I hate monkey butt but if I could make 200k/yr for sure I'd deal with it. There's a powder for that.
When I invest in a stock or bond, I have the ability to research that investment before I lay out my money. Companies have track records, the good ones have superior management and the ability to pay me back even if the intended use of the money fails.
First, I won't ask why Phil sidesteps my posts. Moving on from that, I have a comment regarding the above taken from one of Phil's posts.
Phil, what do you mean where you wrote: "the good ones have superior management and the ability to pay me back even if the intended use of the money fails?"
Are you saying that if a stock investment fails (i.e. share price drops) your "good" investment company pays you the difference between where the stock price fell to and what your initial purchase price of the stock was? Or pays even more based on an anticipated future worth of a share? Or does this "good" investment company tell you to go pound sand because you should have known the risks?
Wouldn't this be a "guarantee" that the stock won't fail? You talk of Bob Dancer making a guarantee even though it isn't written or published anywhere.
Or is this just another example of you writing some nonsense just to see what kind of a response youd get out of people?
Last edited by Tedlark on Fri Mar 08, 2019 10:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
FloridaPhil,
I need to issue a warning here. This is a good example of how you often tend to post inaccurate statements about people/situations. Whether you do this simply to get a rise out of people or because you truly believe them, it needs to stop. Naturally, we have to leave room for people misunderstanding things and subjects that are open to personal opinion. However, you post quite often here - and quite repeatedly - so I think it's important that you make sure what you are posting is accurate. Some examples you have claimed that I can find no supporting evidence would be:
1) Everyone on this forum only talks about advantage play (not even close)
2) Most people here are advantage players (this appears to be inaccurate)
3) Advantage Players guarantee a positive return playing video poker that is without risk (false)
4) Bob Dancer encourages people to play games they cannot afford (false)
You have an obsession with making these points (among others) continually, while ignoring all replies that clearly show them to be false. This needs to end.
I encourage you to share your experiences in your travel and personal play, as well as helpful tips for people playing in a similar situation as yourself. However, continuing to misinform the public about this site, its members, and making untrue statements about people with genuine knowledge about the game will result in a temporary suspension and then, if necessary, a ban.
Avoiding this should be easy. And I hope that need not happen because I believe you have something to offer recreational players, if you can avoid subjects that tend to get you into trouble. Thank you.
I believe we've pretty much discussed this topic to death. I am not a believer that VP math equates to VP profits. As long as the risks are reasonably disclosed and no assumptions are made, whatever someone chooses to do with their own money is their business.
I will continue to use the computer generated strategy my VPW software provides me. It has proven to be the cheapest way to play VP and I have tried it all. I choose to play quarter VP because the cost to play VP is insignificant and the casino lets me stay in their resorts without paying the front desk clerk.
At the moment, this seems to be working out. I have reduced my trips to the casino from one day a week to about 1-2 days a month. I no longer go by myself just to have something to do. As Webman can verify, my online play has increased substantially. I find I enjoy playing against other players on this website more than playing in the casino.
What happens in the future is unknown. VP has lost a lot of it's appeal to us. Both of us quit counting royals a long time ago and there is nothing left to accomplish. We will most likely continue our trips to Biloxi. It's a very enjoyable vacation, even if we don't gamble.
FloridaPhil,I confirm that your play has increased on the site. Can you confirm that you have read my post above?
Yes I did. If you expect me to support the idea that Advantage Play strategy guarantees profits, you might as well ban me now. I believe this to be a totally false premise that benefits one person at the expense of others.
If you expect me to support the idea that Advantage Play strategy guarantees profits, you might as well ban me now.
Where has such a claim made? Please be specific because this is exactly what I'm talking about.
I don't believe anyone here has guaranteed profits, but you state repeatedly that someone has.
You have been asked this question before but I have never seen a concise answer that didn't change the subject. Show us the guarantee you speak of. Educated responses on the subject that I have read state that there are no absolute guarantees, but the risk can be quantified and you need to understand the risks in order to know if they are acceptable to you.
The Bob Dancer article linked earlier in this post addresses this issue somewhat. It makes it pretty clear that there are no guarantees with Advantage Play, but that a 99% chance of success is acceptable to the author for a particular play. That is not a guarantee.
When someone starts a thread saying "I 100% guarantee you can make a profit with this approach!" then you have my blessing to argue the point. However, arguing against a fictional statement that you accuse people of making is not allowed.
If you expect me to support the idea that Advantage Play strategy guarantees profits, you might as well ban me now.
Where has such a claim made? Please be specific because this is exactly what I'm talking about. I don't believe anyone here has guaranteed profits, but you state repeatedly that someone has.
When you state that a certain VP game is worth "X" amount an hour, it's sounds like a veiled guarantee to me. Dancer's books are full of those references. Perhaps he has changed his stance over the years and I wasn't aware of it? A recent Dancer statement on this forum went something like this. "If you only play positive VP games, good things will happen." It should have been "If you only play positive VP games, good things are more likely to happen."
I know this sounds like splitting hairs, it's not. There are players who believe they can beat the casino because someone else does it or because math says it's possible. This belief is dangerous. Making a long term profit from VP takes access to the right games and comps, skill, discipline, dedication, and enough money to last through downturns. Even then there is NO guarantee of a long term profit.
If we can all agree on that, there is no need to comment further.
I wonder if Phil realizes he uses Mr. Dancers math when he calculates what it cost a player per hour on five coins vs CS.
If saying something is worth X an hour is a guarantee, then no one is more guilty of making them than Phil.
I wonder if Phil realizes he uses Mr. Dancers math when he calculates what it cost a player per hour on five coins vs CS. If saying something is worth X an hour is a guarantee, then no one is more guilty of making them than Phil.
You make a valid point. When I make my calculations, I do not expect them to be especially accurate. I use them for comparison purposes only. Math may say a certain quarter Deuces Wild game is 97% at max coins and 95.8% at single coin. Using those numbers times the number of hands, I can estimate the negative cost per hour. However, if I'm using CS and hit a max coin royal, my numbers are way off. I bet 25 cents on the previous hand and benefited from a 4,000 coin win on the next. Math can never predict what a player might do in a casino. It can only approximate what a computer may do it time. There are far too many variables in live human video poker play to guarantee a profit or a loss.
The unknown variable in video poker is the player.
Continue with Google