Let me try this logic. I like to think that one is always playing
in the short term, as part of the long term, if the vp game and pay
schedule is the same.
Short term, or a session, can be one hand. Any additional hand
played wih same game and pay schedule is now part of a new measurable
short term session. Because of hand independence, it does not matter
if that hand is played a few seconds later at the same machine, or
years later, as long as it is the same game and the same pay
schedule. The second hand played, at any time in the future, is now
part of a two hand short term session. Or, because time has elapsed,
you can say that you have played two one hand sessions. It does not
matter how you defined the short term.
However, you have also played your long term whenever when you have
played your final hands in that game and with the same pay schedule.
Thus the long term is all hands played in your lifetime on that pay
schdule. The long term may be after one hand, two hands, or after
200 million hands of the same game and pay schedule.
I thing Cogno Scienti and Skip Hughes the same thing more
convincingly. So, Rich Bronstein, yes you are in control and playing
in what you call the short term and for the short term results.
However, you cannot avoid also playing in your long term at the same
time and contributing to your long term results. Why play a less
profitable pay schedule? Why play a less than optimum strategy? It
does not matter that you beleive you are not playing in the long
term! Pure luck aside, all you are doing is guaranting MOST LIKELY
LESS PROFITABLE short term AND long term results by playing lesser
pay schuldes and a less than optimal strategy. Because of hand
independence, you have not accomplished anything more than these two
facts!
ANYONE! Please correct me if I am wrong with this logic.
Bob