Martingale Strategy?

[billryan]

[QUOTE=mdmick67] All the crap they are peddling about how to play perfect to the math plus adding in all the comps you receive will make you a winner is just a bull crap. (A Crock)When you refer to comps, are you referring just to things like rooms and food, or are you including cashcack, slot play, etc.?

Even ignoring those items, I would note that by the end of this year, I, and my wife, will have flown from Buffalo to Nevada and return, five times. Our total outlay for air fares and approximately 50 night's accommodation will have been ZERO.

Are you seriously suggesting that we should totally ignore that fact in assessing the outcome of our play for the year?   [/QUOTE]


Obviously you should ignore any facts that cast doubt on phils agenda.
Hundreds a month in free play? Ignore.
Hundreds a month in free food? Ignore
Free shows? Ignore.
Free Airfare? Ignore
Free Cruises? Ignore
Free Hotel Rooms ? Ignore
Multi-point days? Ignore
Gifts for minimum play? Ignore.

[FloridaPhil]

You are confusing me with someone else.   I am not ignoring free play and comps.  I am questioning the premise that playing VP by math alone will make anyone a long term winner.   As I understand it, this is the theory that Bob Dancer's strategy is based on.  VP winners and losers are determined by frequency of jackpots.  No math can make them happen any faster or more frequent.  If Bob wants to say playing by math will allow you to play more hands for the money, I agree.  I also agree this could lead to more comps and free play which definitely have value.   No math can not magically reach into the machine and pull out royals.   All VP results are at least partially reliant on chance. Any strategy that states otherwise is marketing not based on fact.

[billryan]

Seeing how Mr. Dancer directly answered this directly barely two weeks ago, I have no idea why you would pretend otherwise.
As you gloated in your ignorance, he "admitted" to being down on a particular game, but the two million plus in other considerations made him a very successful long term winner on the game.
Perfect strategy on a game that pays back 99.5% will, in the long run, pay off 99.5%. Shocking ,eh? The difference between long term winning and losing on this game is simple.
Does the added values one gets from the slot club and promotions bring the value over 100%.
If it doesn't , don't play if your goal is to be a winner. If it does, you have a possible winner.
Next you need see if another game will give better results.
It's painfully obvious, with every post and thread you
make that you are either ignorant or dishonest.
Why you continue to reinforce this by starting nonsensical threads is beyond me.   

[BobDancer]

Bill, while you are correct in your analysis, FP is arguing something completely different. You will never be able to convince him he's wrong --- because he's not! It's a silly argument he's making. It's a nonsensical argument he's making. But he's right!FP argues that there is no 100% guarantee you will be a winner if you continue to play a game where you have an edge. And that's correct.You can get your odds up to 99.9% --- or even higher with a sizeable edge played long enough --- but you'll never get the odds all the way to 100%. THAT'S ESSENTIALLY HIS ENTIRE ARGUMENT. And my argument is having the odds 999 to 1 in my favor can make for a very nice living. And my argument is that doing as I say will greatly improve your chances of being a winner.Why do I think his argument is both correct and basically silly? Because there is no 100% guarantee on ANYTHING in life. You think you can guarantee you'll be alive a week from now? A guarantee means you'll offer a billion to one (or more) if you're wrong. I'll lay a penny against that. As soon as you put up your $10 million on the other side, the clock will start running. I hope you win your penny, and I promise not to actively facilitate your leaving us, but I'll gladly take the $10 million if you meet your unfortunate demise. And when I lose this bet (which I probably will), I'll pay off cheerfully and immediately bet another penny for next week. Sooner or later . . .  Make enough of these bets and I'll be a big winner. And there is still no guarantee that you won't live forever.Nobody can make such a guarantee intelligently. So from that premise, FP argues (to extend the analogy) that any theory on living healthier which will increase your lifespan on average is just a wild premise sold by sharp system sellers because nobody can guarantee you'll live forever. (Never mind that I've never claimed you can live forever --- or moving the analogy back to gambling, are 100% guaranteed to win. Nobody can make that guarantee.)And you, Bill Ryan, will never shake him from this silly argument. He's shown for a long time that he can latch on to a theory and keep repeating it over and over and over again forever. He's annoyingly good at that. If you argue with him he'll just sigh and repeat his argument, while probably being irritated that you keep misinterpreting his words. Neither one of you add anything new during the next iteration of you each spouting your point of view. So long as he's making these nonsensical statements in the Recreational Forum, let it go. He does the least harm possible over here. It's the closest to out-and-out banning him that Webman will currently allow. Your words have warned others here how nonsensical and harmful you believe his theories are. I believe that too. If they choose to believe him rather than us, there's nothing we can do about it.  But you're not going to change his mind or get him to shut up. That's just not in his makeup.

[case]

Phil

Webman told you a couple days ago that no one has ever been banned for disagreeing with Dancer....yet you come right back and same the same thing once again.

Broken record

[case]

This is what Webman wrote to Phil

As far as I know, there are only two topics banned... discussion of online gambling, and discussion about Mr. Fa La La La La.... La la la la (a former member banned for repetitive bad behavior).

[Vman96]

Well said Bob.

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=BobDancer]FP argues that there is no 100% guarantee you will be a
winner if you continue to play a game where you have an edge. And that's
correct.[/quote]I am completely satisfied with Mr. Dancer's response including the parts that I did not quote.  This has always been my issue with math based strategy.  Many players don't understand this.  They think just because they play the best games, practice until they are numb and continue to feed money into the game, they are owed a profit.  I used to think that myself. This is just not true.If you understand there are no guarantees, why would anyone risk millions of dollars of hard earned money on the hope that gambling with a tiny 1-2% edge would make you a nice living?  The average person wouldn't take that chance. Mr. Dancer is not the average person.  I believe his family was wealthy way before he saw his first video poker machine.  This is not a bad thing, but it would explain a lot.  Gambling is gambling, plain and simple.  Don't gamble what you can't afford to lose and you will be OK. 

[case]

There are no guarantees in the stock market, yet you invest money there Phil. How come?

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=case]There are no guarantees in the stock market, yet you invest money there Phil. How come?
[/quote]Excellent question.  I currently invest in stocks and bonds because they are the only game in town.   With CDs paying 2% or less, in order to keep up with inflation you need to find return.  If I could get a 6% return on CDs, at 70 years old that's what I would be doing.Stocks are one of the only investments that have stood the test of time. When I was younger, I took risks because I had time on my side.  I started investing in stocks in my 20s.  I started with nothing and today most people would consider me well off financially.    I am currently trimming back my stock portfolio.  At this stage of my life I don't need any more money, I need to hold onto what I have.Investing in stocks is not gambling.  You control what stocks you buy.  You sell them when they don't perform and you buy them when you recognize their potential.  Trying to time the market is like trying to catch a royal at the right time, it can't be done.  With stocks you do the research and make your decisions based on real data, not a theoretical edge.   If you can't do that, buy an index fund and let someone else do it for you.  If you want to become a millionaire, you aren't going to make it in a casino or even working a job.  Start investing early, keep investing and let your investments compound.Sorry for the investment seminar, but you asked the question.