I know exactly what you are saying and I agree with you. I was just pointing out that "The Math" actually accounts for what you are saying. You and the math are on the same side, comrades in arms, don't shoot it and create a friendly fire incident. Math is your friend, think of its kids at home waiting for it to return. ooops getting too metaphoric...ending now.
~FK
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Sai Sai" <gofastnismo@...> wrote:
>
> People dont go bust because they ignore the other math, they go bust because sometimes that unlucky streak stays unlucky for too damn long. You know what Im saying Frank. Just because the the math says a specific bankroll is needed to have confidence you wont go broke doesn't mean that will happen. I know people that have busted having double the bankroll consideration needed. Sometimes those royals and other big hands go to long without being hit. I know plenty of people that went 10+ cycles without a royal. A buddy of mine went 228 times with drawing one to the royal before hitting it. Strange things can and do happen that will kill that bankroll. I was implying that some people consider the math to be concrete and those machines advertising over 100% payback are always going to do just that. Not the case.
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Peter M." <midnight1626@> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Sai Sai <gofastnismo@> wrote:
> > > Id say 99% of the people dont gamble for a living on this board and dont
> > > have never ending bankrolls. This makes short term play a big deal. Most
> > > people want to play not ride a progressive for days on end trying to get
> > > the mathematical payback.
> >
> > This repeats an oft-held fallacy that math doesn't matter for short term
> > results. The answer is that of course it does.
> >
> > Suppose player A and player B go to the casino once a week and play 1,000
> > hands each. Player A always plays FPDW and player B always plays 6/5
> > Bonus Poker. 1,000 hands is obviously short term, so on any given week,
> > neither player will achieve their mathematically expected result. Some
> > weeks player A will do better than player B and vice versa.
> >
> > But if they keep doing this every week, which one do you think will have
> > more money at the end of one year? At the end of two years?
> >
> > The fallacy of "it's only 1,000 hands, so the math doesn't matter" is that
> > you could say that every time, and then you find yourself as player B.
> >
> > (The mathematical way of expressing this is: the overall expected value of
> > a series of events is simply the sum of the individual expected values of
> > each individual event. It doesn't matter when the events occur, or how
> > close together, or how many of them happen on any particular day.)
> >
> > > If you cant understand this than your not as smart as you think you are
> > > Bob. The math doesn't always work and there have been pros that have
> > > busted.
> >
> > The math *does* work. Pros go busted when they ignore *other* math, which
> > says how big of a bankroll you should have to have a certain level of
> > confidence of surviving a horribly unlucky streak.
> >
>
