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

I just read Bob Dancer's Jan 25th column

MisterPicture
MisterPicture
Jan 30, 2011
1:34pm
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy
The fact of the matter is that when he calculated his Advantage he did not include any probability of losing. He had one number for winning at 2.5M CI and another for winning at 10M CI...
But if the coin-in required to win had only been $1,250,000, his advantage would have jumped to 3.2%. At a million, his advantage would have been 4%. If you're going to criticize Dancer for not factoring in the possibility of a huge coin-in making the game unprofitable, you should also criticize him for not factoring in a lower coin-in making it more profitable. Your real objection isn't to his math, it's to the uncertainty of this proposition.

But as usual, Bob Dancer is way ahead of you: "Although the games themselves are constant, the environment keeps changing. Casinos change slot clubs and promotions regularly. Frequently, you'll find yourself operating in an atmosphere of incomplete information."

That's from the introduction of Dancer's book "Video Poker for the Intelligent Beginner," which I highly recommend. But frankly, alanleroy, I don't think that's the right book for you. I'd rather not say why I feel that way.
alanleroy
alanleroy
Jan 30, 2011
8:18pm
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: forkush

Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy
The fact of the matter is that when he calculated his Advantage he did not include any probability of losing. He had one number for winning at 2.5M CI and another for winning at 10M CI...
But if the coin-in required to win had only been $1,250,000, his advantage would have jumped to 3.2%. At a million, his advantage would have been 4%. If you're going to criticize Dancer for not factoring in the possibility of a huge coin-in making the game unprofitable, you should also criticize him for not factoring in a lower coin-in making it more profitable. Your real objection isn't to his math, it's to the uncertainty of this proposition.

But as usual, Bob Dancer is way ahead of you: "Although the games themselves are constant, the environment keeps changing. Casinos change slot clubs and promotions regularly. Frequently, you'll find yourself operating in an atmosphere of incomplete information."

That's from the introduction of Dancer's book "Video Poker for the Intelligent Beginner," which I highly recommend. But frankly, alanleroy, I don't think that's the right book for you. I'd rather not say why I feel that way.

Dude, the level of 'uncertainty of a proposition' and 'atmosphere of incomplete information' are cute little phrases that really mean you don't know what the probability of failure is...except Dancer's gut feeling based on very limited observations. If you feel so strongly that it equates to +EV, then maybe we'll see you driving one of those Land Rovers after the next contest...but that's going to change the whole dynamic isn't it?

Of course you're the guy who compares the probability that Dancer did not properly account for stiffer competition to 'An asteroid hitting the M'....so I'm kind of glad you're not doing risk analysis for the FDA.

alanleroy
alanleroy
Jan 30, 2011
9:06pm
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: RoadTrip

Quote
.............The best I can give him is that his analysis is interesting but incomplete. I'm glad it worked out for him this time and he's the proud owner of a fine Luxury Land Rover.

So let me ask you a simple question. How may observations of like contests do you believe one would need to establish a mathmatical probabliity for winning with less than 10M coin in with 95% confidence?


Fair enough question.

I am not certain what my answer would be. "It depends" .


I'm talking about mathmatical probability and statistical confidence...not your personal confidence level.
arcimedes
arcimedes
Jan 30, 2011
10:14pm
Block User
Based on his history I think it's safe to say that Dancer will accept a degree of risk that many others would not. He is a gambler. Much more so than many of us.

I think that essentially describes the difference between many of the views posted here. Some think there should be no risk, others believe some degree of risk is acceptable. As such, this discussion could go on ad infinitum.

Also, there are those who clearly don't understand advantage play. Advantage players win/loss rate on a session basis is not all that different from other players. The biggest difference is advantage players look for the best plays possible. The 2nd factor of applying expert play strategies usually only impacts no more than 10% of the hands. The net result is advantage players usually lose less and win more, but only by a small amount. Of course, over time that small amount can result in a big difference.

redietzxyx
redietzxyx
Jan 31, 2011
12:20am
Block User
Arcimedes hit the point precisely here, and I agree with alanleroy wholeheartedly.

I notice people here have been polite enough to not mention what Singer and Dancer have in common besides asinine pseudonyms -- they both went bust, but for different reasons. One of the curious things that gets glossed over in Dancer's book is the how/why of his initial estrangement from his wealthy father. Perhaps it had to do with backgammon, also not mentioned. Anyway, the point is, once someone has risk assessment problems in one area of gambling, and then "gets religion," but still appears to overstate his risk assessment abilities in his sphere of religiosity, it vaguely suggests that the tail is wagging the dog -- that is, the gambling opportunities and scale of gambling is skewering the presumed fastidious risk assessment.

