Gambling question for RGP (test your knowledge)

[BillB]

Assume you play perfect strategy video poker. What would your expected ROI be after running $850 through a video poker machine?

[popinjay]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 4:22:04 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



> Assume you play perfect strategy video poker. What would your expected ROI be after running $850 through a video poker machine?

That's a stupid question.

[Will in New Haven]

Because machines differ in their payouts or because it is Bill B's question?

I agree with both. I just wondered which.

--
Will in Deerfield Beach

[popinjay]

The first.

[BillB]

No, it's not a stupid question. You can give a range, but I'd assume if you play "perfect strategy video poker" that you play the only the machines that offer the best return. duh

Aren't you the self-proclaimed video poker expert here? Surely you can come up with more intelligent answer than the one you've offered.

[BillB]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 4:22:04 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:

> Assume you play perfect strategy video poker. What would your expected ROI be after running $850 through a video poker machine?

I've already received a couple of dud responses. While I welcome everyone's participation, please be aware that all responses will be graded for knowledge and intelligence and will go on the poster's permanent record.

[risky biz]

Yes, it is a stupid question. And you're asking it because I posted this:

'Online Exchange [Predictit] Shows Jeb Bush as the GOP’s 2016 Favorite'
[Public opinion polls were solidly Trump]
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.gambling.poker/FqDEb7uVDa8/oWsBrymXAgAJ

You've been having a spastic attack about that tiny item for a couple of days now.

[BillB]

Uh no. That was an idiotic thing for you to post (because it proved absolutely nothing and made no relevant point), but not NEARLY as idiotic as your claimed expected ROI of "50%-200%" in video poker. LOLOL!!! That's why I am posting this. I want to call further attention to your ignorance.

[popinjay]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 6:37:39 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:

> but I'd assume if you play "perfect strategy video poker" that you play the only the machines that offer the best return.

lol that's stupid

[risky biz]

Like I said- you're having a spastic attack.

Stop lying. I never even mentioned 'expected ROI'.

But I gave you some figures. So show us how you calculated your preferred metric of ROI (which you apparently believe that gamblers consider crucial) from the figures I gave you. You don't want to do that, do you?

[risky biz]

You're the only dud in the thread. You don't even recognize the glaring difference between a stud hand and a hold'em hand.

[BillB]

You've got nothing. Go away.

It's admirable that you're trying to stick up for your boyfriend, but you are intellectually impotent.

[risky biz]

[BillB]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 7:51:56 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 7:45:28 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 7:39:19 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 6:37:39 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 5:45:02 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 4:22:04 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Assume you play perfect strategy video poker. What would your expected ROI be after running $850 through a video poker machine?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > That's a stupid question.
> > > >
> > > > No, it's not a stupid question. You can give a range, but I'd assume if you play "perfect strategy video poker" that you play the only the machines that offer the best return. duh
> > > >
> > > > Aren't you the self-proclaimed video poker expert here? Surely you can come up with more intelligent answer than the one you've offered.
> > >
> > > Yes, it is a stupid question. And you're asking it because I posted this:
> > >
> > > 'Online Exchange [Predictit] Shows Jeb Bush as the GOP’s 2016 Favorite'
> > > [Public opinion polls were solidly Trump]
> > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.gambling.poker/FqDEb7uVDa8/oWsBrymXAgAJ
> > >
> > > You've been having a spastic attack about that tiny item for a couple of days now.
> >
> > Uh no. That was an idiotic thing for you to post (because it proved absolutely nothing and made no relevant point), but not NEARLY as idiotic as your claimed expected ROI of "50%-200%" in video poker. LOLOL!!! That's why I am posting this. I want to call further attention to your ignorance.
>
> Like I said- you're having a spastic attack.
>
> Stop lying. I never even mentioned 'expected ROI'.

The questions asked of you were:

"And what would your expected ROI be on that $850 you put through that machine? Could it be as high as 1%?"

Your answer was "try 50%-200%"

What did you mean by that?

> But I gave you some figures. So show us how you calculated your preferred metric of ROI (which you apparently believe that gamblers consider crucial) from the figures I gave you. You don't want to do that, do you?

You were never asked about ROI. You were asked about EXPECTED ROI. Do you understand the difference? Apparently not.

[Clave]

On 8/21/2019 3:22 PM, BillB wrote:
>
> Assume you play perfect strategy video poker. What would your expected ROI be after running $850 through a video poker machine?
>

I don't know, and I don't care.

This is a correct answer.

[BillB]

Because you wouldn't waste your time and money playing video poker? Yes, that is the correct answer.

