Oh my gosh folks. I haven't laughed this hard in ages.
Great ideas and humor...thanks!
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Frank" <frank@...> wrote:
>
> I'll be starting a new nation wide radio show in April, related to gambling.
>
> Does any one have some good ideas for a name???
>
> ~FK
>
What I wrote was somewhat simplistic. With a team involved, the
players get paid for their time, they make mistakes, etc. I can't
remember how to prove it theoretically, but the way to maximize the
value of a progressive that one has all to oneself is to play as if
the meter is at the point at which the play, including meter
progression (and all other complicating factors such as I just
mentioned) breaks even. With a 5% meter, we should have been playing
as if the meter were fixed at the point at which the machine paid back
95%, no matter how much over 100% it actually was. To be one player
among many minimizes this feature of "pretending" the meter is lower
than it is. It's essentially a matter of estimating how much the
meter resetting costs you. If a casino supervisor came up to you and
offered to pay you to reset the meter, how much would you want? If
you hit the jackpot, you may gain the entire jackpot in cash, but
you've lost the meter to play for, which reduces the value of hitting
the jackpot. Many factors are relevant, such as the value of your
time, how much longer you were intending to play, what competition
might show up, what other progressives there are, etc., so that
there's no such thing as "perfect" progressive play, which, to me, has
a discouraging effect in learning strategy. The fact that you're
playing and would leave if anyone hit it means that this cost exists,
but as the number of competitors increases, this cost decreases. It's
usually not a very important factor. Not making basic mistakes such
as keeping a high card over a pair is far more important than
adjusting for it. Without doing so in a very calculating way, I also
"fudge" and wait even higher before I draw to the royal because it
usually involves more fluctuation. Right at the breaking number,
where the expected value is the same, it usually takes a bigger
bankroll to draw to the royal, but I believe this is similar to the
"cost of hitting a jackpot" factor in that letting it be a distraction
so that it increases the probability of making basic mistakes or
slowing down play can make it more trouble than it's worth.
Chris wrote:
>Tom,
>
>Could you explain how the optimal strategy is calculated in your example below? How about an example that is likely to be encountered in 2012. I play progressives without the benefit of a team. How does that alter the strategy?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Chris
>
>> >Hi Tom!
>> >
>> >Hay if you think about it, I bet people would love to hear how much of a difference playing the break-even strategy makes to total potential earn. I'd tell them myself, but with you posting here I'm sure people would rather hear it from you. After all, you taught me...
>> >
>> >Happy New Year BTW...
>> >
>> >~FK
>>
>> It can be kind of amazing. Sometimes I cringe when professionals draw
>> to a progressive royal, no matter how slim the margin is over the
>> theoretical break point, as if there were no cost to them of the meter
>> resetting or the greater fluctuation. Especially if a team is
>> involved, the difference in optimal strategy can be very significant.
>> I was involved with a team that locked up a bank of tens or better $1
>> machines. The break even royal was $18,400 and the meter was 5%,
>> which meant that the optimal strategy was to play as if the royal was
>> something like $10,000, no matter what the meter, which sometimes went
>> to over $40,000, was.
>>
>
How about the title from the old Phil Silvers show? "You'll Never Get Rich"
CF
Play every day, you never know when you're walking around lucky.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Frank" <frank@...> wrote:
>
> I'll be starting a new nation wide radio show in April, related to gambling.
>
> Does any one have some good ideas for a name???
>
> ~FK
>
------------------------------------
vpFREE Links: http://www.west-point.org/users/usma1955/20228/V/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This week Munchkin's and my guest will be poker player Daniel Negreanu. Daniel has been on hundreds of televised poker shows so a lot of us feel we know him. He is outspoken about a number of poker issues, and he is popular enough that his opinion carries weight. The show may be heard live on 1230AM Thursday evenings 7-8 Pacific time if you're in Las Vegas, or live over the Internet on www.klav1230am.com The following day the show will be archived on both bobdancer.com and richardmunchkin.com Bob
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Lot's of clever ideas have shown up. How about "Imperfectly Frank" Good luck on the new show. Bob
.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Random Gamblin' Random Acts of Gambling Fun and Games Winning Whys
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Frank" <frank@...> wrote:
>
> I'll be starting a new nation wide radio show in April, related to gambling.
>
> Does any one have some good ideas for a name???
>
> ~FK
>
Tom,
Could you explain how the optimal strategy is calculated in your example below? How about an example that is likely to be encountered in 2012. I play progressives without the benefit of a team. How does that alter the strategy?
Thanks,
Chris
> >Hi Tom!
