[vpFREE] Jean Scott's Frugal Vegas LVA BLOG - 18 APR 2015

 

Jean Scott's Frugal Vegas LVA BLOG - 18 APR 2015

When Casinos Cut VP Benefits – Part 3

http://jscott.lvablog.com/?p=3849

*************************************************
This link is posted for informational purposes
and doesn't constitute an endorsement or approval
of the linked article's content by vpFREE. Any
discussion of the article must be done in
accordance with vpFREE's rules and policies.
*************************************************

__._,_.___
Posted by: vpFREE3355 <vpfree3355@gmail.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1)

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] early perspective of Caesars in court

 

the writing/analysis in motley fool tends to be lackluster at best, but here's a good piece about the lay of the land in the main Caesars Entertainment case ... including identification of the people behind it all.

http://m.fool.com/investing/general/2015/04/18/billionaires-in-bitter-fight-over-the-heart-of-las

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: m h <kickboyface@yahoo.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: why CE is better than EV

 

To all those that put to much weight on CE and ROR I don't like giving up anything. I'm like Dancer in that regard. I am not however totally reckless. Notice that I suggested moving down in class if you get off to a horrible start. Nobody goes broke (if they are 1/2 way decent) on 25 cent 2's wild. The problem is you will be bored to death at that low stake and it will take an awful long time to recoup what you lost "overbetting"earlier. If you get a little unlucky at 25 cent 2's wild you can always go into survival mode and play casino promotions at no risk along with 5 cent and 10 cent 2's wild. I dare anyone to go broke with that program. My main thrust however is to "go for it" and don't be afraid to win.

Sent from my iPhone

__._,_.___
Posted by: nordo123@aol.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (27)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: why CE is better than EV

 

Finally someone understands.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: gilrus47@yahoo.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (26)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] why CE is better than EV

 

fivespot wrote: "If there are VP examples where a CE-aware strategy makes a big
difference, I'd be interested to hear about them. I haven't found
any."

The biggest non-progressive base game that I can remember is Bally's full pay All American (800-200-50-8-8-8-3-1-1). I would expect a big difference between its maxEV and minROR strategies but haven't looked at it in a while, and it's been while since I've found the game in a casino. It's not an easy game to play so my first pass would be the easiest strategy between maxEV and minROR, so that's another way to use these alternate strategies: to simplify complex strategies. Basically any strategy between maxEV and minROR is reasonable, nothing is any kind of a real world play mistake. If your bankroll can take it you'll win more in the long term with maxEV but minROR is the easiest on your bankroll. MaxCE is somewhere in the middle and comes into play when your bankroll is not big enough for full maxEV.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (25)

.

__,_._,___

RE: [vpFREE] why CE is better than EV

 

Cogno wrote: "And yet the CE formula says you need over $1200 to play this game."

I think the solution to this quandary is that CE only applies to money at risk. In your example you have $0 at risk. Another thing to watch for is that the formula presented (EV-Variance/Bankroll/2) is valid for a normal distribution, which is a reasonable approximation for most if not all video poker, but it is an approximation. CE can be solved for without assuming a normal distribution, but it involves more math.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (24)

.

__,_._,___

RE: [vpFREE] why CE is better than EV

 

And yet the CE formula says you need over $1200 to play this game.

Cogno

-----Original Message-----
From: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vpFREE@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 11:43 AM
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] why CE is better than EV

If "The rest of the time I get my $100 back" is correct, you can play forever on $100. Show me where I can play that game!

Tom C

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Cogno Scienti cognoscienti@hotmail.com [vpFREE] <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

>
>
> Extra credit for people who believe in CE: Suppose I have a game where
> I bet $100. One in 40,000 times the payback is $100,000. The rest of
> the time I get my $100 back. How big a bankroll do I need to play this
> game?
> Cogno
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

------------------------------------
Posted by: Thomas Calaci <quickquads@gmail.com>
------------------------------------

vpFREE Links: http://www.west-point.org/users/usma1955/20228/V/Links.htm

------------------------------------

Yahoo Groups Links

__._,_.___
Posted by: Cogno Scienti <cognoscienti@hotmail.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (23)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: why CE is better than EV

 

A.P. said: Most of the people that read this forum gamble for entertainment, and just want to get their entertainment at the lowest possible price.

That is the way it is with me. If I relied on VP for my "living" I'd be riding the rails with the hobos. <smile>

..... bl

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: bornloser1537@yahoo.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (22)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Re: why CE is better than EV

 


If you believe that taking CE or ROR considerations into account into your play comes at a significant ER/EV tradeoff, than you're a misinformed gambler. (Something I wouldn't otherwise attribute to you.)

If you're handsomely bankrolled for a play, in fact, there's seldom a conflict. Otherwise, these concepts bend toward added survivability at nominal EV sacrifice. I see nothing admirable about a "by the seat of your pants" gambling style. And to dismiss CE/ROR out of hand is to have a blind spot in your play.


---In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <Nordo123@...> wrote :

Are we gamblers or are we nits? I understand the math of CE and ROR and I am a gambler (I hope a good one). You people that have no gamble in them remind me of the lion in the wizard of oz (odds?). I bet Bob Dancer would put all of you in the gambler's hall of shame. I say go for max EV, "pull the string!!" The bad thing about safety is when you win, it is at a slower rate. If you happen to get unlucky do what any sensible gambler would do and grind away at $1 DB, 2's wild or low value casino promotions. You will probably build your bankroll up again where you can now move up in class to where you used to be. Poker players and race horses do this. If you get lucky from the beginning you can become annuitized (lucky you) and get out of gambling forever.

Sent from my iPhone


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Posted by: harry.porter@verizon.net
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (21)

.

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