I Just Don't Get It ~ VP Systems

I'm not the one claiming that I cannot lose in the long term playing video poker. Why not just play higher denomination machines, really send it in, and make easy money in 1/2 the time.

Again converting fact into fallacy. You FEAR REALITY. Therefore you hate reality. Therefore, you AVOID LOGICAL THOUGHT, because it will bring you closer to what you hate and fear.

No one has ever claimed that a person who plays with an edge can't lose; that's just stupid. And your bald face lie, that APs claim they can't lose, is just, again, testimony of an idiot.

tomdoug- I'm not arguing your point. I'm simply stating that your "15 hours a day" portion of it waters it down and makes it look weak. I definately see what your saying.

Wow, you were able to come up with that type of physcological profile on me just by reading a few simple posts, I'm impressed.
Sounds to me like I hit a nerve. Hmmmm, makes me wonder....
And yes, AP'ers claim that "long term" they have an edge, and cannot lose, just ask Arci.

mrmarcus, I am so happy that you used this quote from Stupak because this really gets to the essence of the entire AP/VP issue.

Here is the quote again: "If he plays long enough, 1/1,000 of one percent will bust the richest man in the world." Bob Stupak

So, to be a true AP/VPer you must play a VP game that is a positive game. There is no playing 99.9% games. Unless you have found some very rich cashback program and unless the casino is giving you RFB plus health care and pension benefits, can you really count the other fringes?

Then, if you do happen to find a positive game, just how much do you need to risk to get lucky to make some money at that positive game along with the other AP fringe benefits such as cashback and promotions?

But wait, could something possibly go wrong with the master plan that will rule the world? From Dancer's latest column:

"My game of choice was going to be two hours on 25¢ Hundred Play 8/5 Bonus Poker (99.17%). Playing $100,000 costs $830 in equity, offset by $250 in free play, adding up to $580 in the hole." His plan was to gain entries for another contest with lots of play... another fringe benefit for an APer. And then he wrote: "My expected machine loss of $830 on the machine, however, turned out to be $8,470. The good drawing results and the decent mailers won't come close to making up for that. Oh well. Sometimes when I play that much on that machine I end up ahead $5,000 or $10,000. The $830 expected loss is an average over hundreds of plays or more."

What is really unfortunate is that there are many, many followers of the Dancer kind of thinking who don't have the bankroll that Dancer has. These players may buy into the Dancer strategy (and paying good money to get it, too) but not hve the bankroll for those hundreds of plays or more... but still be happy with an $830 loss as a mark of success.

An $830 loss as a mark of success? Who the hell are you kidding?

Strategies like that make Singer look like a genius.

Another great post by a great poster!
And alot of these AP'ers have the nerve to call Singer a "charlatan". What a joke!

Hey, Why don't you two (tomdoug & MoneyLA) makes some videos together??

Oh wait, I think they already have!!!

tomdoug, I wouldnt call Dancer a charlatan. I admire Dancer. The problem is that there are many who don't understand that even Dancer needs a huge bankroll to generate what I would consider to be sufficient income when everything goes right. I learned this years ago when I attended one of his lectures at the Fiesta in North LV and he showed those of us in the group that he made a total of $250,000 in the last year from VP. Half of it came from actual wins and have of the income came from cashback. And what was he playing? THREE LINE, $25/COIN DEUCES (Dont ask me what game, because I dont remember). What I do remember to this day is that he was risking $375 on every push of the button to have an income of $250,000 a year.

I didnt ask Dancer then because I was new to VP, but I would like to know this now. And perhaps one of our math guys here can provide the answer:

Assuming he played a DW game with the best possible paytable, how much money did he have to risk in order to win over the course of one year $125,000 plus get another $125,000 in cashback.

And one more question: is there a casino today that offers that same game and what is its cashback formula today, and if Dancer were to play the same, what would that cashback be worth today?

I didn't call Dancer a charlatan. Just laughing at all the mo's who have the nads to call Singer a charlatan