Hi Howard,
I presume you are not Anna Nicole's Howard ? hehe..
No, I have not learn progressive yet. I only do DWVP (and occasionally DBVP) but, I am talking about DWVP.
That is good to know when I am ready for it..however, that does detract from the totally random theory.
~ ¤(¯`*•.¸(¯`*•.¸ Meredith ¸.•*´¯)¸.•*´¯)¤ ~
My New Years Resolution is "That I will be less laz"
--- On Tue, 1/4/11, Howard W. Stern <howard.w.stern@earthlink.net> wrote:
From: Howard W. Stern <howard.w.stern@earthlink.net>
Subject: RE: [vpFREE] Frank
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, January 4, 2011, 4:27 AM
If we are talking about progressives, a royal should be hit more often as strategy adjustments are made.
From: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vpFREE@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Meredith And Kenny
Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 10:17 PM
To: vpFree Yahoo Group
Subject: [vpFREE] Frank
Hello,
I got to read your entire post, to my husband and it all made sense and thanks for that, however, it leads to more questions for myself (not Kenny, hehe)..I wonder who or why came up with the average of hitting a Royal every 30k hands came from ? If this is the case, I cannot comprehend that being random.
Thanks :-) I love to learn and I appreciate your expertise in this area,
~ ¤(¯`*•.¸(¯`*•.¸ Meredith ¸.•*´¯)¸.•*´¯)¤ ~
My New Years Resolution is "That I will be less laz"
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
