vpFREE2 Forums

nudge51@lvcm.com

#1

It amazes me that people who are exposed to the
truth about VP still clutch to these notions.

Jim Morgan

I'm certainly happy that someone on this board knows everything there is to know about VP. Problem is they never take into account the human factor. If a machine is in, what you think is, a losing streak, by all means move. Theoretically, the math says there should be no difference, but real life is not theoretical and is full of variables. If a machine makes you uncomfortable, move. There are lots of machines out there and it makes no sense to worry about what a particular machine is doing while you are playing. You are there to have fun and maybe get lucky.

A lot of people believe that the long run return of positive VP is over the persons lifetime. Others, including myself, believe it's over the lifetime of each particular machine. No one will ever prove it either way to anyone's satisfaction and neither side will budge from their position.

One this is certain, every player/machine will have streaks of winning and losing. It's all a matter of dropping that first coin in at the right millisecond.

Bob

#2

>It amazes me that people who are exposed to the
>truth about VP still clutch to these notions.
>
>Jim Morgan

Bob Sommer wrote:
I'm certainly happy that someone on this board knows everything there
is to know about VP. Problem is they never take into account the
human factor. If a machine is in, what you think is, a losing
streak, by all means move. Theoretically, the math says there should
be no difference, but real life is not theoretical and is full of
variables. If a machine makes you uncomfortable, move.

Bob, I don't think Jim was writing in the guise of being a
"know-it-all".

The fact is that to really have a handle on vp play there's a
tremendous amount of insight concerning play that has to be
assimilated. And, frankly, considerations of machine cycles,
temperatures (hot/cold), and when to add the fabric softener ... er,
sorry ... thought this was the P&G Helpful Hints group for a second ...

Let me try that again ...

Concerns over the chip cycle, streaks, what would have happened had
you held something different, etc. are all things that are static when
it comes to getting a firm hold on the critical aspects of play that
give you the greatest liklihood of success.

Now, I'm right in there with you when you suggest moving if you're
uncomfortable with a machine, or with anything else in the immediate
environment for that matter. However, a player should clear their
mind of the concept of a "streak", at least as it pertains to what
you're going to see from a machine in the hands to come. You're
starting fresh with every deal and someone who thinks otherwise is
placing themself at a disadvantage right out of the starting gate.

If you should change machines and immediately see a deluge of quads,
be confident that you were as likely to have hit the great run of
hands had you stayed put.

What I'm really trying to say here is that changing to another machine
because the one you're playing is "cold" has no adverse impact on your
play. However, the belief that you're likely moving to a better
machine is clutter that gets in the way of a player's ability to see
the game for what it is and play knowledgably.

- Harry

#3

A lot of people believe that the long run return of positive VP is over
the persons lifetime. Others, including myself, believe it's over the
lifetime of each particular machine. No one will ever prove it either
way to anyone's satisfaction and neither side will budge from their
position.

I'm inclined to agree that in the long run return lies with the machine
rather than the player, if only because it's the machine that does the
dealing and the player that does the reacting to the deal. But that
wouldn't alter the fact that jumping from machine to machine has no impact
on probablilities.

Also, from Harry:

If you should change machines and immediately see a deluge of quads,

be confident that you were as likely to have hit the great run of
hands had you stayed put.<

Using the term "likely" implies that similar results are "probable," and I'd
like to suggest that it might be better to think of it as "just as probable
prior to actual play," which emphasizes that while the likelihood is
similar before the fact, results can't be forecast or expected.

lb

#4

I worte

It amazes me that people who are exposed to the
truth about VP still clutch to these notions.

This was actually intended as a private message. I accidentally
put the address in the subject and so it went to the group.

I'm certainly happy that someone on this board knows everything there is
to know about VP.

Your logic is unsound. My statement did not in any way imply
a complete knowledge of VP. It did imply that certain ideas
are garbage and should be discarded as such.

Is it arrogant to say that 2 + 2 = 5 is incorrect? Is it
arrogant to say that those who believe 2 + 2 = 5 are misguided?
Is it arrogant to believe that those who have been shown why
2 + 2 = 4, yet still claim 2 + 2 = 5, are even more misguided
than those who simply did not konw better?

Problem is they never take into account the human factor.

What human factor? It's a f***ing computer! The dealt cards
are governed entirely by the pseudo-random numbers it generates.

If a machine is in, what you think is, a losing streak, by all
means move. Theoretically, the math says there should be no difference,
but real life is not theoretical and is full of variables.