[popinjay]

By far the majority of games are long-term negative expectancy. Most pros are benefiting from promotions and extras that the casinos give out, or by playing a progressive with a high enough jackpot. There are only a handful of games that are over 100%, and nowadays you get "punished" for playing those. They offer reduced benefits, or no benefits. And they are not offered for higher stakes. Video poker in 2019 is much different than video poker in 1994.

[popinjay]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 8:19:52 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>
> Because you wouldn't waste your time and money playing video poker? Yes, that is the correct answer.

You can play higher stakes but with a smaller edge than in the "old days". Say you're playing $5 denom, with only a 1/2% edge. That's a small edge, but still decent money. A competent $5 player will push through $20,000 an hour coin-in. That's a hundred dollars an hour and I can find that play all day long.

[popinjay]

Another factor, there is heat nowadays, like blackjack. Twenty years ago there was zero heat, and they treated you like a king.

[BillB]

FINALLY! An actual attempt at an intelligent answer. You get a gold participation star for that. But why'd I have to goad it out of you?

When you say "long-term negative expectancy," would that be the same thing as a negative expected ROI?

Would it be fair to say that when risky said his expected ROI on $850 would be 50%-200% that he was out of his fucking mind?

[BillB]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 8:49:38 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:

That's $200,000/yr in expected profit. Is that what you're doing?

Why would the casino choose to leave an opening like that? Why not just design the very best games to pay out exactly 100%?

[popinjay]

I don't know what Risky said and I don't trust you to quote him accurately and honestly.

[popinjay]

Casinos often don't know they are vulnerable. They hire bean-counters instead of gamblers. Either way, chances are you will be shown the door if you win too much, even if it is due to blind-ass luck instead of skill. Casinos are stupid.

[BillB]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 9:16:16 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:

> I don't know what Risky said and I don't trust you to quote him accurately and honestly.

That's your excuse? LOL What obvious horseshit. The questions asked were:

"And what would your expected ROI be on that $850 you put through that machine? Could it be as high as 1%?"

risky responded with:

"Try 50-200%"

[popinjay]

He says he didn't say that.

[BillB]

Then maybe your mistrust is misplaced.

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.gambling.poker/FqDEb7uVDa8/MImdldo0AwAJ

[BillB]

Assume you have $500,000. You decide to run it once through the best video poker machine you can typically find. What's your expected ROI?

[popinjay]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 9:37:04 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>
> Then maybe your mistrust is misplaced.
>
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.gambling.poker/FqDEb7uVDa8/MImdldo0AwAJ

My mistrust of you is never misplaced. But I want to hear him explain what he meant, not you.

[Clave]

The desert is full of people who were convinced of that.

[BillB]

So do I. That's why I asked him seventeen times.

The fact is, I asked him if his expected ROI could be as high as 1%, and his response was "Try 50-200%". Who are you going to believe, risky or your lying eyes?

[BillB]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 9:52:04 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:

> The fact is, I asked him if his expected ROI could be as high as 1%, and his response was "Try 50-200%". Who are you going to believe, risky or your lying eyes?

By the way, if risky is such a pro who "knows what he's doing" (lol) why were you just admonishing him the other week for playing machines with negative expectations?

[popinjay]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 9:43:51 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>
> Assume you have $500,000. You decide to run it once through the best video poker machine you can typically find. What's your expected ROI?

This is tricky. The "best" I can find is full pay deuces which returns 100.72%, but now you can only find it for quarters. That's better than McDolnald's, but not by much. If by 500K you mean "coin-in", that's only 400,000 hands. A small sample size.

[popinjay]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 9:50:32 PM UTC-7, Clave wrote:



>
> The desert is full of people who were convinced of that.

The dummies running today's casinos don't bury their problems in the desert.

[BillB]

So your expected ROI is about 1% (and that's being generous) as I said in the first place, not risky's claimed 50-200%.

Risky said he puts a maximum of $637/hr through the machine. That means it would take risky 784 hours to run that $500,000 for an expected profit of $3550. That works out to an expected profit of $4.52/hr. I'd rather work at McDonald's for $15/hr.

[Clave]

No, but they're smarter than you are.

[popinjay]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:13:41 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



>
> Risky said he puts a maximum of $637/hr through the machine. That means it would take risky 784 hours to run that $500,000 for an expected profit of $3550. That works out to an expected profit of $4.52/hr. I'd rather work at McDonald's for $15/hr.

Risky is doing "other things". I don't wish to divulge.

[popinjay]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:15:27 PM UTC-7, Clave wrote:


>
> No, but they're smarter than you are.

Sometimes not. In fact, most times not. I make a living off this, and I'm not even in Vegas. I would do much better in Vegas, and I'd stay busy.

