I recently had a playing session I dare anyone to claim honestly has done worse. At a local casino on the boulder strip w/aprrox 3-4hrs of play on 10/7 Db I somehow lost 2800 betting units. The worst part is I hit 6 quads, 4 of which were special (incld. a set of aces). Obviously no Royal or Srt.Flush. I always apply expert 10/7 strategy. This was a brutal experience and I wonder if anyone else has done that badly. I know there's no such thing as rigged machines or casinos are cheating us. However Im experiencing way more brutal lossing streaks the last few years, all the while coming up short of the givin game's e.v. The economy is putrid now w/no relief in sight. Could, just maybe, somthing strange is going on vis a vis the casinos 'tighing' up to recoup lost profit? Also is it true the 1% R.O.R bankroll for 10/7 db assuming no cb, mailers,ect is 45000$ for quaters? thanks for any feed back as Im aching to read how some of the brighter minds here respond.
Something strange
My copy of VPW says $46,336.36, if I inserted everything correctly.
..... bl
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "shortpaydan" <shortpaydan@...> wrote:
is it true the 1% R.O.R bankroll for 10/7 db assuming no cb, mailers,ect is 45000$ for quaters?
Singer seems to think there is something going on.
Hmmmm. Someone posted recently about getting an unusual number of quad Aces
while playing many hours of Bonus Poker. I thought it odd that no one
suggested that there was anything wrong with that machine.
I have a feeling that mathematical concepts are understood best only after
experiencing in real life the worst case scenario. Bad results are not
necessarily caused by "altered" machines. The math is ugly enough without
getting any "help."
···
On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Robert Levine <stuckinvegas@yahoo.com>wrote:
Singer seems to think there is something going on.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I know there's no such thing as rigged machines or casinos are cheating us.
That's a mantra, as with all mantras it needs to be repeated frequently, otherwise it loses its power (see Bhagavad Gita for details).
Technically, if you search the public record, there are documented cases of casinos cheating and rigged machines. But mantras override facts (so they say).
Also is it true the 1% R.O.R bankroll for 10/7 db assuming no cb, mailers,ect is 45000$ for quaters?
Sounds about right. Jazbo says the absolute Kelly limit is 16511 bets or $20,638.75 on five coin quarters. According to Kelly, without that minimum amount of bankroll, the gambler should walk away without placing a single bet, otherwise the results are self destructive even though the game itself is slightly positive.
Jazbo's link:
http://www.jazbo.com/videopoker/kelly.html
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "shortpaydan" <shortpaydan@...> wrote:
A slight technical error on my part. The absolute limit is one half Kelly. Continuing to bet once your bankroll has crossed under that threshold is counterproductive (leads to bankroll shrinkage, not bankroll growth). This is different than the standard claim that one should continue to bet until their bankroll is fully depleted as long as the gamble is positive. According to the Kelly Criterion, continuing to bet once your bankroll has crossed under one half Kelly leads to bankroll shrinkage.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cUNNKzj_Nc
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "nightoftheiguana2000" <nightoftheiguana2000@...> wrote:
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "shortpaydan" <shortpaydan@> wrote:
>I know there's no such thing as rigged machines or casinos are cheating us.That's a mantra, as with all mantras it needs to be repeated frequently, otherwise it loses its power (see Bhagavad Gita for details).
Technically, if you search the public record, there are documented cases of casinos cheating and rigged machines. But mantras override facts (so they say).
>Also is it true the 1% R.O.R bankroll for 10/7 db assuming no cb, mailers,ect is 45000$ for quaters?
Sounds about right. Jazbo says the absolute Kelly limit is 16511 bets or $20,638.75 on five coin quarters. According to Kelly, without that minimum amount of bankroll, the gambler should walk away without placing a single bet, otherwise the results are self destructive even though the game itself is slightly positive.
