HELLO BOB DANCER......

[case]

Phil I think you and Dancer are saying different things. Dancer says you guys are saying his system doesn't work and  you are saying it will not work because we don't have full pay tables. Bobs point is IF you play with an advantage AND play 100% accurate his system will work. You might not win every year but the results should speak for themselves.You are saying no matter how we play we can not win (over time) with our pay tables.You are both right

[Carcounter]

Agreed. I still see some pros in AC that I met years ago and they are still playing, so they must know something. Some time ago I saw a few on a .25 progressive at Caesars that had multiple games on it and a natural royal that was at $3,300 if I remember. I know the one guy scouts like crazy, knows all the promotions going on and is as close to AC's version of Bob Dancer as you can get. I think he is still grinding out a small profit.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=case]Phil I think you and Dancer are saying different things. [/quote]I agree totally.  You can not make blanket all encompassing statements
about video poker strategies because there are so many variables involved.    Also,
our definition of what "works" are totally different.   I get this, but
many players don't.   Playing a negative expectation video poker game
is something he would never consider, so he dismisses everyone who does as having a "discipline" problem.    There is nothing wrong with Bob's methodology, it just doesn't work for most players outside of Nevada and I'm not sure how much longer it will there either.   If your goal is to make a living playing video poker, you need to move to Vegas and hit the good machines while they last.  If that's not in the cards for you and you're concerned about your growing losses, you may want to try something different. That's all I'm saying. 

[KingofAmerica]

Do I put much stock in the negative reports from recreational players? No I don't. The reports are overwhelmingly written by losing players. The winning players aren't talking. They're just doing their thing. The losing players are talking --- and always complaining. That creates a really biased sample.


Bingo

[BobDancer]

There are over-100% opportunities in many jurisdictions other than Nevada --- if you limit yourself to playing when the best promotions occur and don't insist on such things as "it must be for quarters (or any other denomination), it must be DDB, it must be Triple Play or Five Play, it must be available whenever you show up, and it must be obvious to figure out." If you limit yourself to those constraints, I agree it's hard to find good games. If you know lots of different games and are wiling to play whatever is best, it's not impossible.One of my best plays is NOT in Nevada.arguing that your Cheap Strategy is a smart play is highly irresponsible. Is it possible to lose less playing one coin at a time rather than five? Absolutely. If you ALWAYS play one coin, your loss will be less than if you play max coins. (Best strategy on these games is to bet zero coins --- not one coin.) Is it possible to end up a winner? Absolutely not! Your strategy always has the caveat to switch to max coins just before you hit a royal. Good luck on that one! Nobody is good at predicting when the next royal will occur. If you really think you are good at that, why waste time playing for quarters? Go directly to $100 machines when you know the royal is coming! You don't have $100 machines in the casinos you frequent. No matter. Fly to Vegas. Airfare is very cheap when you know you're going to be collecting $400,000!For anyone who doesn't understand why playing bad games is a guaranteed loser --- and playing these games at 2% less is even worse --- consider Expected Value. Every hand has an expected loss. You win some. You lose some. But over time, your actual results converge on your Expected Value. Try to sum up a series of negative number and end up with a positive one. You can't do it, because it's impossible. Is it possible you're actually ahead using this system for a short period of time? Of course. If your time horizon is short enough. But over time, those negative numbers will eat you up.This isn't a matter of professional gamblers versus recreational gamblers. The Cheap Strategy is highly flawed no matter how you gamble. But you keep repeating yourself over and over again and there are some on this site who will misguidedly believe you. Which will be too bad for them.Why don't you take your strategy over to the vpFREE forum and talk about it there. I promise you, they will heckle your ideas mercilessly. There are a significant proportion of people there who are knowledgeable gamblers. On this site, there are very few, so your ideas go unchallenged --- except by me. But they won't go unchallenged when you talk about them in front of knowledgeable players.The more you dig in your heels and defend such a flawed strategy, the harder it will be for you to ever find a system that works.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=BobDancer]Is it possible to end up a winner? Absolutely not! Your strategy always
has the caveat to switch to max coins just before you hit a royal. Good
luck on that one[/quote]I absolutely love this discussion.  The reason Bob Dancer doesn't get the Cheap Strategy is because his brain can't wrap around the idea that anyone would chose to play a negative expectation game and try to break even.  And why should he?  To him breaking even is losing.   Most players would kill if they thought they could even come close to breaking even over a period of years.  I'm on my third year playing this way and I'm still a few bucks ahead.   Even if I start losing, it will be peanuts compared to how much I would lose playing max coins on negative expectation games.    Also, if he would bother to read how it actually works, he would know I don't choose when to switch to max coins.  No one can possibly know when a royal is going to happen and the Cheap Strategy doesn't rely on max coin royals to stay even anyway.  If your goal is to make a lot of money, get into Real Estate.  If you are trying to do it playing video poker, I hope your daddy's trust fund is really really big!  Some people are making a good living from video poker, but they aren't doing it by playing the game alone.