[BillB]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:15:27 PM UTC-7, Clave wrote:

I don't believe for a second that the casinos don't know what they are doing, but that the degenerate gamblers have it all figured out. lol Ph.D. mathematicians are designing these games.

I think it's more likely that by creating a game with an ever-so-slight "theoretical" player advantage they attract tens of thousands of suckers (like risky and others who shall remain nameless) who imagine they will play perfectly 100% of the time for thousands of hours in a row. Of course, that never happens.

And, according to popinjay, even if you are the one in a million who can realize that 0.71% advantage, they'll spot you and kick you out in no time. Sounds like a real fool's errand. I can consistently make 2bb/hr in just about any low-midlimit poker game in the country and nobody will say a word to me, ever. Not only that, but with real poker there is some social interaction involved. I'm not just staring into a screen and pressing buttons like a zombie. That sounds too much like work to me.

[risky biz]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 8:06:12 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 7:51:56 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 7:45:28 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 7:39:19 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 6:37:39 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 5:45:02 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 4:22:04 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Assume you play perfect strategy video poker. What would your expected ROI be after running $850 through a video poker machine?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's a stupid question.
> > > > >
> > > > > No, it's not a stupid question. You can give a range, but I'd assume if you play "perfect strategy video poker" that you play the only the machines that offer the best return. duh
> > > > >
> > > > > Aren't you the self-proclaimed video poker expert here? Surely you can come up with more intelligent answer than the one you've offered.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, it is a stupid question. And you're asking it because I posted this:
> > > >
> > > > 'Online Exchange [Predictit] Shows Jeb Bush as the GOP’s 2016 Favorite'
> > > > [Public opinion polls were solidly Trump]
> > > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rec.gambling.poker/FqDEb7uVDa8/oWsBrymXAgAJ
> > > >
> > > > You've been having a spastic attack about that tiny item for a couple of days now.
> > >
> > > Uh no. That was an idiotic thing for you to post (because it proved absolutely nothing and made no relevant point), but not NEARLY as idiotic as your claimed expected ROI of "50%-200%" in video poker. LOLOL!!! That's why I am posting this. I want to call further attention to your ignorance.
> >
> > Like I said- you're having a spastic attack.
> >
> > Stop lying. I never even mentioned 'expected ROI'.
>
> The questions asked of you were:
>
> "And what would your expected ROI be on that $850 you put through that machine? Could it be as high as 1%?"
>
> Your answer was "try 50%-200%"
>
> What did you mean by that?

Here's an example. Last night I went over to M Resort for dinner. I had a $25 dinner at no charge. I then bet my free play on a single large bet and won nothing. Subsequently, I played various games, mostly video poker, for about 2 hours after which I left the M Resort with $226 more than I had when I arrived. What was my ROI? Was it positive or was it zero?

> > But I gave you some figures. So show us how you calculated your preferred metric of ROI (which you apparently believe that gamblers consider crucial) from the figures I gave you. You don't want to do that, do you?
>

~ You were never asked about ROI. You were asked about EXPECTED ROI. Do you understand the difference? Apparently not.

I do understand the difference and any grade-school child could understand the difference between the two. What's mysterious to me is why you are trying to portray it as some sort of sophisticated tool for evaluating a gambling opportunity. Do you think that's impressing anyone other than someone who has never gambled? Are you really naive enough about gambling that you think professional gamblers do 'expected ROI' calculations at the beginning of each year to decide if they are going to gamble in the coming year?

Serious question- when you stayed at the 'D' Downtown last year what did you do? Walk around watching everyone else gambling but not doing so yourself because you thought you were smart enough to recognize that they were all games with an 'expected ROI' which was negative? I'm sure you didn't play any live poker.

I'm just wondering because when I go Downtown, which isn't often, I ALWAYS leave with more money than I brought.

[BillB]

pfffft...what? He's got a one of those coins with a string attached to it? lol

[Clave]

On 8/21/2019 9:22 PM, popinjay wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:15:27 PM UTC-7, Clave wrote:
>
>
>>
>> No, but they're smarter than you are.
>
>
> Sometimes not. In fact, most times not.

I'm sure we all believe that.

[Clave]

Magnets. Everyone uses magnets these days.

[risky biz]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:27:00 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:15:27 PM UTC-7, Clave wrote:
> > On 8/21/2019 9:04 PM, popinjay wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 9:50:32 PM UTC-7, Clave wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> The desert is full of people who were convinced of that.
> > >
> > >
> > > The dummies running today's casinos don't bury their problems in the desert.
> > >
> >
> > No, but they're smarter than you are.
>
> I don't believe for a second that the casinos don't know what they are doing, but that the degenerate gamblers have it all figured out. lol Ph.D. mathematicians are designing these games.
>
> I think it's more likely that by creating a game with an ever-so-slight "theoretical" player advantage they attract tens of thousands of suckers (like risky and others who shall remain nameless) who imagine they will play perfectly 100% of the time for thousands of hours in a row. Of course, that never happens.
>
> And, according to popinjay, even if you are the one in a million who can realize that 0.71% advantage, they'll spot you and kick you out in no time. Sounds like a real fool's errand.