Just what variables are you talking about? The random nature of the
deals from a video poker machine is not 'theoretical'. It is real.
The fact that the behavior of this real world device is completely
modeled by mathematics is different from most real world things, but
it is what it is, a device where reality and theory are identical.

If a machine
makes you uncomfortable, move. There are lots of machines out there and
it makes no sense to worry about what a particular machine is doing
while you are playing.

My point exactly. Save your worry for things that you can control and
that actually matter. A big part of life is learning to accept that which
you cannot control. In video poker, one CANNOT control the quality of the
cards you are dealt. Changing machines will get different cards. So will
going to take a dump. Neither action will control any of this in any
sort of meaningful way. Streaks come, streaks go. They end when they
end and not a second sooner. One cannot change this. Accepting this simple
fact will given one one less thing to worry about.

You are there to have fun and maybe get lucky.

Ok, but changing machines does nothing except perhaps between the
ears of the misguided. Moving machines hurts nothing, but it does
nothing.

A lot of people believe that the long run return of positive VP is over
the persons lifetime. Others, including myself, believe it's over the
lifetime of each particular machine. No one will ever prove it either
way to anyone's satisfaction and neither side will budge from their
position.

When this came up awhile ago, I knew something was wrong, but I
did not think about it much. Now that I am thinking about it
again, I see the resolution. Both viewpoints are correct! There
is nothing to argue. The view about a machine's long run gets
dangerously close to looking like an argument that a machine
will be more likely to hit when it has been cold and vice versa.
However, it is a perfectly valid long run.

The long run applies to ANY sufficiently large set of hands.
That could be viewed as all hands by a player, played by a machine,
a bank of machines, played between midnight and 11:06 AM in the
entire world, etc. All that matters is the NUMBER OF HANDS. Who
played them and what machine they were played on is irrelevent.
It just happens to be easiest to collect data for a single person
or a single machine. Of course, the data collected is meaningless
if it is used in an effort to give no information about future results.
A machine that has hit 100 royals in its first million hands is just
as likely to hit a royal today as one that has hit 2 royals in its
first million hands. Same goes for a player. Let me stop to add the
implicit disclaimer... This all assumes the machines are using an
algortihm that is designed to deal cards randomly. Obvioulsy all
bets are off if the game does not use a valid pseudo random number
generator to deal the cards.

One this is certain, every player/machine will have streaks of winning
and losing. It's all a matter of dropping that first coin in at the
right millisecond.

Huh? Or maybe I should say... So what? Since you don't seem to have
any idea when that correct millisecond will be, it certainly seems like
there is nothing useful to be extracted from this statement. Maybe it
means that every hand is random. We already knew that. In fact,
if that is what it means, you are making my case against moving.

QZ

#5

Quad Zilla wrote:

Problem is they never take into account the human factor.

What human factor? It's a f***ing computer! The dealt cards
are governed entirely by the pseudo-random numbers it generates

You obviously do not comprehend what I was saying and you proved it with the above statement. Yes, the VP machine is a computer, but unless you are another computer playing it, you are suppose to be human and you will NEVER take the human element out of this game mix unless you are completely devoid of any human emotions.

Most the people I know have normal emotions. If a .25 machine sucks down $100 in ten minutes, I'm moving and could care less if you sit down next, put in 5 quarters and hit a RF. Fact is, odds are I probably would not of hit it anyway and my move will, at the very least, give me a short break, emotional relief that I left a rotten machine, and MAYBE I'll do better on another. If I'm losing $100 every 10 minutes, I certainly could not do any worse by moving. Feeding the same machine one bill after another every ten minutes is not my idea of having a good time. Moving hurts nothing.

I know of one well known VP Pro that pounds (very hard) on the machines he's playing. He must think that will help in the deal and re-draw. Do I think it helps? No, but he must. Everyone is different in how they approach the game and right or wrong, unless you are a robot or cyborg, you will have feelings about the machine you are playing. You may live in a perfect world of just numbers, but I prefer to experience and live my life with a little more in it.

After losing $500, I would much rather leave a casino in a frame of mind that I have had a lot of fun, played the best I could, and enjoyed myself, instead of being in a foul mood and taking it out on everyone who comes near me. Of course if I win.......that's another story.

Bob

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#6

Quad Zilla wrote:

Problem is they never take into account the human factor.

What human factor? It's a f***ing computer! The dealt cards
are governed entirely by the pseudo-random numbers it generates

You obviously do not comprehend what I was saying and you proved it with the above statement. Yes, the VP machine is a >computer, but unless you are another computer playing it, you are suppose to be human and you will NEVER take the human >element out of this game mix unless you are completely devoid of any human emotions.