> >
> >Hay if you think about it, I bet people would love to hear how much of a difference playing the break-even strategy makes to total potential earn. I'd tell them myself, but with you posting here I'm sure people would rather hear it from you. After all, you taught me...
> >
> >Happy New Year BTW...
> >
> >~FK
>
> It can be kind of amazing. Sometimes I cringe when professionals draw
> to a progressive royal, no matter how slim the margin is over the
> theoretical break point, as if there were no cost to them of the meter
> resetting or the greater fluctuation. Especially if a team is
> involved, the difference in optimal strategy can be very significant.
> I was involved with a team that locked up a bank of tens or better $1
> machines. The break even royal was $18,400 and the meter was 5%,
> which meant that the optimal strategy was to play as if the royal was
> something like $10,000, no matter what the meter, which sometimes went
> to over $40,000, was.
>
"Gambling for Fun and Profit"
Regards
A.P.
________________________________
From: Frank <frank@progressivevp.com>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 6:36:07 PM
Subject: [vpFREE] New Radio Show (Need Name?)
I'll be starting a new nation wide radio show in April, related to gambling.
Does any one have some good ideas for a name???
~FK
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Bob Bartop wrote:
>--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Tom Robertson <007@...> wrote:
>>
>> Are you addicted to breathing, Rob? And before you answer, keep in
>> mind that I'll consider any denial by you as evidence of your
>> addiction. Is anyone doing any job therefore addicted to it?
>>
>
>
>When I first started breathing, it was exciting. I felt alive. Now I have to breath just to maintain.
You're obviously in denial, just like everyone else.
That's interesting - I've stayed at Harrah's every trip down there. I'm
heading down again the last week in February and couldn't get into Harrah's,
my host booked me into the Westin. I'm not sure if I'm happy about that -
I like to play at night and feel more comfortable heading up to my room
when I don't have to walk outside except for that little bit in the courtyard.
In a message dated 1/18/2012 10:08:34 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jimmccollum@swbell.net writes:
It's strange, for a while I could only get into the partner hotels. My wife
and I thought they were great, we were happy! Now I can only get into
Harrah's and no partner offers. After a couple of stays in Harrah's, I'm
begging to get back to the Big Easy hotels.
--- In _vpFREE@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:vpFREE@yahoogroups.com) ,
misscraps@... wrote:
> We have had so many noisy experiences in the Harrahs New Orleans hotel,
we
> are now staying at one of the partner hotels.
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I was pretty tired on Monday night so I decided to stay in and go to sleep.
Tuesday morning I had a digestive problem and I had to stay
close to the room. I did shower & dress and went down to the North Tour Lobby to play the first round of the slot tournament. I did pretty well with 12,000 points. Got an extra Pepsi from the tournament and stopped at a snack bar on the way back to my room and bought a croissant and some fruit. Ate while relaxing on the sofa looking at the great view and watching some news on CNN. Stayed in the room until it was time to play the tournament again at 3 PM. This time I did terrible which is the norm for me, got 6900 points. They were putting the scores up at 7PM. If I had any decent chance of one of the top spots, I would have paid the change fee and stayed to finish playing the tournament. After the tournament I hung out in the casino to give CET some play. I lost a couple hundred dollars then Tom and I went to our room to watch the UK/Arkansas game. UK won. At halftime we got a pizza and a salad. After eating and watching the second half of the game, we walked down to IP and played some Let It Ride and watched the dealertainers do their show. It was a very friendly table with a very nice outgoing dealer. I lost $140 and Tom lost $100. Walked over to Bellagio to see the Conservatory. It was very pretty and well done as usual. Went back to Flamingo, we both played a little vp mostly 100 play penny DDB. Went back to the room, packed and went to bed. We had a smooth flight back to Lexington. I have slept the rest of the day since I got home. Overall we lost but we didn't lose more than we had planned to gamble in fact we both had money left over. The rooms were free and they were both nice rooms, our food was free except for Oscars. we got $210 in free play. My husband attended his convention and we had a fun trip. We are happy.
"Even the Odds" ?
Certainly the game is rigged. Don't let that stop you; if you don't bet, you can't win. -Lazarus Long
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is. -Yogi Berra
There is no such thing as luck. There is only adequate or inadequate preparation to cope with a statistical universe. -Robert Heinlein
>________________________________
> From: Frank <frank@progressivevp.com>
>To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 6:36 PM
>Subject: [vpFREE] New Radio Show (Need Name?)
>
>
>
>I'll be starting a new nation wide radio show in April, related to gambling.
>
>Does any one have some good ideas for a name???
>
>~FK
>
>
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
