Las Vegas Advisor Menu
« LVA Forums « Vegas Free-for-All

Archimedes and his "soapbox"

chefantwon
chefantwon
Apr 8, 2011
11:12am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: arcimedes
Quote
Originally posted by: chefantwon
Arci, I understand the "overtime" as for your winning at VP. However, can you whittle down that "overtime" to a specific period of time? Like in days, weeks, months, or years.

Thanks


No, it varies depending on the exact situation. The higher the edge the shorter the time period. The less the variance of the game (fewer number of high paying, low probability hands) the shorter the time period.

Also, the time period is really a function of number of hands, not actual time. That's why I prefer to use the term "over time" since there is no exact way to describe it.

Over on vpfree they have a page that discuss a function called N0. It gives a little more preciseness to the terminology by describing some specific cases.

https://members.cox.net/vpfree/Bank_NO.htm

Note the FPDW example is about a 1% edge.The game is medium variance and the number of hands is about 260K to have about an 80% (one standard deviation on the low side) chance of coming out a winner.


By playing 260k hands of FPDW I should be a winning. Does this take into account the number of machines one ends up playing to get to the number of hands as I don't think this can be done at one sitting?
arcimedes
arcimedes
Apr 8, 2011
11:43am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: chefantwon
By playing 260k hands of FPDW I should be a winning. Does this take into account the number of machines one ends up playing to get to the number of hands as I don't think this can be done at one sitting?


A 4 out of 5 chance of winning and, yes, as long as all the machines have the FPDW pay table, it doesn't matter how many different machines are played. Of course, expert play strategy is required.

Since FPDW is a fairly easy game it is possible to play 1000 hands/hour without any difficulty. At this rate you're talking 260 hours ... less than one hour a day for a year. Easy if you live in LV or Reno, not quite so easy if you only visit once in awhile.

chefantwon
chefantwon
Apr 8, 2011
12:00pm
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: arcimedes
Quote
Originally posted by: chefantwon
By playing 260k hands of FPDW I should be a winning. Does this take into account the number of machines one ends up playing to get to the number of hands as I don't think this can be done at one sitting?


A 4 out of 5 chance of winning and, yes, as long as all the machines have the FPDW pay table, it doesn't matter how many different machines are played. Of course, expert play strategy is required.

Since FPDW is a fairly easy game it is possible to play 1000 hands/hour without any difficulty. At this rate you're talking 260 hours ... less than one hour a day for a year. Easy if you live in LV or Reno, not quite so easy if you only visit once in awhile.


Yea, considering your only playing 24,000 hands per 24 hours (straight). That's about 12 days of serious scope burn! You thought TV's were the only thing that suffers from burn in??
tomdoug
tomdoug
Apr 8, 2011
9:52pm
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: billryan
Starting a thread to denegrate a fellow forumite is pretty poor form, but suggesting Stonewall Jackson was a horrible strategist is moronic.
Can you please provide one example of a Jackson strategy you think was horrible?
Look up the definitions of the word strategist and tactician, you have no clue what you are talking about.


mrmarcus12LVA
mrmarcus12LVA
Apr 8, 2011
10:47pm
Block User
He's apparently tired of stalking PokerWayne. But I'm not sure whether it's Arc or Jackson he's after this time. Presumably, Arc, since Jackson's dead.
tomdoug
tomdoug
Apr 8, 2011
11:04pm
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: mrmarcus12LVA
He's apparently tired of stalking PokerWayne. But I'm not sure whether it's Arc or Jackson he's after this time. Presumably, Arc, since Jackson's dead.
Ahh, good old PokerWayne, The clown who helped contribute the downturn of our economy(ala Barney Frank) by buying way more house than he could afford on 3 or 5yr ARM. Then cries that his bank won't give him a loan modification in between trip reports. Thats nice, I refuse to honor the terms of my loan, but I continue to gamble.
As far as the Civil War goes, Arc opened the door when he made an analogy, Asked me If I believed the Civil War actually happened, I used General Jackson as an example in a similar analogy, quite simple actually.

alanleroy
alanleroy
Apr 9, 2011
1:15am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: tomdoug
Ahh, good old PokerWayne, The clown who helped contribute the downturn of our economy(ala Barney Frank) by buying way more house than he could afford on 3 or 5yr ARM. Then cries that his bank won't give him a loan modification in between trip reports. Thats nice, I refuse to honor the terms of my loan, but I continue to gamble.


Since about half of your posts attack 'good old' PokerWayne, maybe you should come down off your 'soapbox' before you attack others for theirs.
garthman83
garthman83
Apr 9, 2011
1:18am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: tomdoug
Quote
Originally posted by: billryan
Starting a thread to denegrate a fellow forumite is pretty poor form, but suggesting Stonewall Jackson was a horrible strategist is moronic.
Can you please provide one example of a Jackson strategy you think was horrible?
Look up the definitions of the word strategist and tactician, you have no clue what you are talking about.


I also would like to hear how you think Jackson was a bad "strategist" since you're the one making this claim. I also know quite a bit about the Civil War since I grew up around several battlefields and took several Military History classes. I certainly could understand if you were referring to some of the Union generals using both bad strategy and tactics, but I am unsure on what makes you think Jackson was a bad "strategist". Please share your thoughts on that. Saying someone must not know the difference between "strategist" and "tactician" proves nothing about Jackson.
BAGIANT
BAGIANT
Apr 9, 2011
2:52am
Block User
What we need is Singer back here for some entertainment value.
billryan
billryan
Apr 9, 2011
4:03am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: tomdoug
Quote
Originally posted by: billryan
Starting a thread to denegrate a fellow forumite is pretty poor form, but suggesting Stonewall Jackson was a horrible strategist is moronic.
Can you please provide one example of a Jackson strategy you think was horrible?
Look up the definitions of the word strategist and tactician, you have no clue what you are talking about.


Seriously? I suppose my Degree in history, my major being Military History, and my year experiance as an Assistant Professor of Military History at UofF, along with the courses I took on tactics and strategy during my tenure in the US Army can't compare to the fact that you read about the war, but why not answer my question- Which Jackson strategy do you consider as horrible.
Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now