~ I can consistently make 2bb/hr in just about any low-midlimit poker game in the country

Obvious B.S. You are completely clueless about poker.

[popinjay]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:27:00 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:


>

> I don't believe for a second that the casinos don't know what they are doing, but that the degenerate gamblers have it all figured out. lol Ph.D. mathematicians are designing these games.
>

Casinos make incredibly stupid plays. The Downtown Grand made one last month and must have lost a bundle. They don't know the business. Benny Binion would never have made such mistakes.

[popinjay]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:27:00 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:


>

> And, according to popinjay, even if you are the one in a million who can realize that 0.71% advantage, they'll spot you and kick you out in no time. Sounds like a real fool's errand. I can consistently make 2bb/hr in just about any low-midlimit poker game in the country and nobody will say a word to me, ever. Not only that, but with real poker there is some social interaction involved. I'm not just staring into a screen and pressing buttons like a zombie. That sounds too much like work to me.

Making 0.71% on fpdw is easy, one of the easiest games to play. Almost anyone can do it, not "one in a million", moron. I did not say they will kick you out. In fact, you can probably move your mattress in and sleep there, no one will ever kick you out for making that 0.71%. Try reading for comprehension.

[popinjay]

I am believed by longtime RGPers more than you, fuckface. I am much more savvy than the average casino exec, including marketing.

[popinjay]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:33:20 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:



>
> Obvious B.S. You are completely clueless about poker.
>

Bill is a master at bluff-eliciting. lol

[Clave]

On 8/21/2019 9:56 PM, popinjay wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:29:42 PM UTC-7, Clave wrote:
>> On 8/21/2019 9:22 PM, popinjay wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:15:27 PM UTC-7, Clave wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, but they're smarter than you are.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sometimes not. In fact, most times not.
>>
>> I'm sure we all believe that.
>
>
> I am believed by longtime RGPers more than you, fuckface.

Longtime RGPers believe a whole lot of really stupid stuff.

[BillB]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:27:58 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:

> Here's an example. Last night I went over to M Resort for dinner. I had a $25 dinner at no charge. I then bet my free play on a single large bet and won nothing. Subsequently, I played various games, mostly video poker, for about 2 hours after which I left the M Resort with $226 more than I had when I arrived. What was my ROI? Was it positive or was it zero?
>

More information needed to calculate ROI (just take my word for it). However, if you left with more than when you arrived, then it must have been positive, unless you were sucking cock for tips in the men's room.

> > > But I gave you some figures. So show us how you calculated your preferred metric of ROI (which you apparently believe that gamblers consider crucial) from the figures I gave you. You don't want to do that, do you?
> >
> ~ You were never asked about ROI. You were asked about EXPECTED ROI. Do you understand the difference? Apparently not.
>
> I do understand the difference and any grade-school child could understand the difference between the two. What's mysterious to me is why you are trying to portray it as some sort of sophisticated tool for evaluating a gambling opportunity. Do you think that's impressing anyone other than someone who has never gambled? Are you really naive enough about gambling that you think professional gamblers do 'expected ROI' calculations at the beginning of each year to decide if they are going to gamble in the coming year?
>

No, it's not sophisticated. It's as basic as can be. If a game does not have a positive expected ROI, then it's not worth playing (unless you are placing a non-tangible monetary value on the "entertainment"). If it does have a positive expected ROI, then knowing what that number is is crucial in evaluating which game to choose to play or whether you should bother playing at all (opportunity cost).

> Serious question- when you stayed at the 'D' Downtown last year what did you do? Walk around watching everyone else gambling but not doing so yourself because you thought you were smart enough to recognize that they were all games with an 'expected ROI' which was negative? I'm sure you didn't play any live poker.
>

You're sure? You're "sure" about a lot of things that aren't true. lol That's all I did. That's all I ever do. I played poker at the GN and my wife played $5 single deck at the El Cortez, same as always.

> I'm just wondering because when I go Downtown, which isn't often, I ALWAYS >leave with more money than I brought.

Horseshit.

[VegasJerry]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 4:22:04 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> Assume you play perfect strategy video poker. What would your expected ROI be after running $850 through a video poker machine?

Negative.

