--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "mike" wrote:
>
> Those who follow Shackleford's logic would happily spend the >afternoon losing hundreds of dollars on some 6-5 progressive with >a "highly positive number" while turning their nose up at the "idiot" >on the next bank who just hit the Elvis progressive for 20 million->convinced by their ideology that "it doesn't matter if you win or >lose".
> To the rest of us, it matters very much whether one wins or loses and >unless they are a degenerate gambler the "idiot" who hits the 20 >million will do quite well-even "in the long term"!
>
>
One person got lucky, caught lightning in a bottle, and won the 20 million, but the thousands of others who played the game lost. It's a forgone conclusion that one person is going to get lucky and hit the progressive. And it's a forgone conclusion that everyone else will get beat. Maybe the Clint Eastwood quote fits here "Are you feeling lucky, punk?"
>
>Now if Shackleford said "Don't worry about if you will win or lose, >just play games where you have an edge" I don't think any of us would >take issue with that. But to say "it doesn't matter if you win or >lose" betrays a certain intellectual and ideological snobbishness >which some of us find both false and grating.
>
>
Perhaps Shack poorly worded the statement. But I got his meaning. I think the Bob Dancer quote fits here "Winning is not an event, it's a process." What if someone propositioned me to flipping coins? And they layed me 2 to 1 per flip. And they got really lucky and won the first 10 flips. That's a pretty bad result. Should I pay attention to the results and quit the game? No, I'm going to ignore it and keep flipping. And I don't think I need to explain why.
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (23) |
