the advice of VP "experts" to mean that playing according to that advice will guarantee financial success, yet you do not hesitate to boast about "against the math" successful draws, with no apparent concern that those same newbies might think: if Phil can do it, so can I.

I have never boasted about playing "against the math" draws. I am careful to say I am going against the math to influence a different result. If you want a chance to profit from playing VP long term, you must have everything the experts require. You must have access to net positive games. You must be able to play computer perfect for long periods of time. You must have a bankroll big enough to weather all downturns and you must have the discipline to carry on no matter what your short term results. I have none of those things. Most players I know don't either.

So what choices do you have? You can refuse to play. You can play like an expert and accept the cost as a fee for playing the game or you can change the game plan to meet your own personal requirements. The choice you make should depend upon your skills, opportunities and what you want out of the game. I prefer to change the game plan. I get the entertainment I want at a price I want to pay. I could write a book, but no one is going to buy a book about that. Players want to dream of beating the casino and that dream is what sells books.

Would you buy a VP strategy book if the author told you what to do and added the fact that it might not work? Millions of players play VP every year. Many know what a good game looks like. Many own software and some train extensively. For this reason, the casinos have reduced the odds. We are at a point where 100% VP opportunities are almost non existent. If you want to use the tactics that work when playing extinct games, go for it. They already went extinct where I play, so I am attempting to do the best with what I have and that means playing smaller.

[TheDirector]

Webman -

Under Video Poker/Recreational Play, I motion for the creation of a subforum called "Phil's Corner" so that Phil, his followers, and his detractors can post until their collective fingers go numb.

Do I hear any seconds from the rest of the forum members?

[Tedlark]

The Recreational Play forum was set up by Webman specifically for Phil, his followers, and his detractors.

Maybe a new forum can be started: "The Director's Cut?"

[FloridaPhil]

The Recreational Play forum was set up by Webman specifically for Phil, his followers, and his detractors. Maybe a new forum can be started: "The Director's Cut?"

It seems the only thing members are passionate about on this forum is how I choose to play negative VP games. If you don't want to see my posts, start some of your own. Surely someone has something interesting to say other than "I hit a jackpot yesterday"?

Today, ninety nine percent of the video poker games in America are negative. Our experts refuse to talk about these games other than to say not to play them. The majority of our members are playing these games. If the experts tried to help the majority instead of the few, we wouldn't need to discuss them among ourselves, we could just sit back and learn from those who know. My entire strategy when playing these games is to limit losses by limiting coin in. Do the experts agree? We have no way of knowing.

The Strategy Forum is for those who can play with an edge. There aren't many of those games left, so there isn't much to talk about. Recently the forum conversation has been generally peaceful and most of the comments have been well thought out. Let's leave well enough alone.

[FAA]

I hit a jackpot yesterday is pretty interesting to me. My last RF was in August and only $250.

[TheDirector]

It seems the only thing members are passionate about on this forum is how I choose to play negative VP games. If you don't want to see my posts, start some of your own. Surely someone has something interesting to say other than "I hit a jackpot yesterday"?

Phil, it appears that members are not really passionate about how you choose to play, however, it seems they get annoyed when you say the same things over and over again. Your method of play can be boiled down to this: when faced with net-negative opportunities, reduce bets to minimize losses. For recreational players that place a higher value on entertainment over pure profit, this makes sense.

You talk about educating those would-be players that do not have access to net-positive games. I would argue you have done that time and again. I applaud your efforts and your counterpoint to advantage play. The experts will not comment because they have no reason to do so.

What else can you bring to the table other than your simplistic (not meant negatively) and straightforward method? If there is truly nothing else that you can advance beyond variations on a theme, then we are likely left with jackpot stories and pics (which would be fine with me as I often enjoy vicarious living and celebrating the successes of others).

[FloridaPhil]

I hit a jackpot yesterday is pretty interesting to me. My last RF was in August and only $250.

OK, how about these questions? Do you only play positive VP games? If not, do you care how much it costs to play VP? If all VP games were negative, would you quit the game? Do you believe walking out ahead is a winning strategy? If you didn't hit a royal in 10 royal cycles would you quit playing VP? How big of a jackpot is enough to make you walk out of the casino or would you keep playing? Would you play a $100 game if you had an edge? Take your pick.