Denomination Dilemma

[FloridaPhil]

The problem with VP progressives we see today is they often drop the odds on those games to a point where you are paying more than the progressive is worth. Unless you are lucky enough to hit it early and stop playing.

[Webman]

If I don't tell them my motivation for playing VP, players may conclude I am playing for profit.

Your paranoia about people mistaking you for an advantage player is trumped by the fact that people are annoyed with reading the exact same paragraphs over and over again. It's a waste of everyone's time, most especially yours. If the subject came up every few months, it would never have been an issue. But it's almost a daily occurrence!

On a message board, you don't have to repeat something 5,000 times on the off chance a stranger reads one post and misses all your other ones that make it clear what type of player you are. This is a community. People have history. Your priorities in playing will be obvious to anyone who chooses to participate here, simply by the nature of your posts.

And if anyone does make that mistake, I promise to personally let them know you are playing for entertainment, not profit.

Either this is clear by now, or it's not. It seems like it's not. I don't know what else to say. But for the sake of the community, it has to stop now.

[FloridaPhil]

What is it you want me to say? How can we talk about today's video poker games without talking about losses? Does it help anyone to talk about games players can't play?

I just came back from a 1,300 mile road trip. I played VP in some casinos that I have never been to before. I didn't see any profitable VP games. I have never seen a profitable video poker game except at Red Rock 2,283 miles from my home. A/C is 1,023 miles from my home. FAA and Olds442Jetaway tell me they don't have profitable games either. I assume if they did, they would be playing them.

The games you have to play determines how you play them. Perhaps we need another forum called "Profit Forum" where Advantage games can be discussed? I will gladly ban myself from that forum for obvious reasons. When I talk about the games I see, you want to censor me. The heading on the forum says "Learn". What are we teaching? No matter how we try to put a positive spin on today's VP games, we can't escape the fact that playing them costs money.

If you want me to act like there is profit in playing today's video poker, you may as well ban me now. All I know is what I see with my own eyes.

[OTABILL]

FP, all you need to do is say, I've commented on this subject previously. Here is a link to my post that provides my views.

[FloridaPhil]

Before Webman bans me, I would like to say a few things. I have enjoyed my time on this forum. I have learned a lot. I met some new friends. I enjoyed playing a lot of video poker. I started playing VP when near positive games were common. I have seen them consistently removed and downgraded. I never know what I am going to find when I go to my casino. Yesterday's 98.9% games became 97% overnight. Just when I think I can live with that, the games dropped to 96%. I have no clue what's going to be next.

All the VP books and CDs that I have in my closet outlining a methodology for VP profit are worthless to me now. They talk about games that no longer exist. If I wish to play decent games, the casino forces me to take huge risks with my money. If too many of those risks pay off, the casino changes the rules. If you are going to play at one of my local casinos today, you can do just as well playing slots. Your comps will be better anyway.

All I ever wrote about on this forum was what I observed when I played VP. What I observed was not what those authors described. I don't consider non advantaged players to be stupid. I don't enjoy thinking they are paying anyone's bills. Exactly the opposite is true. I care about small time players. I don't want them to fall into the trap of thinking a casino is a place where profit can be made. I have seen the consequences of this thinking up close and personal. You don't know pain until you talk to someone who lost everything when they believed they would win.

I expect my critics will be happy to see me gone. They can continue to talk about winning and never talk about the losses that come with those wins. It will make me sad to see this. I have done all I can. Whatever I say after this you will probably never read. There will come a day when even the experts will admit what I am writing now is true. I doubt anyone will remember.

[Gronbog]

My personal suspicion is that none of today's casinos are beatable long term.

Definitely not true. Replace the word "casinos" with "video poker games" and it's still not true. Additionally replace the word "none" with "many" and then you've made an accurate statement.

[OTABILL]

My personal suspicion is that none of today's casinos are beatable long term.

Definitely not true. Replace the word "casinos" with "video poker games" and it's still not true. Additionally replace the word "none" with "many" and then you've made an accurate statement.

You are saying many casinos and video poker games are beatable long-term. That implies well over 1/2. Please elaborate.

[Waiting4RF]

billryan is just trying to keep Phil from running amok. Same with tedlark. Fighting the "good fight". I've mostly given up mainly because Phil never stops... ...

If you are waiting for me to stop whatever lies you believe I am telling, you may have a long wait. I call them as I see them.

I will stay as long as the management allows me to voice my opinion. ...

To be honest, if I was banned permanently from this forum it would be a relief. ...

Phil, I think you want to be banned based on your old post.

[onemoretry]

There's an old story about a scorpion and a frog. Without going into the whole thing, the bottom line is that the scorpion stings the frog, and the frog, as it is dying, says to the scorpion: "Why did you do that - now we're both going to die". The scorpion replies: "I just couldn't help myself - it's in my nature".

[Gronbog]

My personal suspicion is that none of today's casinos are beatable long term.

Definitely not true. Replace the word "casinos" with "video poker games" and it's still not true. Additionally replace the word "none" with "many" and then you've made an accurate statement.

You are saying many casinos and video poker games are beatable long-term. That implies well over 1/2. Please elaborate.

My apologies. I botched the substitution. I meant the statement to end up saying that "many" video poker games are not beatable which is to say that some are beatable. However, I did mean to say that almost all casinos are beatable. To elaborate on that, almost every casino I have ever visited has had a blackjack game that I could beat.