I just read Bob Dancer's Jan 25th column

I noticed the smile. Are you trying to stir things up?

BTW, I know exactly what Singer would say as he has said it many times in the past. And, yes, it would be total nonsense.

Thanks Arci....

I'm taking your word for the math, same as I took his.

One of you is definitely "not computing". I'm not going to try to figure out who. Nope.

Anyway, I sure would like Mr. Dancer to maybe read this thread and your reply, and than respond.

If Dancer's math is incorrect, than others were correct in stating it was flawed.

However, I still think that regardless of his flawed math expectation, his strategy and tactics to win the car were good.

So, I need to think about what I think about this.

I am not trying to stir things up. I know Singer is banned from the LVA forum, so it's unlikely he will become involved in this discussion, although perhaps he'll email BAGIANT with one reply.

I am well aware of your feud with him, and the animosity you both have for the other.

I am genuinely interested in hearing from Dancer, and Singer about that specific column and "play", and hope they read this thread before penning their response.

It should, would, could be educational, informative, and interesting, plus it could give many an insight into their Pro VP Player world.

I also sincerely hope they are both civil.

I just went over Bob Dancer's math.

He admits to losing $80,000 playing video poker. (Did he lose more?)
He won a car worth a cash value of $40,000.
Thats a net loss of $40,000.

He reports playing 2.5-million coin in, but did not reveal the "additional play" at the end of the promotion. let's "guess" it was an additon half million of coin in. That gives him 3-million of coin in.

Let's be generous and say the cash back and comps earned on 3-million of coin in is one half percent.

0.5% of 3,000,000 = $15,000

He still has a net loss of $25,000 on this strategy.

Since Im not a whiz at math, would someone please set me straight? Oh, and if you think he had some additional losses with that additional last dash of play, please let me know how much?

I think I may see the error Dancer made.

1.6% of 2.5 million is $40K.

The game he started with was 99.97%. ("worth 99.97% including cash back on 50¢ Fifty Play 8/5 Bonus. I played $1.8 million.") and he did not take that 0.03% -EV into those calculations.

Than, "The next day I played $700,000 on $25 9/6 Double Double Bonus with a 0.90% slot club" (99.88% ? )

The 1.6 % figure was against the 2.5 million, and did not reflect his overall calculation of EV, only what it represented against the anticipated coin in to win. (2.5 mil)

He did not make it clear that the HA would be an additional cost of winning.

(0.12% of 700,000 = 840) + (0.03% of 1,800,000 = 540) = $1380 That number seems right to me, but I could be mistaken.

IF he would win the 40K with only playing 2.5 million, his EV cost would be $1380 to win $40K.

IF an additional $500K had to be played, his additional expected cost at 0.12% would be $600, bringing his total -EV to $1980.00 while trying to win $40K.

Arci, check your numbers. I think mine are correct, once I figured out his convoluted explanation.

And I probably did not do a very good job explaining it here.

The 50 play BP game is 99.17% + .5% for the RF bonus + .3% for cash back or a total return of 99.97%. Take $1.8M times 99.97% and his theo loss is $540.

On the $25 DDB you have a 98.98% game with .9% cash back for a total return of 99.88% or a theo loss of $840.

Combined, this is a theo loss of $1,380 on $2.5M coin in. Arci, did you take into consideration the 25% premium for the RF's on Friday's on the BP machine he was playing?

Going forward, assuming he had to play up to $10M to win this, he would have played on the $25 DDB on a 3X points day so the math for that is:

$7.5M X 99.88% = $7,491,000 or a loss of $9,000.

In order for him to run all $10M through if necessary, he would have had a theo loss of $10,380 which would have been offset by whatever he could net after reselling the vehicle.

Although I don't know this for fact, I would suggest that Bob has a pretty good inside information on exactly what level of play was required to lock up the car and where he stood in this from the onset. So, in my estimation, this was more than a calculated risk.

He likely also propogated the story that he would do whatever it took to win as this was relayed to me by a host there. He mounted such a huge lead and even if someone wanted to take a run at him, they'd have to do it on a pretty volatile machine which required a huge bankroll.

In terms of games, the theo on this was pretty strong. Using his math, at a 25 time investment, he did the first $2.5M. If he stopped there and won the car, his return on a per hour basis is in the $800 range. So, even if he had to go all the way to $10M coin in, it's still a $200/hr. game. If there are better games out there with this kind of theo, I'd like to hear about them.

I heard but haven't confirmed that he was trying to negotiate a cash payment or free play in lieu of the vehicle but M wanted no part of that....they were going to "force" him to take the vehicle. So, after taxes and depreciation, it was no longer a net $40K vehicle but something significantly less. I'm thinking he would be getting a 1099 for the retail price of the vehicle. In addition, he would have to pay the sales tax at 8.1% and the registration fees and to insure it.

I don't have blind faith into what Dancer says but I'm not seeing where his math is wrong. If he wasn't 100% confident that he wouldn't win the car, he would have never played....without the car, this was a negative expectation game. He might have played to a level to keep his monthly mailers coming but that figure is no where near $2.5M. I at least appreciate that he came clean and said how much this little experiment cost him.....no one can accuse his as an all wine and roses outcome.

Dan

Yes, you are right, although he did not specify exactly what the promotion was, it appears he valued it at .5% of his play. That was key and I misread that. However, if he had needed to play another $7.5 million at 99.47% then that would have cost him almost $40K. So, he could not play $10 million and still have a .4% advantage unless he did it all on the first two days.

Is there a link for this article? Casinogaming.com didn't seem to have anything more recent than his 1/18 column.

https://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/bob_dancer/2011/0125.cfm

Certainly, as others have said, there is always a possibility that someone could have been a "spoiler", but for all practical purposes, Dancer knew and was positive of the outcome.
His strategy to win was sound, and the cost of protecting his lead with additional play to insure his victory was built into his calculations.

Whether another person thinks this is a good play based on potential risk vs reward is a different debate that can never be won. What matters is that Dancer felt it worthwhile, seemed to analyze the promotion close enough to gain and it was a risk-reward he was willing to accept.


And his tax implications would be on the amount he sold the vehicle for, not the MSRP sticker price probably shown on the original W2G or 1099, whichever.