Jazbo's link:
http://www.jazbo.com/videopoker/kelly.html
> I have a feeling that mathematical concepts are understood best only after
experiencing in real life the worst case scenario. Bad results are not
necessarily caused by "altered" machines. The math is ugly enough without
getting any "help."Well put gmblnmn. I guess in the end its on me, I took a pot shot and missed. The game was slightly positive but 2800$ was, to paraphrase Mr. Dancer, was 'pitifully small' for 10/7 Db. For such a short session, I may have well shot dice or played pai gow. Thats why I suppose marginal to slightly positive games still flourish. Any suggestions what to play w/ my last 200$? Not playing and saving my money is not an option, 2800 of 3000 is already gone. Closing the barn door after 95% of the cattle have left is never an option, no matter how much 'positive marginal' games have taken from me.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, gmblnmn <nktalbrch@...> wrote:
"shortpaydan" <shortpaydan@> wrote:
I know there's no such thing as rigged machines or casinos are
cheating us.
"nightoftheiguana2000" <nightoftheiguana2000@...> wrote:
Technically, if you search the public record, there are
documented cases of casinos cheating and rigged machines.
But mantras override facts (so they say).
A likely explanation for belief in this mantra: though it's not
true that "there's no such thing as rigged machines," it's close
enough to the truth to work in practice in the wide majority
of cases.
In other words... there are documented cases of casinos rigging
machines. There are also documented cases of players having a
very bad session, and then either speculating that the machine
might have been rigged (or claiming it was probably/definitely
rigged).
The cases in which players claim casino cheating (with little
evidence) are much much much more numerous than the
documented cases of actual cheating. So when someone has a
bad session at a major casino, and then wonders if the cause
was a rigged machine, it's a heavy favorite that the machine
is not rigged.
A strained analogy: You visit a psychic, he/she says something
accurate about your personality or history, and you wonder if it's
the result of psychic powers. You can't legitimately claim "No one
has psychic powers," since that's unproven and improvable.
Still, it's a practical enough belief to say "No one has psychic
powers." Even if it turns out to be true that some people with
such powers exist, there's no doubt that their numbers are very
very small, IN COMPARISON TO those who superficially seem to have
special powers but really don't.
Stuart
http://stuart-randomthoughts.blogspot.com/2008/02/difference-between-church-and-casino.html
I heard someone say they will believe VP is rigged when they see a 100-play FPDW machine. 
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Stuart" <sresnick2@...> wrote:
"shortpaydan" <shortpaydan@> wrote:
>I know there's no such thing as rigged machines or casinos are
> cheating us."nightoftheiguana2000" <nightoftheiguana2000@> wrote:
> Technically, if you search the public record, there are
> documented cases of casinos cheating and rigged machines.
> But mantras override facts (so they say).A likely explanation for belief in this mantra: though it's not
true that "there's no such thing as rigged machines," it's close
enough to the truth to work in practice in the wide majority
of cases.In other words... there are documented cases of casinos rigging
machines. There are also documented cases of players having a
very bad session, and then either speculating that the machine
might have been rigged (or claiming it was probably/definitely
rigged).The cases in which players claim casino cheating (with little
evidence) are much much much more numerous than the
documented cases of actual cheating. So when someone has a
bad session at a major casino, and then wonders if the cause
was a rigged machine, it's a heavy favorite that the machine
is not rigged.A strained analogy: You visit a psychic, he/she says something
accurate about your personality or history, and you wonder if it's
the result of psychic powers. You can't legitimately claim "No one
has psychic powers," since that's unproven and improvable.Still, it's a practical enough belief to say "No one has psychic
powers." Even if it turns out to be true that some people with
such powers exist, there's no doubt that their numbers are very
very small, IN COMPARISON TO those who superficially seem to have
special powers but really don't.Stuart
http://stuart-randomthoughts.blogspot.com/2008/02/difference-between-church-and-casino.html
Rob Singer is doing a study on having 4 to a flush or straight and having the same card that you threw away come back in another suit. For example, you have the 2-3-4-5-9h, and throw away the 9h and get back the 9d.