[VegasJerry]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 8:38:58 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 7:55:37 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:

> > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 7:51:47 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 6:37:39 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > but I'd assume if you play "perfect strategy video poker" that you play the only the machines that offer the best return.
> > >
> > >

> > > lol that's stupid
> >
> > You've got nothing. Go away.
> >
> > It's admirable that you're trying to stick up for your boyfriend, but you are intellectually impotent.
>
>
> By far the majority of games are long-term negative expectancy. Most pros are benefiting from promotions and extras that the casinos give out, or by playing a progressive with a high enough jackpot. There are only a handful of games that are over 100%, and nowadays you get "punished" for playing those. They offer reduced benefits, or no benefits. And they are not offered for higher stakes. Video poker in 2019 is much different than video poker in 1994.

But still a sucker's game.

[VegasJerry]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 9:04:49 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 8:49:38 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 8:19:52 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Because you wouldn't waste your time and money playing video poker? Yes, that is the correct answer.
> >
> >
> > You can play higher stakes but with a smaller edge than in the "old days". Say you're playing $5 denom, with only a 1/2% edge. That's a small edge, but still decent money. A competent $5 player will push through $20,000 an hour coin-in. That's a hundred dollars an hour and I can find that play all day long.
>
> That's $200,000/yr in expected profit. Is that what you're doing?
>
> Why would the casino choose to leave an opening like that? Why not just design the very best games to pay out exactly 100%?

I worked for the Golden Nugget. This is not a charity business. There are no casino games where the odds are in your favor. Why would there be?

[VegasJerry]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 9:21:00 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 9:04:49 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 8:49:38 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 8:19:52 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Because you wouldn't waste your time and money playing video poker? Yes, that is the correct answer.
> > >
> > >
> > > You can play higher stakes but with a smaller edge than in the "old days". Say you're playing $5 denom, with only a 1/2% edge. That's a small edge, but still decent money. A competent $5 player will push through $20,000 an hour coin-in. That's a hundred dollars an hour and I can find that play all day long.
> >
> > That's $200,000/yr in expected profit. Is that what you're doing?
> >
> > Why would the casino choose to leave an opening like that? Why not just design the very best games to pay out exactly 100%?
>
>

> Casinos often don't know they are vulnerable.

Wha! Ha~ha! There's one born every minute, what minute was yours?

> They hire bean-counters instead of gamblers.
Either way, chances are you will be shown the door if you win too much, even if it is due to blind-ass luck instead of skill. Casinos are stupid.

Yea, that's why they're able to stay open for suckers like you. Which brings up the question: If you're so smart, why aren't you millionaires?

[risky biz]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 11:48:12 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:27:58 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
>
> > Here's an example. Last night I went over to M Resort for dinner. I had a $25 dinner at no charge. I then bet my free play on a single large bet and won nothing. Subsequently, I played various games, mostly video poker, for about 2 hours after which I left the M Resort with $226 more than I had when I arrived. What was my ROI? Was it positive or was it zero?
> >
>

~ More information needed to calculate ROI (just take my word for it). However, if you left with more than when you arrived, then it must have been positive, unless you were sucking cock for tips in the men's room.

You're emanating unmistakable signals that you feel like a loser.

When I gave you all the information needed you backed down and refused to do the calculation.

BTW- after dealing with your spastic attack last night, I took a 5-7 minute drive to a local casino because I had some free play available. I made nothing on that but made $75 in 30 minutes, and came home. Not much but worth the short drive. I had to do some grocery shopping on the way home anyway.

> > > > But I gave you some figures. So show us how you calculated your preferred metric of ROI (which you apparently believe that gamblers consider crucial) from the figures I gave you. You don't want to do that, do you?
> > >
> > ~ You were never asked about ROI. You were asked about EXPECTED ROI. Do you understand the difference? Apparently not.
> >
> > I do understand the difference and any grade-school child could understand the difference between the two. What's mysterious to me is why you are trying to portray it as some sort of sophisticated tool for evaluating a gambling opportunity. Do you think that's impressing anyone other than someone who has never gambled? Are you really naive enough about gambling that you think professional gamblers do 'expected ROI' calculations at the beginning of each year to decide if they are going to gamble in the coming year?
> >
>
> No, it's not sophisticated. It's as basic as can be. If a game does not have a positive expected ROI, then it's not worth playing (unless you are placing a non-tangible monetary value on the "entertainment"). If it does have a positive expected ROI, then knowing what that number is is crucial in evaluating which game to choose to play or whether you should bother playing at all (opportunity cost).

I've been keeping accurate records since November 2017 and have had only two losing months since then. Those both were due to the fact that I played video poker very little. You clearly are ignorant.

