Re: [vpFREE] Bob Dancer's LVA - 1 JUL 2014

 

dunbar wrote: "NOTI where is that "10x Kelly" coming from?  $5 Jacks plus 1% (as in cashback) would require just $181K for a 1% RoR.   (using the jazbo-Sorokin equation) "

10x is wrong, my bad. Should be about double Kelly, which would be close to your figure above (my estimate should have been $195K). But then, at double Kelly, I don't think one can just assume maxEV is always the optimal choice.

(Kelly is about 10% ror, 2x would be about 1% ror, 4x would be about 0.1% ror ...)




__._,_.___
Posted by: nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (18)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Bob Dancer's LVA - 1 JUL 2014

 

I suppose you might argue, noti, that this strategy is applicable for somewhere with the rep of Atlantis in Reno.  Still, a better strategy might be, "why bother to play there in the first place?"

In any case, the "Atlantis' " tend to represent a nominal portion of an active player's play ,,, so while I consider your observation "fair", it's marginal in significance.



---In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <nightoftheiguana2000@...> wrote :

007 wrote: "There was a team a few decades ago that locked up many progressives
they played and the progressives had huge meter movement. I estimated
their "max-EV" strategy cost them 5 figures per year."

A similar idea to think about: say there is a casino with a juicy mailer but they no mail you as soon as you get a royal. Clearly the min-royal strategy (not maxEV) would get the most money in that case.

__._,_.___
Posted by: harry.porter@verizon.net
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (17)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Bob Dancer's LVA - 1 JUL 2014

 

noti, I wrote that I play conservatively.  Less than 5% of my coin-in is at $5 denom ( I have, however, been fortunate in that play).

As far an edge:  "jacks + 1%"?  Don't make me laugh.   Yes, sometimes I'll go that thin ... but it's truly the exception.

- H.



---In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <nightoftheiguana2000@...> wrote :

vp_wiz wrote: "However, for 90%-95% of my play these days, I'm playing my bankroll within a 1% ror."

Are you sure? Just off the top of my head, you're talking about 10x Kelly to get a 1% ror. Kelly on $5 jacks plus 1% would be about $25 x 19.5 / 0.5% = $97,500. 10x that would be about a million. You have that kind of bankroll?

__._,_.___
Posted by: harry.porter@verizon.net
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (16)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Bob Dancer's LVA - 1 JUL 2014

 


NOTI wrote " Just off the top of my head, you're talking about 10x Kelly to get a 1% ror. Kelly on $5 jacks plus 1% would be about $25 x 19.5 / 0.5% = $97,500. 10x that would be about a million. "

NOTI where is that "10x Kelly" coming from?  $5 Jacks plus 1% (as in cashback) would require just $181K for a 1% RoR.   (using the jazbo-Sorokin equation)   

--Dunbar



---In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <nightoftheiguana2000@...> wrote :

vp_wiz wrote: "However, for 90%-95% of my play these days, I'm playing my bankroll within a 1% ror."

Are you sure? Just off the top of my head, you're talking about 10x Kelly to get a 1% ror. Kelly on $5 jacks plus 1% would be about $25 x 19.5 / 0.5% = $97,500. 10x that would be about a million. You have that kind of bankroll?
 

__._,_.___
Posted by: h_dunbar@hotmail.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (15)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Bob Dancer's LVA - 1 JUL 2014

 

funny.young.guy wrote: "Just taking a sniff at it 3 standard deviations (99.96%) would not be a million in even the highest variance games "

$sd=betsize x sqrt(variance x hands)

3 x $25 x sqrt(100 x 2 million hands) = $1.06 million

__._,_.___
Posted by: nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (14)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Bob Dancer's LVA - 1 JUL 2014

 

That's only one way to calculate ROR. Just taking a sniff at it 3 standard deviations (99.96%) would not be a million in even the highest variance games 

On Jul 4, 2014, at 11:50 AM, "nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

vp_wiz wrote: "However, for 90%-95% of my play these days, I'm playing my bankroll within a 1% ror."

Are you sure? Just off the top of my head, you're talking about 10x Kelly to get a 1% ror. Kelly on $5 jacks plus 1% would be about $25 x 19.5 / 0.5% = $97,500. 10x that would be about a million. You have that kind of bankroll?

