bob Dancer's new column, new question

Yup, that's what you said ... and it hasn't gotten any smarter since you said it.

Maybe you should consider what "endure" and 266 mean. Get back to me after you've figured it out.

to the math geniuses here: I never said that a player with an $80K bankroll will lose 266 hands in a row. I said that if a player lost $300 at a time he would lose his $80K in 266 hands.

I was doing some simple math... $80K/300 = 266. I was not saying that a player would lose all 266 hands in a row, nor did I deny that a player wouldnt win hands during that time.

You guys read too much into simple statements. Im sorry I cause such grief for you.

You're just projecting, chef.

Have you ever seen any advantage player here criticize recreational players who just enjoy the fun of gambling (within moderation)? Of course not. Have you ever seen Bob Dancer dump on recreational video poker players? I didn't think so. Yet you, Money, and others here crap on advantage players every chance you get. Why is that?

Sorry money, but now you are backpedalling. You implied that someone who loses $300 in ONE session is worse off than a player who won $300 EVEN THOUGH that person had an $80K bankroll compared to $10K. You then followed that with your 266 number and used the word "endure" to imply that that person could continue to lose and lose.

All we are trying to get you to understand is that is complete nonsense. What an individual does on any given day is truly meaningless. Sure, we'd all love to win every time we gamble but that doesn't happen on this planet. We all lose more often than we win. So, the ONLY real question is how does a player do over time. Everything else is moot.

That is why I give you a hard time. I'm trying to pound into you the reality of gambling. It really doesn't cause me any grief at all. But, I'm hoping the grief I cause you will get you to stop your short term thinking and think about the big picture.

Obviously, I'm not doing too well.

No, don't think so Forkie. I get the superiority complex from arci when he hits the subject of math. Others, I get it from just from the subject of advantage play. I don't follow Dancer and frankly I've never even heard of him until I got to this place. So any comments he has made about VP folks or poker players never reached these ears. Besides, he plays against a chip, poker players play against human beings.

Using the last discussion concerning the chasing or non chasing of a $40,000 range rover for $80,000. I kept getting the feeling that I didn't know squat and was a peion for even questioning what tactics Dancer was using to win his precious SUV. I do know statistics and I do know they can and have manipulated to give people what they want in the past. Its easy and most folks never question the math, I do. (its that '60's child in me that needs to question everything.)

A classical example of math manipulation is your friendly neighborhood Global Warming. If that ain't an 800 pound gorilla, I sure as hell don't know what is. All based upon bad science and specifically bad math. (that sample size thingy you know) This is of course is real small beans when it comes to the subject of advantage play on some slot machine. (Which IS a nice green card with lots of black IC's stuck to it, housed inside a very big display case and some controls for people to operate.)

There was no explanition as to how much he was going to devote to the chasing of the car and how he got the exact figure. The one he did cite was the coin in figure. For a teaching article, why are you using coin in instead of actual cash? For the novice player, it would make far more sense to do it that way. I once heard and was taught that when writing an article, one should target it to their audiance. Not to the top end folks, but the majority of them. Dancers articles are supposed to be geared to the novices. These folks don't have a math background nor do they have x number of years of playing VP at a high level.

One specific point was the one of bankroll and VP in which our own AC (Anthony Curtis) basically stated that after a time bankroll doesn't matter. I got the feeling from his statement that I didn't have a clue as to what I was talking about and how dare I question him. Sorry, never say I shouldn't question any opinions you may have. I will question what ever I choose to, next....My opinion was and is a valid one, I've seen and heard it explained far too many times when it comes to the subject of poker. Having and protecting ones bankroll is what keeps you alive when lady luck just isn't on your side. How many times have the Pro's gone broke because they couldn't manage their bankrolls?

Arc, I implied NOTHING nothing of the kind. Drop it. Because I have. Here and now.

Forkush, I have nothing against "advantage players." Go to it buddy. Because I am considered to be an "advantage player" at craps which is why I can't play at any of the MGM properties anymore -- they threw me out.

What I challenge is the belief that math is more important than luck in video poker. I think any of you advantage players could get wiped out if luck werent on your side-- but you advantage players seem to believe that as long as you play proper strategy on full pay machines with proper cash back that you will come out ahead. Im sorry, but I think LUCK must also be factored in. Because if your cold streaks go too long on a full pay machine even with proper cash back you will lose. And that's all I challenge.

By the way, what casino has the good cash back now and how much is it? And what is the best pay table they offer?

I think chief touched on an oblique but important aspect of the Dancer articles. Dancer preaches precision, discipline, and knowing your games. All of these are great things to emphasize when introducing people to playing video poker for profit. The problem I see is that, while these articles are for novices as well as experienced players, in no article have I seen Dancer categorically state, "Hey guys, the rebates I get are going to be near-impossible for you to get from 2011 going forward. What gives me most of my edge is my history and volume, which virtually none of you will be able to emulate." Now the question arises, of course, why doesn't he categorically state this? Probably, I guess, because he's selling stuff -- mostly to novices.

One question that, ethically, Dancer should probably answer is, 'If Bob Dancer started playing video poker with his original bankroll, in 2011, would he be able to accomplish anything close to what he's done?" If the answer is no, then his articles should steer clear of tales of his great high-bankroll present-day adventures, and stick to helping people with bankrolls similar to his 15 years ago deal with the realities of 2011 video poker.

well said, redietz.

A few years ago Chris Ferguson took up a challange on Full Tilt Poker:

To start off with nothing and get to $10,000

As you may or may not be aware Full Tilt has serveal freerolls that have cash prizes everyday. They don't pay much but hey, its a start. Freguson went from $0 to $10,000:

Starting with nothing but a Full Tilt Poker account, Chris played in Freerolls until he earned enough to graduate to games with real-money buy-ins. From that point on, he adhered to a strict set of guidelines to build up his bankroll:

•He never bought into a cash game or a Sit & Go for more than 5 percent of his total bankroll; the only exception was at the lowest limits: he was allowed to buy into any game with a buy-in of $2.50 or less
•He didn’t buy into any multi-table tournaments for more than 2 percent of his total bankroll; the only exception was $1 MTTs
•If at any time during a No-Limit or Pot-Limit cash-game session the money on the table represented more than 10 percent of his total bankroll, he had to leave the game when the blinds reached him
Getting started wasn’t easy. In fact, it took more than seven months of steady play until he got his bankroll to stabilize above $100, turning a $1 tournament buy-in into $104 when he finished second in a 683-player tournament. From there, it took Chris eight more months to reach $10K.

The Next Year
After completing his original $0 to $10,000 Challenge, Chris continued to adhere to the guidelines whenever playing at Full Tilt Poker. His next challenge was to add a zero to the end of his original target, building on the $10K he had already won.

The five-time WSOP bracelet winner reached $30K before a downswing knocked him back down to $10k.

linky

Maybe Dancer should in effect do something a touch different. Give hime a realistic bankroll ($1,000) and let him build it up from there to a specified amount. ($10,000) Documenting his progress as he goes.

Southpoint and M give about the best base CB you're going to find in LV. Some casinos have multiplier days that can be better. I know SP has FP TDB as well (or at least it did the last time I was there). You can always check out vpfree2.com to get the latest info.