> > Serious question- when you stayed at the 'D' Downtown last year what did you do? Walk around watching everyone else gambling but not doing so yourself because you thought you were smart enough to recognize that they were all games with an 'expected ROI' which was negative? I'm sure you didn't play any live poker.
> >
>
> You're sure? You're "sure" about a lot of things that aren't true. lol That's all I did. That's all I ever do. I played poker at the GN and my wife played $5 single deck at the El Cortez, same as always.

If you played poker you lost unless you were able to find a table with players who were all as ignorant as you. Then maybe you got lucky.

> > I'm just wondering because when I go Downtown, which isn't often, I ALWAYS >leave with more money than I brought.
>
> Horseshit.

Like I said- clueless. If only you knew how I'm laughing at your comments.

[risky biz]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:29:42 PM UTC-7, Clave wrote:

I know that what Paul said is true. There isn't any reason whatsoever that what he said couldn't be true. You just don't know enough to believe him.

[risky biz]

Speaking for yourself.

[popinjay]

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 7:17:49 AM UTC-7, VegasJerry wrote:



>
> I worked for the Golden Nugget. This is not a charity business. There are no casino games where the odds are in your favor. Why would there be?

You're a stupid person.

[risky biz]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:59:07 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:33:20 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
>
>
>
> >
> > Obvious B.S. You are completely clueless about poker.
> >
>
>
>

~ Bill is a master at bluff-eliciting. lol

Isn't it spiteful of him to not teach us esoteric topics like that?🤣

[risky biz]

There are casino games where the odds are in your favor. They're there because you don't know that.

[popinjay]

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 7:21:34 AM UTC-7, VegasJerry wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 9:21:00 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:



> >
> > Casinos often don't know they are vulnerable.
>
> Wha! Ha~ha! There's one born every minute, what minute was yours?
>

You and Clave and Bill just don't know the truth. Risky and I study this shit for a living. It's our business to know.

[popinjay]

Steve Wynn said the same thing on 60 Minutes that Jerry is saying. The only difference is that Steve Wynn is lying, and Jerry is just an imbecile.

[Mossingen]

"popinjay" wrote in message
news:3730e1da-afdf-4b5d...@googlegroups.com...

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 5:46:52 PM UTC-7, Will in New Haven wrote:

> > That's a stupid question.
>

> Because machines differ in their payouts or because it is Bill B's
> question?
>
> I agree with both. I just wondered which.
>
> --
> Will in Deerfield Beach


>The first.


I'm actually curious about the answer. Are video poker machines like slots,
in that they are calibrated as "tight" or "loose" to keep a certain
percentage? I would assume so, which is why I never really believed that
video poker could be an advantage play unless you're just calculating comps
and drinks and other free shit.

Video poker is play against the house. How the hell could you ever have an
edge or any ROI that is not negative on any dollar you put in the machine.
Am I wrong?

[popinjay]

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 11:19:30 AM UTC-7, Mossingen wrote:



>
> Video poker is play against the house. How the hell could you ever have an
> edge or any ROI that is not negative on any dollar you put in the machine.
> Am I wrong?

Yep, you're wrong.

[VegasJerry]

Knew you couldn't answer..

[VegasJerry]

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 10:49:05 AM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:

No, there are not, and you can't show where there are..

[VegasJerry]

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 10:51:41 AM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
> On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 7:21:34 AM UTC-7, VegasJerry wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 9:21:00 PM UTC-7, popinjay wrote:
>
>
>
> > >
> > > Casinos often don't know they are vulnerable.
> >
> > Wha! Ha~ha! There's one born every minute, what minute was yours?

> You and Clave and Bill just don't know the truth.

Knew you couldn't answer..

> Risky and I study this shit for a living.

No, you don't.

> It's our business to know.

Yet where are the millions?

LOL

[VegasJerry]

Because we both know.

> The only difference is that Steve Wynn is lying, and Jerry is just an imbecile.

Yet we remain right and you can't show where we're wrong..

[VegasJerry]

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 11:19:30 AM UTC-7, Mossingen wrote:

> "popinjay" wrote in message
> news:3730e1da-afdf-4b5d...@googlegroups.com...
>
> On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 5:46:52 PM UTC-7, Will in New Haven wrote:
> > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 8:45:02 PM UTC-4, popinjay wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 4:22:04 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Assume you play perfect strategy video poker. What would your expected
> > > > ROI be after running $850 through a video poker machine?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > That's a stupid question.
> >
> > Because machines differ in their payouts or because it is Bill B's
> > question?
> >
> > I agree with both. I just wondered which.
> >
> > --
> > Will in Deerfield Beach
>
>
> >The first.
>
>
> I'm actually curious about the answer. Are video poker machines like slots,
> in that they are calibrated as "tight" or "loose" to keep a certain
> percentage?

No, the cards speak for themselves because the odds are always in the house's favor.