When it comes to success at video poker, that's the ideal. Having a
long-run viewpoint IS devoid of any human emotions. The ideal is
relevant. What's normal isn't.

Most the people I know have normal emotions. If a .25 machine sucks down $100 in ten minutes, I'm moving and could care less if >you sit down next, put in 5 quarters and hit a RF. Fact is, odds are I probably would not of hit it anyway and my move will, at the >very least, give me a short break, emotional relief that I left a rotten machine, and MAYBE I'll do better on another.

That's quite a "maybe." If, "maybe" you'll do better on another
machine (one with the exact same pay table, I assume) that you would
have done had you stayed at the same machine, then "maybe" 6/5 jacks
or better is a better game than full pay deuces wild. How would
anyone know?

If I'm losing $100 every 10 minutes, I certainly could not do any worse by moving. Feeding the same machine one bill after another every ten minutes is not my idea of having a good time. Moving hurts nothing.

No, not much, except being a waste of time and betrays that the player
has no foundation upon which to play in the first place. Considering
moving to not be a waste of time means that the player believes that
losing $100 every 10 minutes is significant evidence that the machine
is gaffed. After losing $100 every 10 minutes, you probably aren't
going to do any worse by continuing to play the same machine.

···

I know of one well known VP Pro that pounds (very hard) on the machines he's playing. He must think that will help in the deal and >re-draw. Do I think it helps? No, but he must. Everyone is different in how they approach the game and right or wrong, unless you >are a robot or cyborg, you will have feelings about the machine you are playing. You may live in a perfect world of just numbers, >but I prefer to experience and live my life with a little more in it.

After losing $500, I would much rather leave a casino in a frame of mind that I have had a lot of fun, played the best I could, and >enjoyed myself, instead of being in a foul mood and taking it out on everyone who comes near me. Of course if I win.......that's >another story.

Bob

#7

It truly amazes me how many "pro" VP players will move machines just because
they are not winning on the one they are on. The very backbone of these
people playing VP professionally is that they subscribe to the notion that
hands in VP are random. The Nevada gaming laws also require this to be so.
So their belief that they should change hands simply because the one they
are on is losing makes absolutely no "logical" sense at all. If it really
did matter, then all their subscribing principals about playing the game
professionally goes out the window.

Just another mystery in life for me.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#8

It truly amazes me how many "pro" VP players will move machines just because
they are not winning on the one they are on. The very backbone of these
people playing VP professionally is that they subscribe to the notion that
hands in VP are random. The Nevada gaming laws also require this to be so.
So their belief that they should change hands simply because the one they
are on is losing makes absolutely no "logical" sense at all. If it really
did matter, then all their subscribing principals about playing the game
professionally goes out the window.

Just another mystery in life for me.

I've always thought that subscribers to the "due-theory" were about as
numerous as subscribers to the "anti-due-theory." I'm surprised that
there aren't as many people advocating staying at a machine that has
been losing.

#9

Yes, that too! :slight_smile:

···

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Robertson [mailto:thomasrrobert…@…net]
Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2003 8:29 AM
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] changing machines

It truly amazes me how many "pro" VP players will move machines just

because

they are not winning on the one they are on. The very backbone of these
people playing VP professionally is that they subscribe to the notion that
hands in VP are random. The Nevada gaming laws also require this to be so.
So their belief that they should change machines simply because the one

they

are on is losing makes absolutely no "logical" sense at all. If it really
did matter, then all their subscribing principals about playing the game
professionally goes out the window.

Just another mystery in life for me.

I've always thought that subscribers to the "due-theory" were about as
numerous as subscribers to the "anti-due-theory." I'm surprised that
there aren't as many people advocating staying at a machine that has
been losing.

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=251812.3170658.4537139.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=17050657
32:HM/A=1564416/R=0/SIG=11ti81skc/*http:/www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=601647
97&partid=3170658>

<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=251812.3170658.4537139.1261774/D=egroupmai
l/S=:HM/A=1564416/rand=201487315>

vpFREE Links: http://tinyurl.com/a7ga

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#10

To me it seems, rather than change machines, it would be easier to
change stools.