__._,_.___
Posted by: funny.young.guy@gmail.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (13)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Bob Dancer's LVA - 1 JUL 2014

 

007 wrote: "There was a team a few decades ago that locked up many progressives
they played and the progressives had huge meter movement. I estimated
their "max-EV" strategy cost them 5 figures per year."

A similar idea to think about: say there is a casino with a juicy mailer but they no mail you as soon as you get a royal. Clearly the min-royal strategy (not maxEV) would get the most money in that case.

__._,_.___
Posted by: nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (12)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Bob Dancer's LVA - 1 JUL 2014

 

vp_wiz wrote: "However, for 90%-95% of my play these days, I'm playing my bankroll within a 1% ror."

Are you sure? Just off the top of my head, you're talking about 10x Kelly to get a 1% ror. Kelly on $5 jacks plus 1% would be about $25 x 19.5 / 0.5% = $97,500. 10x that would be about a million. You have that kind of bankroll?

__._,_.___
Posted by: nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (11)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Silverton 9/5 $1 DDB Progressive

 

Time to "bone up" a bit ... 9/5 is roughly 98%;  $10k rf at $1 denon adds about 3%.



---In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <funny.young.guy@...> wrote :

That doesn't strike me as a +EV level, or is it? Sounds very low

On Jul 3, 2014, at 11:44 PM, "vegasvpplayer vegasvpplayer@... [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

Jackpot currently at max limit $10k.

Sent from my iPad

__._,_.___
Posted by: harry.porter@verizon.net
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (4)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Silverton 9/5 $1 DDB Progressive

 




---In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <funny.young.guy@...> wrote :

That doesn't strike me as a +EV level, or is it? Sounds very low

On Jul 3, 2014, at 11:44 PM, "vegasvpplayer vegasvpplayer@... [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

Jackpot currently at max limit $10k.

Sent from my iPad

__._,_.___
Posted by: harry.porter@verizon.net
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (3)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Silverton 9/5 $1 DDB Progressive

 

That doesn't strike me as a +EV level, or is it? Sounds very low

On Jul 3, 2014, at 11:44 PM, "vegasvpplayer vegasvpplayer@gmail.com [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

Jackpot currently at max limit $10k.

Sent from my iPad

__._,_.___
Posted by: funny.young.guy@gmail.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (2)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Bob Dancer's LVA - 1 JUL 2014

 

noti -- No doubt, to some extent, my comments betray my own bias.

I'm a very conservative player.  There's no question that were I to tackle higher risk progressive (say, one that presented a ror of 5%+ for the bankroll I were willing to "throw" at it), a min-cost strategy is very appropriate.

However, for 90%-95% of my play these days, I'm playing my bankroll within a 1% ror.  The advantages of alternate strategies in bankroll preservation are nominal, at best, and (frankly) of no added value to me.

Admittedly, the "typical" player is ill-defined.  But I assert that for the player who isn't 99.95%+ proficient in their play, alternate strategies are an undesirable distraction from key basics of play.

__._,_.___
Posted by: harry.porter@verizon.net
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (10)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Cannery Point Multipliers

 

Perhaps I'm a month off.  I know it was in their advertising when they switched over to kiosk swipes being necessary for activation of point multipliers.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 4, 2014, at 12:34 AM, "007 007@embarqmail.com [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

 

I just looked at my May mailer and I didn't see it.

vegasvpplayer wrote:

>In May the mailer and signage stated 5000 base points was the limit for all multipliers. I have not seen this limit anywhere since that time, so I assumed they had removed it. Apparently they haven't.
>

__._,_.___
Posted by: Vegasvpplayer <vegasvpplayer@gmail.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (4)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Cannery Point Multipliers

 

I just looked at my May mailer and I didn't see it.

vegasvpplayer wrote:

>In May the mailer and signage stated 5000 base points was the limit for all multipliers. I have not seen this limit anywhere since that time, so I assumed they had removed it. Apparently they haven't.
>
>Sent from my iPad
>
>> On Jul 3, 2014, at 10:56 PM, "007 007@embarqmail.com [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>>
>> I played at the Cannery on Craig Road last Thursday. It was 4x
>> points. I earned more than 7000 points and expected all of them to be
>> quadrupled, but my balance was short by an amount that suggested that
>> exactly 20,000 points had been added, not 3x all the points that I had
>> earned. Is there a limit to how many points will be multiplied and is
>> this information reasonably accessible?
>>

__._,_.___
Posted by: 007 <007@embarqmail.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (3)

.

__,_._,___
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)