vpFREE2 Forums

What is "Long Term"?

#1

What I would like to know is:

If, 1) "....the expected value is .9954...."; and 2) "....it is impossible
to get that value after playing one hand, or ten hands or 100 hands...."
then at what point (how many hands) is it *possible* to get that EV? In
other words, what is "long term?" I would imagine it is many more hands
than I will ever play in my lifetime.

If the number of hands needed to reach "long term" is greater than the
number of hands I will ever play in my lifetime, doesn't that diminish the
relevancy of EV?

But, if "long term" is something that can be reached in my lifetime, how
many hands will I need to play?

···

On 3/20/06, Zaroff, John <John.G.Zaroff@delphi.com> wrote:

Rick Bronstein, talking about short pay games and long term/short
term wrote .....
>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.

I disagree with the first sentence. It doesn't matter if you play the
machine for 2000 hours or not. There is a long
term expected value for the game you are playing. I do agree with the
second sentence.

>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.

Whether you belief it or not doesn't determine whether something is true
or not. As far as adding up
sessions, what are really doing is adding up a whole lot of 1 hand
'sessions'. For each 'session' ( in 9/6
JOB) the Expected value of the hand is .9954 times the amount bet. I am
using expected value to mean
average value. Maybe the term expected value is what is confusing. Even
though the expected value is .9954,
it is impossible to get that value after playing one hand, or ten hands or
100 hands. If we take the value to
be exactly .9954 and we are betting $1.25 per hand, we have to play a
whole lot of hands before we can be
at the actual expected value. We can be close to the expected value after
1 hand if we get a high pair. But to
at exactly the expected is very difficult to do. The more hands you play,
the more likely you are to be close to
the expected value expressed as a percentage of coin in.

John Zaroff
Delphi Electronics and Safety
313-996-3682 (w)
313-378-2987 ( Cell)
3133782987@vtext.com ( text page)

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

#2

Read the thread on N0, or check the FAQ

What I would like to know is:

If, 1) "....the expected value is .9954...."; and 2) "....it is

impossible

to get that value after playing one hand, or ten hands or 100 hands...."
then at what point (how many hands) is it *possible* to get that EV? In
other words, what is "long term?" I would imagine it is many more hands
than I will ever play in my lifetime.

If the number of hands needed to reach "long term" is greater than the
number of hands I will ever play in my lifetime, doesn't that

diminish the

relevancy of EV?

But, if "long term" is something that can be reached in my lifetime, how
many hands will I need to play?

>
> Rick Bronstein, talking about short pay games and long term/short
> term wrote .....
> >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.
>
> I disagree with the first sentence. It doesn't matter if you play the
> machine for 2000 hours or not. There is a long
> term expected value for the game you are playing. I do agree with the
> second sentence.
>
> >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.
>
> Whether you belief it or not doesn't determine whether something

is true

> or not. As far as adding up
> sessions, what are really doing is adding up a whole lot of 1 hand
> 'sessions'. For each 'session' ( in 9/6
> JOB) the Expected value of the hand is .9954 times the amount bet.

I am

> using expected value to mean
> average value. Maybe the term expected value is what is

confusing. Even

> though the expected value is .9954,
> it is impossible to get that value after playing one hand, or ten

hands or

> 100 hands. If we take the value to
> be exactly .9954 and we are betting $1.25 per hand, we have to play a
> whole lot of hands before we can be
> at the actual expected value. We can be close to the expected

value after

> 1 hand if we get a high pair. But to
> at exactly the expected is very difficult to do. The more hands

you play,

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Curtis Rich" <LGTVegas@...> wrote:

On 3/20/06, Zaroff, John <John.G.Zaroff@...> wrote:
> the more likely you are to be close to
> the expected value expressed as a percentage of coin in.
>
> John Zaroff
> Delphi Electronics and Safety
> 313-996-3682 (w)
> 313-378-2987 ( Cell)
> 3133782987@... ( text page)

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

#3

Good luck with this one Curtis. I have never been given a semi satisfactory answer to the question you posed. I think that no one can truly define "long term" as it relates to vp . It doesn't seem to be definable in a measurement of time nor in a number of hands . Yet, it is a term that has a lot riding on it for many players.
  