> I would assume so, which is why I never really believed that
> video poker could be an advantage play unless you're just calculating comps
> and drinks and other free shit.
>
> Video poker is play against the house. How the hell could you ever have an
> edge or any ROI that is not negative on any dollar you put in the machine.
> Am I wrong?

No.

[risky biz]

Someone should ask Steve Wynn why Wynn Resorts worldwide barred me from their properties. Because they don't like losers who generate income for the casino?

[risky biz]

Let them repose in the darkness. I know I'm not here to teach.

[BillB]

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 12:00:36 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:

> Let them repose in the darkness. I know I'm not here to teach.

That's for sure. You have to know something before you can teach.

50-200% ROI LOLOLOLOL

[popinjay]

At the same time, ask Mr.Wynn why he downgraded the video poker paytables near the Red 8 if no one ever wins. 60 Minutes forgot to ask him that.

[popinjay]

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 12:00:36 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:



>

> Let them repose in the darkness.

Let them scratch each other's ass.

[popinjay]

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 11:42:57 AM UTC-7, VegasJerry wrote:



>
> No, there are not, and you can't show where there are..
>

Yes, there are, and yes, he can. Maybe he can't teach a monkey, or you, same thing. Go get a banana and let's give it a try.

[popinjay]

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 11:44:54 AM UTC-7, VegasJerry wrote:



>
> Yet where are the millions?
>

Why would I answer this honestly, on a public newsgroup?

[VegasJerry]

Knew you couldn't...

[VegasJerry]

Knew you couldn't answer...

[Dutch]

Enough with all this gambling talk, what do you think this is, a
gambling newsgroups?

[risky biz]

Because the IRS wants to know. LOL.

[risky biz]

I know 500-2,000% more than you. In fact, I've already told you too much. You don't get any more. Not that you would know what to do with it.

[Tim Norfolk]

The calibration, as you put it, comes from altering the payouts on certain hands. For the 5-card draw versions with no wild cards, the first machines paid 9 units for a full house and 6 for a flush, hence a 9/6 machine. Those returned 98-99% on average.

Then, the standard became 8/5, or even 7/5 where there was no competition. It became much more complicated on the 'bonus' machines, which pay more for certain types of 4 of a kind, and sometimes only 1 unit on 2 pair.

The random number generator for the deals is as random as they can make it.

[BillB]

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 5:07:38 PM UTC-7, Tim Norfolk wrote:

> The random number generator for the deals is as random as they can make it.

Not according to risky. Just listen to this hilarious mumbo-jumbo (risky responding to popinjay's criticism of risky playing -EV machines):

"You should qualify that by saying theoretical math. That's based on the assumption of a random deal.

"In Nevada, a casino can legally hold up to 25%. So they can legally get a slot certified as random if it pays back 75%. But the public isn't that dumb. So they get slots legally certified at 'random' minus 6-8%.

"Are the casinos flooding their floors with video poker machines at over 99% payback when they could use the floor space for slots that payback 94-92%?"

[Clave]

But they're still pseudo-random, yes?

[Mossingen]

"Tim Norfolk" wrote in message
news:69f3b068-e5f7-4eab...@googlegroups.com...

The calibration, as you put it, comes from altering the payouts on certain
hands. For the 5-card draw versions with no wild cards, the first machines
paid 9 units for a full house and 6 for a flush, hence a 9/6 machine. Those
returned 98-99% on average.

Then, the standard became 8/5, or even 7/5 where there was no competition.
It became much more complicated on the 'bonus' machines, which pay more for
certain types of 4 of a kind, and sometimes only 1 unit on 2 pair.

The random number generator for the deals is as random as they can make it.

__________________


OK, so any EV is always going to be negative. When risky or paul claim to
have +EV it's not from the dollar they put into the machine, it's from
casino bonuses or comps or some such? Neither of them will give a serious
answer.

[popinjay]

Not exactly. As I mentioned, Risky is doing other things. Some of his methods is called "vulturing". Whereas my specialty is progressives, and that +EV is directly from the coin-in I push through. Any casino bennies are extra.

[Clave]

Gosh, it couldn't be because they're fulla shit, could it?

Inquiring minds and such.

[popinjay]

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 6:28:17 PM UTC-7, Clave wrote:



>
> But they're still pseudo-random, yes?

Kinda like you being pseudo-human. Yes?

[Clave]

So you don't know what "pseudo-random" means.

Big fucking deal -- surprise us all again. *yawn*

[popinjay]

I know what it means, fuckface. *Yawn* back at you, you fucking little baby.

[Clave]

Tell us more about your +EV, Uncle Pop-Twat!

[popinjay]

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 9:34:39 PM UTC-7, Clave wrote:



>
> Tell us more about your +EV, Uncle Pop-Twat!