He's showing that this keeps happening way out of the normal percentages that it should be happening. If you go to his website vptruth.com, you'll see the results for yourself. Anything that is out of the realm of "randomness" must be considered rigged.
So let me get this right. They don't "rig" them so they will pay off with less royals, but they instead rig them so they will give you a 9 of diamonds just to annoy you. Is that correct?
Oh brother! Sheesh! This guy Singer sounds like he's got some issues. Sounds like "studying" what Singer has to say would really be a waste of one's time.
-BB
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Levine" <stuckinvegas@...> wrote:
Rob Singer is doing a study on having 4 to a flush or straight and having the same card that you threw away come back in another suit. For example, you have the 2-3-4-5-9h, and throw away the 9h and get back the 9d.
He's showing that this keeps happening way out of the normal percentages that it should be happening. If you go to his website vptruth.com, you'll see the results for yourself. Anything that is out of the realm of "randomness" must be considered rigged.
1 - I'm highly disappointed in myself for replying to a Singer thread, but I
must interject
2 - The words "Singer" and "study" should never be used in the same
sentence. It's like using "Britney Spears" and "High IQ" in the same
sentence - they just don't go together in any way, shape or form
3 - His current "study" is based on 3500 hands like this and he's "2/3 of
the way through". Which means that he has a woefully inadequate sample size
to come up with any solid evidence. Any conclusions that he might draw are
going to be anecdotal, much like every other conclusion he has had.
D
···
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Robert Levine <stuckinvegas@yahoo.com>wrote:
Rob Singer is doing a study on having 4 to a flush or straight and having
the same card that you threw away come back in another suit. For example,
you have the 2-3-4-5-9h, and throw away the 9h and get back the 9d.He's showing that this keeps happening way out of the normal percentages
that it should be happening. If you go to his website vptruth.com, you'll
see the results for yourself. Anything that is out of the realm of
"randomness" must be considered rigged.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I take it there must be some history about him on this bulletin board that I have not checked out yet. I guess it's my responsibility to see what that is. I do know that I have read some stuff by him in the past, but I don't remember where or when. It was complete garbage, and I don't mean to sound insulting. But that's what it was.
-BB
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Dennis Salguero <salguero@...> wrote:
1 - I'm highly disappointed in myself for replying to a Singer thread, but I
must interject2 - The words "Singer" and "study" should never be used in the same
sentence. It's like using "Britney Spears" and "High IQ" in the same
sentence - they just don't go together in any way, shape or form3 - His current "study" is based on 3500 hands like this and he's "2/3 of
the way through". Which means that he has a woefully inadequate sample size
to come up with any solid evidence. Any conclusions that he might draw are
going to be anecdotal, much like every other conclusion he has had.D
the point is are the machines random?
if they are not, then everything Dancer writes is moot.
Singer's one study is in and of itself not relevent, true random dealing is!
And the other person who questioned Singer, go to his site and read and drae your own conclusions.
Is not "studying" all sides true learning.
···
----- Original Message -----
From: bobbartop
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 12:43 PM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Something strange
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Levine" <stuckinvegas@...> wrote:
>
> Rob Singer is doing a study on having 4 to a flush or straight and having the same card that you threw away come back in another suit. For example, you have the 2-3-4-5-9h, and throw away the 9h and get back the 9d.
>
> He's showing that this keeps happening way out of the normal percentages that it should be happening. If you go to his website vptruth.com, you'll see the results for yourself. Anything that is out of the realm of "randomness" must be considered rigged.
>
So let me get this right. They don't "rig" them so they will pay off with less royals, but they instead rig them so they will give you a 9 of diamonds just to annoy you. Is that correct?
Oh brother! Sheesh! This guy Singer sounds like he's got some issues. Sounds like "studying" what Singer has to say would really be a waste of one's time.
