I understand the long term implications. My point was that by not
worrying about it, I won $16,000. It would not have been any more
or
less if the machines were 100% or 98%.
It would, of course, have been more. For example, you would have
made 5 credits more per FH that you hit if you had chosen an 8/5 over
a 7/5 machine. Let's say you played an hour and hit ten --5 at $1
level and 5 at $2. That machine choice just cost you $75 for that
hour. The royals would have been the same on most machines. As a
person who believes only in short term gains it is interesting that
you should fixate on the extremely infrequent hand to make a
justification for your short term system rather than the hand that is
seen multiple times during every short term session.
I don't believe in long term because I can't sit at a machine and
grind things out for 2000 hours. Each time I sit down is a new
short
term session.
Your math is correct IF one believes in long term. I don't believe
that you can add up the sessions and have them become just one long
term ratio. If I have unlimited resources, unlimited time and a
large number of machines, then long term works because it can
happen
in just a few days.
I can add up my sessions. If it's hard I use a calculator;-) I
suspect the casino adds up my sessions as well. They are big fans of
the "long term" return. Congrats on the royals! I always enjoy a
good gambling story.
Chandler
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Bronstein" <rick@...> wrote: