bob Dancer's new column, new question

redietz once again brings sanity to the discussion.

He wrote: "are casino bottom lines better or worse due to the existence of Bob Dancer and his books, software, blogs? This is the big question."

I dont have the exact answer to your question, but consider that Dancer is employed by several casinos to hold lectures about his strategies, and his name and photos are used to "brand" and identify certain full pay machines, and several casinos boast of being listed among Dancer's "best video poker"... so you take a guess why the caisnos do this?

I doubt they do it because they are losing money.

Arcimedes: I am glad you are a success at Video Poker. I would not hire you in my business. But, I do admit that there is some reason to playing for the long term. Tonight is a case in point:

Probably a dozen times over the last four or five sessions of playing DDB, I was dealt a full house with three aces. Proper strategy is to break up the full house and hold only AAA. Each of those dozen or so times, I failed to get a fourth ace, though I did pick up a couple of full houses with another pair on the draw.

Well it happened two more times tonight, and the second time it happened (dealt KAAAK) I drew a fourth ace but no kicker. Still good for $4,000. Yes, over the long term (as of tonight) I certainly came out ahead on this play. But over the real long term... the next 10, 20, 100 times I break up a full house with three aces, I might not hit a fourth ace again. If I do, I will consider myself lucky. I cannot put the faith in the draws that you do.

edited to add:

Arc, I noticed no response to this question... which puts a different spin, I think, on the original question about a $300 win or loss. I would appreciate you response:

Player-A walks into a casino with $10,000 and wins $100. While Player-B walks into a casino with $80,000 and in the session loses $40,000. Which player was "better off bankroll wise??"

Please tell me how this changes or does not change your "long term" outlook?

The person with the bigger bankroll is obviously better off "bankroll-wise". Duh!. Since you didn't specify the bankroll we really don't know. But, a player that brings in the $80,000 most likely has the biggest bankroll.

Notice that whatever was won or lost in a single session is of no importance to the question.

One of these days you might understand that playing VP is not like other occupations. Take an engineer for example (my good old days). I expected to make money each and every day I worked. Although the amount may vary a little over time with raises, that is the "expectation". This is not the case in VP. Due to the variance a player will lose more sessions than they win. However, a good VP player's "expectation" is still to make money over time. One has to understand what the big picture looks like.

Your question above demonstrates you still don't understand. You're trying to fit VP play into a box that doesn't fit. And, as long as you can't think outside that little box you will continue to be lost.

That's a bit of an overstatement, but I get your point.

For example, over a 40 hour period, a QUARTER player, playing full pay deuces perfectly, with a full 1% advantage at the Palms, can expect to occasionally lose $1,500. Because of the standard deviation built into these games, the bankroll requirement for advantage play is massive.

Which is one reason why those without the bankroll for advantage play are so bitter about the ones that do have the bankroll.

Well Forkie, since Arci is the only one here that has actually provided a bankroll number. Would you be so kind as to provide your own?

I doubt anyone here lacks the bankroll to play FPDW forever. So really you should stop puffing yourself like your some big shot who does a rarified thing.
I could teach a Labrador to play FPDW in half a day. Without spending hundreds on books, strategy cards, lessons and other trinkets like the con men with fake names sell. Everything one needs is FREE on sites like Wizard Of Odds or VP Genius.
You and your ilk are nothing.

Is it true that in the Dakota language "Minnesota" means "lousy paying machines which still draw addicts".

You mean gambling isn't a real investment?
Damn I was just about to buy Dancer's book (it was a quarter on Amazon last time I checked-still overpriced) sell my house and move to LV to play NSUD as a "pro".

I'd like to see that. How many dogs have you taught to play VP? Do you have any videos of dogs playing (video) poker?

I'm an advantage player, but I feel many advantage players on these boards are naive. I must say that I really doubt the advantage play/non-advantage argument here is divided along socioeconomic lines, so I take issue with Forkie's comments. If anything, I'd guess the non-advantage posters are probably higher on the wealth/income scale on this board.

You must not have checked too recently. His latest is $14 - if you'll settle for used. Oh did you mean the autobiography that he wrote back before the start of the Iraq war? Even used - you're still off by about 2,000%.

Gosh melbedey, with these blatant inaccuracies, I'm beginning to doubt your other claims.