-BB
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098 - Release Date: 05/05/09 08:05:00
----------
----------
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098 - Release Date: 05/05/09 08:05:00
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
WHAT IF THE MACHINES ARE NOT RANDOM?
JUST THINK ABOUT THE RAMIFICATIONS TO ALL OF OUR VIEWS OF THE VP WORLD.
···
----- Original Message -----
From: bobbartop
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 1:04 PM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Something strange
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Dennis Salguero <salguero@...> wrote:
>
> 1 - I'm highly disappointed in myself for replying to a Singer thread, but I
> must interject
>
> 2 - The words "Singer" and "study" should never be used in the same
> sentence. It's like using "Britney Spears" and "High IQ" in the same
> sentence - they just don't go together in any way, shape or form
>
> 3 - His current "study" is based on 3500 hands like this and he's "2/3 of
> the way through". Which means that he has a woefully inadequate sample size
> to come up with any solid evidence. Any conclusions that he might draw are
> going to be anecdotal, much like every other conclusion he has had.
>
> D
>
I take it there must be some history about him on this bulletin board that I have not checked out yet. I guess it's my responsibility to see what that is. I do know that I have read some stuff by him in the past, but I don't remember where or when. It was complete garbage, and I don't mean to sound insulting. But that's what it was.
-BB
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098 - Release Date: 05/05/09 08:05:00
----------
----------
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098 - Release Date: 05/05/09 08:05:00
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Tell me about fairy godmother what hands out money in the casinos. What did Steve Wynn say? He owns the casinos.
Vet.
···
________________________________
From: Video Poker <videopoker@twcny.rr.com>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 7, 2009 5:04:22 PM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: Something strange
WHAT IF THE MACHINES ARE NOT RANDOM?
JUST THINK ABOUT THE RAMIFICATIONS TO ALL OF OUR VIEWS OF THE VP WORLD.
----- Original Message -----
From: bobbartop
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups. com
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 1:04 PM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Something strange
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups. com, Dennis Salguero <salguero@.. .> wrote:
1 - I'm highly disappointed in myself for replying to a Singer thread, but I
must interject2 - The words "Singer" and "study" should never be used in the same
sentence. It's like using "Britney Spears" and "High IQ" in the same
sentence - they just don't go together in any way, shape or form3 - His current "study" is based on 3500 hands like this and he's "2/3 of
the way through". Which means that he has a woefully inadequate sample size
to come up with any solid evidence. Any conclusions that he might draw are
going to be anecdotal, much like every other conclusion he has had.D
I take it there must be some history about him on this bulletin board that I have not checked out yet. I guess it's my responsibility to see what that is. I do know that I have read some stuff by him in the past, but I don't remember where or when. It was complete garbage, and I don't mean to sound insulting. But that's what it was.
-BB
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098 - Release Date: 05/05/09 08:05:00
----------
----------
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098 - Release Date: 05/05/09 08:05:00
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
The point is what if the sun explodes tonight and does not rise tomorrow.
The point is what if there are gremlins in the machine that don't like you and force the machine to not be random ONLY FOR YOU.
The point is what if everyone except me was in on the Kennedy assassination?
The point is what if you have true faith and KNOW the machines are not random even without any objective evidence?
···
At 02:00 PM 5/7/2009, you wrote:
the point is are the machines random?
if they are not, then everything Dancer writes is moot.
Singer's one study is in and of itself not relevent, true random dealing is!And the other person who questioned Singer, go to his site and read and drae your own conclusions.
Is not "studying" all sides true learning.----- Original Message -----
From: bobbartop
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 12:43 PM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Something strange--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Levine" <stuckinvegas@...> wrote:
>
> Rob Singer is doing a study on having 4 to a flush or straight and having the same card that you threw away come back in another suit. For example, you have the 2-3-4-5-9h, and throw away the 9h and get back the 9d.
