In a message dated 2/8/2003 5:03:34 AM Pacific Standard Time,
jaycee5353@aol.com writes:
In a message dated 2/7/2003 6:50:05 PM Central Standard Time,
BJayGold@aol.com writes:> Increasing the variance makes the probability of very extreme
> >results more likely. The impact on this situation is simply
> >to increase the number of hands one must play to be very sure of
> >being ahead. As an extreme case, a game like a lottery with a
> >high jackpot might take trillions of games to become 'certain'
> >of showing a profit.
>
Actually, I did not write this. I was quoting from Quadzilla's post. But I
completely agree with it.
Several years ago when I first discovered VP after casino's came to my home
town, I was playing a progressive opportunity next to a traveling pro. He
was
here in my town to take advantage of a casino mistake and stayed for
several
months. I asked him many questions and learned that I had a lot to learn.
When I asked him what the secret was to winning at VP he simply said " PLAY
A
LOT OF ****ING HANDS", I did not understand him then but I do now.
A good lesson. The more hands you play, the more you can "expect" to win
(positive games played accurately). But anything fewer than millions of hands
is truly gambling, in the sense that you have a quite large risk of losing,
cash back and all. Most people will never play that many hands in their
lifetime, so must accept the very real possibility that they will end up a
net loser, even playing the best games with near-perfect strategy.
Brian
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]