I Just Don't Get It ~ VP Systems

Quote

Originally posted by: mrmarcus12LVA

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.


Actually no "AP "on this board will ever admit that, over a lifetime, they can lose-or at best break even. But with the games available in the 2011 Realworld, where the "pro's" are reduced to playing NEGATIVE games and hope to turn a profit on welfare checks, jeejaws, sweepstakes, gas cards, etc. they sure can. And do.
Believe it.

Quote

Originally posted by: mrmarcus12LVA
Quote

Originally posted by: tomdoug I don't play video poker, nor do I care to. I occasionally make the drive back home to Upstate NY, stop by Turning Stone Casino, shoot a little craps and thats about it. Never even knew or cared what AP was until recently when I stared reading all of the BS.
So guess again Arci, but I will tell you this, I bet baseball, specifically, I bet pitchers, and I never lose.
No avoidance of reality going on here. This is obviously 100% accurate.

Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroy We're men. We've been programmed through thousands of millenia that if we ignore a pissing contest some new cro-magnon is going to start peeing all over us.
LOL. Possibly a more accurate assessment then Snidely's. But probably not thousands of millenia.


What do you perceive as not accurate? Not being a video poker player? Betting on baseball? Not being from Upstate NY?
Quote

Originally posted by: mrmarcus12LVA
You FEAR REALITY. Therefore you hate reality. Therefore, you AVOID LOGICAL THOUGHT, because it will bring you closer to what you hate and fear.

.


I have no clue what the fuck this even means! You actually thought of this?
Quote

Originally posted by: surf87
I perceive much of this discussion to be likened to a "paradigm shift," which is used to describe a profound change in some of the basic or fundamental assumptions (ie., The world was flat as opposed to being round, or the planets revolving around the earth rather than the sun in the pre-Galileo era, etc) as it pertains to VP. I like to keep an open mind about things and I'll be the first to admit that I'm learning valuable information from both camps.


well said and excellent point.

Quote

Originally posted by: tomdoug
I almost forgot, How can I be a failed AP'er, with the right paytable and perfect play, I can't lose, right?


Bwah hahahahahahahahahahaha

Spoken like someone without a clue. Congratulations on making one of the stupidest statements ever on LVA.
I've just noticed that Roadtrip is not posting. Where's Roadtrip?
Quote

Originally posted by: surf87
I perceive much of this discussion to be likened to a "paradigm shift," which is used to describe a profound change in some of the basic or fundamental assumptions (ie., The world was flat as opposed to being round, or the planets revolving around the earth rather than the sun in the pre-Galileo era, etc) as it pertains to VP. I like to keep an open mind about things and I'll be the first to admit that I'm learning valuable information from both camps.


How can there ever be a "paradigm shift" in a game as simple as VP. I think you're going to be very disappointed if you believe there's anything more to this than simple mathematics.

But hey, please tell what "valuable information" you are learning from those who essentially claim 2+2 = 5.
Quote

Originally posted by: arcimedes
Quote

Originally posted by: surf87
I perceive much of this discussion to be likened to a "paradigm shift," which is used to describe a profound change in some of the basic or fundamental assumptions (ie., The world was flat as opposed to being round, or the planets revolving around the earth rather than the sun in the pre-Galileo era, etc) as it pertains to VP. I like to keep an open mind about things and I'll be the first to admit that I'm learning valuable information from both camps.


How can there ever be a "paradigm shift" in a game as simple as VP. I think you're going to be very disappointed if you believe there's anything more to this than simple mathematics.

But hey, please tell what "valuable information" you are learning from those who essentially claim 2+2 = 5.


For instance in the Dancer camp I learned about the need to have a large enough bankroll to weather the storms of the video poker variances and in the long term expected value should be realized. This meant having to play video poker for hours upon end grinding away or as Tomdoug puts it "15 hours in a casino."


In the Singer camp he talks about setting a win goal or a loss limit. When either is attained walk away from the video poker machine and enjoy a show, or have a nice meal, or what ever interests you. Singer's recommendation is liberating compared to the "ball and chain" philosophy of having to play video poker long term which can also be very addicting.


I can see why Singer gets bashed for his ideas. Sometimes the truth hurts (LOL).
Leaving when you have reached a predetermined win/loss limit would indeed piss off
quite a few VP players. Most likely because if they have hit one of those slots
that are in a "taking" mode, they will just keep throwing money at it in the
hopes that "over time" the slot will pay off.

TomdougSinger, how was your vacation in Hawaii?
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