>
> He's showing that this keeps happening way out of the normal percentages that it should be happening. If you go to his website vptruth.com, you'll see the results for yourself. Anything that is out of the realm of "randomness" must be considered rigged.
>So let me get this right. They don't "rig" them so they will pay off with less royals, but they instead rig them so they will give you a 9 of diamonds just to annoy you. Is that correct?
Oh brother! Sheesh! This guy Singer sounds like he's got some issues. Sounds like "studying" what Singer has to say would really be a waste of one's time.
-BB
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098 - Release Date: 05/05/09 08:05:00----------
----------
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098 - Release Date: 05/05/09 08:05:00[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
Yahoo! Groups Links
"DOUBT IS NOT A VERY AGREEABLE STATUS,
BUT CERTAINTY IS A RIDUCULOUS ONE"
···
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Coleman
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 5:51 PM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: Something strange
The point is what if the sun explodes tonight and does not rise tomorrow.
The point is what if there are gremlins in the machine that don't
like you and force the machine to not be random ONLY FOR YOU.
The point is what if everyone except me was in on the Kennedy assassination?
The point is what if you have true faith and KNOW the machines are
not random even without any objective evidence?
At 02:00 PM 5/7/2009, you wrote:
>the point is are the machines random?
>if they are not, then everything Dancer writes is moot.
>Singer's one study is in and of itself not relevent, true random dealing is!
>
>And the other person who questioned Singer, go to his site and read
>and drae your own conclusions.
>Is not "studying" all sides true learning.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: bobbartop
> To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 12:43 PM
> Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Something strange
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Levine" <stuckinvegas@...> wrote:
> >
> > Rob Singer is doing a study on having 4 to a flush or straight
> and having the same card that you threw away come back in another
> suit. For example, you have the 2-3-4-5-9h, and throw away the 9h
> and get back the 9d.
> >
> > He's showing that this keeps happening way out of the normal
> percentages that it should be happening. If you go to his website
> vptruth.com, you'll see the results for yourself. Anything that is
> out of the realm of "randomness" must be considered rigged.
> >
>
> So let me get this right. They don't "rig" them so they will pay
> off with less royals, but they instead rig them so they will give
> you a 9 of diamonds just to annoy you. Is that correct?
>
> Oh brother! Sheesh! This guy Singer sounds like he's got some
> issues. Sounds like "studying" what Singer has to say would really
> be a waste of one's time.
>
> -BB
>
>
>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098 - Release Date:
> 05/05/09 08:05:00
>
> ----------
>
>
> ----------
>
>
>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098 - Release Date:
>05/05/09 08:05:00
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098 - Release Date: 05/05/09 08:05:00
----------
----------
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098 - Release Date: 05/05/09 08:05:00
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Umm, spell checkers are good too.......
···
--- Video Poker <videopoker@twcny.rr.com> wrote:
"DOUBT IS NOT A VERY AGREEABLE STATUS,
BUT CERTAINTY IS A RIDUCULOUS ONE"----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Coleman
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 5:51 PM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: Something strangeThe point is what if the sun explodes tonight and
does not rise tomorrow.The point is what if there are gremlins in the
machine that don't
like you and force the machine to not be random
ONLY FOR YOU.The point is what if everyone except me was in on
the Kennedy assassination?The point is what if you have true faith and KNOW
the machines are
not random even without any objective evidence?At 02:00 PM 5/7/2009, you wrote:
>the point is are the machines random?
>if they are not, then everything Dancer writes is
moot.
>Singer's one study is in and of itself not
relevent, true random dealing is!
>
>And the other person who questioned Singer, go to
his site and read
>and drae your own conclusions.
>Is not "studying" all sides true learning.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: bobbartop
> To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 12:43 PM
> Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Something strange
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Levine"
<stuckinvegas@...> wrote:
> >
> > Rob Singer is doing a study on having 4 to a
flush or straight
> and having the same card that you threw away
come back in another
> suit. For example, you have the 2-3-4-5-9h, and
throw away the 9h
> and get back the 9d.