No, you're mean to me. You're not a nice man. Fuck you.

[Clave]

On 8/22/2019 8:38 PM, popinjay wrote:
> On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 9:34:39 PM UTC-7, Clave wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>> Tell us more about your +EV, Uncle Pop-Twat!
>
>
> No, you're mean to me.

Sorry, snowflake.

[popinjay]

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 7:17:49 AM UTC-7, VegasJerry wrote:


>
> I worked for the Golden Nugget.

You were a shill in a $1-$2 stud game in 1967.

[popinjay]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 9:04:49 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



> Why not just design the very best games to pay out exactly 100%?
>

Who's supposed to do this?

[popinjay]

On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:27:00 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:



> who imagine they will play perfectly 100% of the time for thousands of hours in a row. Of course, that never happens.
>



It doesn't need to happen. At worst my errors amount to 99.90% possible return. That works for me.

[Clave]

On 8/22/2019 9:38 AM, risky biz wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 11:48:12 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
>> On Wednesday, August 21, 2019 at 10:27:58 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
>>
>>> Here's an example. Last night I went over to M Resort for dinner. I had a $25 dinner at no charge. I then bet my free play on a single large bet and won nothing. Subsequently, I played various games, mostly video poker, for about 2 hours after which I left the M Resort with $226 more than I had when I arrived. What was my ROI? Was it positive or was it zero?
>>>
>>
> ~ More information needed to calculate ROI (just take my word for it). However, if you left with more than when you arrived, then it must have been positive, unless you were sucking cock for tips in the men's room.
>
> You're emanating unmistakable signals that you feel like a loser.
>
> When I gave you all the information needed you backed down and refused to do the calculation.
>
> BTW- after dealing with your spastic attack last night, I took a 5-7 minute drive to a local casino because I had some free play available. I made nothing on that but made $75 in 30 minutes, and came home. Not much but worth the short drive. I had to do some grocery shopping on the way home anyway.
>
>>>>> But I gave you some figures. So show us how you calculated your preferred metric of ROI (which you apparently believe that gamblers consider crucial) from the figures I gave you. You don't want to do that, do you?
>>>>
>>> ~ You were never asked about ROI. You were asked about EXPECTED ROI. Do you understand the difference? Apparently not.
>>>
>>> I do understand the difference and any grade-school child could understand the difference between the two. What's mysterious to me is why you are trying to portray it as some sort of sophisticated tool for evaluating a gambling opportunity. Do you think that's impressing anyone other than someone who has never gambled? Are you really naive enough about gambling that you think professional gamblers do 'expected ROI' calculations at the beginning of each year to decide if they are going to gamble in the coming year?
>>>
>>
>> No, it's not sophisticated. It's as basic as can be. If a game does not have a positive expected ROI, then it's not worth playing (unless you are placing a non-tangible monetary value on the "entertainment"). If it does have a positive expected ROI, then knowing what that number is is crucial in evaluating which game to choose to play or whether you should bother playing at all (opportunity cost).
>
> I've been keeping accurate records since November 2017 and have had only two losing months since then. Those both were due to the fact that I played video poker very little. You clearly are ignorant.
>
>>> Serious question- when you stayed at the 'D' Downtown last year what did you do? Walk around watching everyone else gambling but not doing so yourself because you thought you were smart enough to recognize that they were all games with an 'expected ROI' which was negative? I'm sure you didn't play any live poker.
>>>
>>
>> You're sure? You're "sure" about a lot of things that aren't true. lol That's all I did. That's all I ever do. I played poker at the GN and my wife played $5 single deck at the El Cortez, same as always.
>
> If you played poker you lost unless you were able to find a table with players who were all as ignorant as you. Then maybe you got lucky.
>
>>> I'm just wondering because when I go Downtown, which isn't often, I ALWAYS >leave with more money than I brought.
>>
>> Horseshit.
>
> Like I said- clueless. If only you knew how I'm laughing at your comments.

And then everybody applauded.

[VegasJerry]

How did you get the date wrong and forget the other games?

[risky biz]

Why did you archive that comment of mine, BillB? And don't shovel some bullshit that it was so you could use it in the future to embarrass me, which it doesn't. You squirreled away a comment made by a real gambler. I'd be flattered if you weren't such a world-class genius.🤣

[risky biz]

No, we aren't 'fulla shit'. You are. Stay that way.

[risky biz]

On Thursday, August 22, 2019 at 8:22:03 PM UTC-7, Mossingen wrote:

I don't even consider comps in my profit and loss and I'm profitable month in and month out doing it only part-time. If Paul was here in Las Vegas I have no doubt at all that he could make a good living gambling full-time.