Rob, I can see where, from your perspective, you might have been led to conclude Bob had a losing trip.
After all, it would seem that Bob was doing a reverse take on an old medical joke: "The operation was a failure; the patient is better."
Bob's article stands out as an example of how "day to day results" are a minor focus in his play. He's all about "EV", and the interesting aspect to him in this play was how Riviera diminished a good expectation.
By contrast, Rob, when you played actively, a loss in a given day was a keen disappointment. When executed as you advocate, your strategy yields up a win most days.
You know that I have a certain respect for your strategy (even if I don't think it's necessarily a "winning" one overall). I'm first to admit that the methodology of "advantage play" isn't satisfying to all, and that for yourself and many others, play along the lines you recommend yields greater fulfillment.
That said, a competent "advantage player" can reliably look to reap that advantage over manageable time, provided that they keep their eye on playing at a sufficiently positive EV. To have a casino "pull the rug" out from under that expectation on a trip is a key frustration.
- H.
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rob.singer1111@yahoo.com" wrote:
That's good to know, because everywhere I've seen where that article has been discussed--as well as my own interpretation--was that readers understood things didn't work out so well. Even the Wizard had posted on his forum recently that things weren't going so well lately, so maybe this windfall came at the right time. But of course it doesn't matter one way or the other because as Shack says, "It's not whether you win or lose; it's if it was a good bet".
----- Reply message -----
From: "Bob Dancer"
To: "vpfree@yahoogroups.com"
Subject: [vpFREE] Bob Dancer's LV Advisor Column - 8 JAN 2013
Date: Thu, Jan 10, 2013 6:09 pm
Not that it matters, of course, and I don't think I mentioned it in the article, but both Shack and I ended up ahead on this play.
Bob