> >
> > He's showing that this keeps happening way out
of the normal
> percentages that it should be happening. If you
go to his website
> vptruth.com, you'll see the results for
yourself. Anything that is
> out of the realm of "randomness" must be
considered rigged.
> >
>
> So let me get this right. They don't "rig" them
so they will pay
> off with less royals, but they instead rig them
so they will give
> you a 9 of diamonds just to annoy you. Is that
correct?
>
> Oh brother! Sheesh! This guy Singer sounds like
he's got some
> issues. Sounds like "studying" what Singer has
to say would really
> be a waste of one's time.
>
> -BB
>
>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database:
270.12.18/2098 - Release Date:
> 05/05/09 08:05:00
>
> ----------
>
>
> ----------
>
>
>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098
- Release Date:
>05/05/09 08:05:00
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]
>
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>vpFREE Links:
http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098
- Release Date: 05/05/09 08:05:00----------
----------
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098 -
Release Date: 05/05/09 08:05:00[Non-text portions of this message have been
removed]------------------------------------
vpFREE Links:
http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htmYahoo! Groups Links
I believe there is a psychological effect going on here.
When I throw away, say a nine of hearts, and get a nine in its place, I *notice* it. Especially if the color is the same (diamonds in this case). Otherwise, I don't notice it. Over some time, the "notices" pile up in the back of my mind. So I get suspicious.
About randomness:
The entire theoretical structure of the computations of all those payoffs, and all those "hold/discard" hierarchy tables, is predicated on "any card is as likely as any other card" (to within some statistical criterion).
It is true that algorithmic random number generators have their faults. There is a large body of study on this issue, mostly by physics people who are very critical of the "purity" of the methods they use to computer-simulate complicated physical processes.
For purposes of use in a video poker machine, however, the departure from "true randomness" (however defined) of the internal random number generator (RNG), is not worth worrying about.
Also, the casino does not have to go to the trouble of biasing the RNGs. Just reducing the payout table suffices. Like replacing a "6/9" J-or-B with a "5/8".
That said, I cannot help but wonder about all those Indian casinos outside of Nevada. It is a trivial programming job to bias the RNG in a machine.
This is related to an interesting design question: If a machine pays off poorly, customers will learn to avoid it. On the other hand, if it pays off too well, the casino will not make as much money. Somewhere, there is an optimum point.
A related design question is: Should the payouts be large and rare, or small and frequent? The California Lottery is currently debating this question.
- - Norma Posy
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Video Poker" <videopoker@...> wrote:
the point is are the machines random?
if they are not, then everything Dancer writes is moot.
Singer's one study is in and of itself not relevent, true random dealing is!And the other person who questioned Singer, go to his site and read and drae your own conclusions.
Is not "studying" all sides true learning.----- Original Message -----
From: bobbartop
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 12:43 PM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Something strange--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Levine" <stuckinvegas@> wrote:
>
> Rob Singer is doing a study on having 4 to a flush or straight and having the same card that you threw away come back in another suit. For example, you have the 2-3-4-5-9h, and throw away the 9h and get back the 9d.
>
> He's showing that this keeps happening way out of the normal percentages that it should be happening. If you go to his website vptruth.com, you'll see the results for yourself. Anything that is out of the realm of "randomness" must be considered rigged.
>So let me get this right. They don't "rig" them so they will pay off with less royals, but they instead rig them so they will give you a 9 of diamonds just to annoy you. Is that correct?
Oh brother! Sheesh! This guy Singer sounds like he's got some issues. Sounds like "studying" what Singer has to say would really be a waste of one's time.
-BB
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098 - Release Date: 05/05/09 08:05:00----------
----------
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.12.18/2098 - Release Date: 05/05/09 08:05:00[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]