[alpax]

If your goal is to make a lot of money, get into Real Estate.  If you are trying to do it playing video poker, I hope your daddy's trust fund is really really big!  Some people are making a good living from video poker, but they aren't doing it by playing the game alone.


I am also enjoying the discussion between these intelligent folks (just taking a back seat).

A huge bankroll is required to see the efforts bear fruit as well as the dedication needed to play out millions of rounds to reach a game's theoretical return, only the latter is mentioned on Mr. Dancer's LVA weekly articles.

It took me longer than others to realize Mr. Dancer is a good businessman, I am pretty sure it will scare people off if he said you need a enormous bankroll to be a long term winner even if you have to sell off your home; so it is not mentioned at all.

The biggest skill required in real estate is location, location, location...

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=alpax]It took me longer than others to realize Mr. Dancer is a good
businessman, I am pretty sure it will scare people off if he said you
need a enormous bankroll to be a long term winner even if you have to
sell off your home; so it is not mentioned at all.[/quote]Mr. Dancer makes good money selling software, books and radio show advertising targeting average video poker players like me.  He is also being paid by casinos to promote the idea that video poker can be beat.  I don't begrudge any of his success and I wish him well even though I don't personally believe everything he espouses 100%.  He is wrong about the Cheap Strategy and I can tell from his posts that he has judged it useless without actually trying it.  I guess that makes us even because I don't believe for a minute that you can make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year just by sitting on a casino stool playing video poker.  You can make up your own mind about that.  I'm sure he will be quick to fire back that the Cheap Strategy is garbage and anyone who questions his judgement is an idiot.  If he wants to attack me on this forum, so be it.  I have treated him with respect and given him credit for his knowledge of the game and the industry.   The truth is most players in the US would be better off financially playing single coin quarters and he knows it.

[BobDancer]

  He is wrong about the Cheap Strategy and I can tell from his posts that he has judged it useless without actually trying it.  Absolutely correct. Intelligent people can judge it flawed just from reading it."Trying it" will not make it un-flawed.

[alpax]

I don't believe for a minute that you can make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year just by sitting on a casino stool playing video poker.  You can make up your own mind about that.  I'm sure he will be quick to fire back that the Cheap Strategy is garbage and anyone who questions his judgement is an idiot. If he wants to attack me on this forum, so be it.  I have treated him with respect and given him credit for his knowledge of the game and the industry.   The truth is most players in the US would be better off financially playing single coin quarters and he knows it.



I believe that number has dropped way down to thousands of dollars or enough to make a living but not hundred of thousands of dollars like it was during the golden days.

Mr. Dancer's motive to play VP is only about being ahead year in and year out. Your motive is about enjoying VP cost effectively because the casino has such a high edge, which Mr. Dancer will not be interested in. If he really wanted to explore just the dynamics of your strategy, he can do max bet quarters as the single coin / max bet $1 as the max coin / max bet $5 as the higher denomination bet. That way he does not give up the 2% royal flush bonuses.

I guess where the friction lies is that you are telling Mr. Dancer to play your way when his way works out for him.

People here have their doubts about casinos allowing an individual to win a large sum of money on a year in and year out basis. People have the right to believe he works for some casinos and is an enemy to the rest of the casinos. People understand the concepts of Mr. Dancer's strategy, but they are waiting for someone to come up with proof that it works year in and year out.