Just some speculation.
MoneyLA
MoneyLA
Jan 31, 2011
1:35am
Block User
arcimedes, I am really surprised that YOU of all people came up with this stock market analogy. there are MANY variables in the stock market, but when it comes to VP it is the number of cards and the pay table. your analogy with the stock market makes no sense.

Yes, I accept the fact that he was taking a gamble... he just shouldnt have gone public with it. (LOL)
melbedewy
melbedewy
Jan 31, 2011
1:43am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: snidely333
Quote
Originally posted by: MoneyLA
Dan, you and others have this belief "It should be noted that the actual results don't matter...." when discussing the merits of so-called "advantage play." Well, actual results are all that matters.

The whole point of "advantage play" is to make you a winner. If it doent make you a winner, then something is wrong.

I do accept Arcimedes' statement -- he says that even with advantage play you will have losing sessions. Of course you will.

I do not oppose anyone who follows the strategy of "advantage play" and if given a choice between playing 10/6 DDB and 9/5 DDB and all things being equal I would also always choose 10/6 DDB because that is one of the elements of "advantage play."

But no where in all of the writings of "advantage play" does it say that it is OK to LOSE money. One of the rules of advantage play is to limit losses, isn't it? Well, granted, Dancer's loss limits are probably a lot higher than what the rest of us have. And advantage play does figure in the value of comps and cashback -- BUT advantage play does not include competition for a car in which another player can outplay you, and in this point alanleroy is correct in his arguments.

Actually, Dan, had Dancer said he had an 80-thousand dollar PROFIT and WON THE CAR he would continue to be the world's #1 VP God, but he didnt. He lost 80-thou and got a car thats maybe worth 40-thou, and it leaves followers like me wondering what the heck he was thinking???

By the way Arc, I got lucky the other night and hit quad aces with a kicker on a 9/5 machine. The 10K win put me into the plus column on the year. I guess you can say I followed proper strategy because I held two aces and got the other two plus kicker on the draw. But it was on a 9/5 machine -- so "tsk tsk" on me for playing a 9/5 machine.

and one more thing Arc, you wrote: "One dealt RF on the 50-play machine Dancer was playing would yield $100K and make up for everything Dancer lost and more." Really, is this what you "advantage players" figure on? The chance of a dealt royal is 1/629,740.

Im going to tell you right now WHO has the advantage: the casino.


So, Money, if someone offers you $1.05 for every dollar you bet on a flip of an honest coin, you'd jump on that, right? That is a clear advantage play for you. But, there is no guarantee you would win. You could lose. Doesn't mean it's a bad bet.


Right.
Now tell me where those 105% percent machines are..
Oh, that's right they DO NOT EXIST.
Granhoff (Dancer) the "pro" plays 8-5 BP at $125 a spin.
melbedewy
melbedewy
Jan 31, 2011
1:46am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: forkush
Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy
...Of course there's always the chance that his write up of this event will scare off others from participating in such future contests based on his huge loss...
Actually it wasn't a huge loss at all. For a $125 a pop player to drop $30,000 - over two weeks - is the equivalent of a quarter player dropping $300. So alanleroy, just because you can't play with the big boys, that's no reason to pout.


He dropped $65k in 2 days. That's the kind of "advantage" play that caused Dick Mustain (Arcimedes) to go belly up in LV and head back to the balmy climes of Minnesota to change diapers.
arcimedes
arcimedes
Jan 31, 2011
5:48am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: melbedewy
He dropped $65k in 2 days. That's the kind of "advantage" play that caused Dick Mustain (Arcimedes) to go belly up in LV and head back to the balmy climes of Minnesota to change diapers.


I'm far from being a high roller. My biggest loss is about 10% of that figure. I'm just not that much of a gambler. But, the fact is I've still had 8 consecutive winning years. And, I'm still waiting for you to put your money where your big mouth is.

What is it about some people that they will continue to repeat lies yet don't have the balls to back up their lies?

And, do you really think posting people's names makes you look good? Are you really that stupid? I suppose you'll soon be outing kurt and Merla to make people think you have a brain ... sorry, you already blew that one.

Mike, you are starting to make Singer look good by comparison. That's about as low as it gets.
alanleroy
alanleroy
Jan 31, 2011
6:07am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: arcimedes
And, do you really think posting people's names makes you look good? Are you really that stupid?

Got to agree there. It's really just being mean. Of course my real name is Alanleroy, so what do I know?

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