Tom

···

On 3 Jun 2003 at 8:04, Randy C wrote:

It truly amazes me how many "pro" VP players will move machines just because
they are not winning on the one they are on. The very backbone of these
people playing VP professionally is that they subscribe to the notion that
hands in VP are random. The Nevada gaming laws also require this to be so.
So their belief that they should change hands simply because the one they
are on is losing makes absolutely no "logical" sense at all. If it really
did matter, then all their subscribing principals about playing the game
professionally goes out the window.

#11

It truly amazes me how many "pro" VP players will move machines

just because

they are not winning on the one they are on. The very backbone of

these

people playing VP professionally is that they subscribe to the

notion that

hands in VP are random. The Nevada gaming laws also require this to

be so.

So their belief that they should change hands simply because the

one they

are on is losing makes absolutely no "logical" sense at all. If it

really

did matter, then all their subscribing principals about playing the

game

professionally goes out the window.

Just another mystery in life for me.

It sure is. No matter how often this subject comes up and is
carefully explained, arguments continue.

Changing VP machines:

(1) is a matter of personal preference

(2) does not influence results in a predictable manner

Arguments to the contrary are based on faith and not science.

Kudos to QZ: for clearly and patiently explaining the science behind
VP AND for pointing out and correcting faulty reasoning. Pay
attention folks.

2-W

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Randy C" <randyc@u...> wrote:

#12

Bob Sommer <NL7HT@b...> wrote:

Most the people I know have normal emotions.

Some people think their own emotions are "normal," suggesting that
people who have different sorts of emotions are "abnormal." I feel
it's more wide-minded to just recognize that everyone's emotions are
different. I'd say that when you start labeling emotions as "normal"
or otherwise, it creates problems but doesn't create benefit.

If a .25 machine sucks down $100 in ten minutes, I'm moving and
could care less if you sit down next, put in 5 quarters and hit a
RF.

This is a different matter from emotions. For instance, two people
might both lose $100 in ten minutes, & one might be much more upset
than the other, because of different emotional makeup.

But let's assume that they both have the same emotions, both equally
upset. One person might *understand* that changing machines has no
effect on expected returns, while the other doesn't understand it.
The one who doesn't understand will change machines in an effort to
change his luck, while the other doesn't bother. It's wrong to
suggest that this has anything to do with emotions. It has to do with
whether or not one understand probability.

Then, maybe you have two people with the same emotions & the same
understanding of probability. After losing $100 in ten minutes, they
both know it doesn't matter whether or not they change machines. But
one of them finds it pacifies his mind, makes him feel better, to
take a break & walk to a new location (even though he understands it
won't improve his winning chances). The other one continues playing &
deals with his upset mind by re-focusing his efforts, or internally
singing a song, or repeating a mantra, or praying to Allah, or
through any of a million methods to pacify the mind, which are no
better or worse than switching machines. Except that since one can
continue to play video poker while praying or whatever, these methods
don't waste time the way that switching machines does.

So... sometimes, whether or not someone switches machines has nothing
to do with different emotions *or* with superior/inferior
understanding. It's about personal differences in dealing with stress.

Everyone is different in how they approach the game and right or
wrong, unless you are a robot or cyborg, you will have feelings
about the machine you are playing.

No robots or cyborgs follow this email list, so I assume we all have
feelings about winning & losing. The nature & magnitude of the
feelings may differ, but I see no good coming from claiming that your
own feelings are better or worse or more "normal" than anyone elses.

It's can be very difficult to see how one's emotions of the moment
have zero effect on the expected return from a video poker machine.
That's because in so much of life our emotions *do* give valuable
information. If you meet someone for the first time & get a feeling
in your stomach that they're trouble, it makes sense to follow that
feeling, because it's often possible to intuit things about people
that you can't explain intellectually.

The difference with video poker is that it's *not* possible to intuit
what a machine's short-term return will be. So the methods we use for
dealing with people (using both our intellect & our feelings to
determine how to relate to them) aren't appropriate. Dealing with a
random number generator, the intellect gives valuable information,
while emotions give no worthwhile information.

You may live in a perfect world of just numbers, but I prefer to
experience and live my life with a little more in it.

It's got nothing to do with "a perfect world," because we live in a
world where sometimes (e.g., dealing with people) emotions give
valuable information about future expectations, wile sometimes (e.g.,
dealing with inanimate objects like video poker machines) emotions
give no such information.

It appears that not everyone understands that emotions have zero
value in predicting the actions of a random number generator. I
personally don't see how this lack of understanding adds anything to
life. It certainly doesn't add anything to one's expected result from
playing video poker.

Stuart (RandomStu)
sresnick2@attbi.com
http://home.attbi.com/~sresnick2/mypage.htm