  Take care,
  
  Nita

Curtis Rich <LGTVegas@gmail.com> wrote: What I would like to know is:
  
  If, 1) "....the expected value is .9954...."; and 2) "....it is impossible
  to get that value after playing one hand, or ten hands or 100 hands...."
  then at what point (how many hands) is it *possible* to get that EV? In
  other words, what is "long term?" I would imagine it is many more hands
  than I will ever play in my lifetime.
  
  If the number of hands needed to reach "long term" is greater than the
  number of hands I will ever play in my lifetime, doesn't that diminish the
  relevancy of EV?
  
  But, if "long term" is something that can be reached in my lifetime, how
  many hands will I need to play?

···

On 3/20/06, Zaroff, John <John.G.Zaroff@delphi.com> wrote:
  >
  > Rick Bronstein, talking about short pay games and long term/short
  > term wrote .....
  > >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.
  >
  > I disagree with the first sentence. It doesn't matter if you play the
  > machine for 2000 hours or not. There is a long
  > term expected value for the game you are playing. I do agree with the
  > second sentence.
  >
  > >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.
  >
  > Whether you belief it or not doesn't determine whether something is true
  > or not. As far as adding up
  > sessions, what are really doing is adding up a whole lot of 1 hand
  > 'sessions'. For each 'session' ( in 9/6
  > JOB) the Expected value of the hand is .9954 times the amount bet. I am
  > using expected value to mean
  > average value. Maybe the term expected value is what is confusing. Even
  > though the expected value is .9954,
  > it is impossible to get that value after playing one hand, or ten hands or
  > 100 hands. If we take the value to
  > be exactly .9954 and we are betting $1.25 per hand, we have to play a
  > whole lot of hands before we can be
  > at the actual expected value. We can be close to the expected value after
  > 1 hand if we get a high pair. But to
  > at exactly the expected is very difficult to do. The more hands you play,
  > the more likely you are to be close to
  > the expected value expressed as a percentage of coin in.
  >
  > John Zaroff
  > Delphi Electronics and Safety
  > 313-996-3682 (w)
  > 313-378-2987 ( Cell)
  > 3133782987@vtext.com ( text page)
  
  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  
    vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm
  
          SPONSORED LINKS
                                                        Online gambling Outdoor recreation Recreation software Gambling
        
---------------------------------
    YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
  
    Visit your group "vpFREE" on the web.
     
    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
vpFREE-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
     
    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
  
---------------------------------
  
---------------------------------
Brings words and photos together (easily) with
PhotoMail - it's free and works with Yahoo! Mail.

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

#4

<<I think that no one can truly define "long term" as it relates to vp .
It doesn't seem to be definable in a measurement of time nor in a number
of hands . Yet, it is a term that has a lot riding on it for many
players. >>

Very good point. There is really no such thing as "long term." There is only
"term." In other words, every stretch of hands played carries with it a
probability-distribution function exactly predicting the likelihood of being
up or down any particular amount. The longer the stretch, the less likely it
is to be way off the mean (expectation).

On the other hand, for every single stretch of hands played on a full-pay
machine, you will be at or ahead of where you would have been had you had
the same hands on a short-pay machine.

Cogno

#5

Since I have no idea what "NO" means, I have been ignoring that thread. Per
nightoftheiguana2000's suggestion, I looked for "NO" in the vpFREE glossary
- located at http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Gloss.htm. But, there is no
listing for "NO." Also, there is no mention of "NO" in the vpFREE FAQ page
- located at http://members.cox.net/vpfree/FAQ.htm . So, I still don't know
what "NO" means!

But, I did find the entry for "long term" in the vpFREE FAQ page. I find
it VERY interesting. In fact, reading this one FAQ entry has completely
changed my view of video poker. According to vpFREE, the (vague) definition
is: "Theoretically speaking, the long term is forever. For video poker
purposes, the long term is when you have played a lot of hands (several
million at a minimum) and actual results are about the same as expected
results. TomSki calculates (with a 95% confidence factor) that the actual
results for 10/7 DB, played with perfect strategy, should be within 1.0% of
expected results after 1,085,465 hands, and within 0.1% after 108,546,482
hands."

Here is what I find very Interesting: If you use the above definition, the
"long term" is over TWENTY YEARS if you are playing non-stop 24 hours a day
(at 600 hand per hour). It's probably a few years shorter for some of you
who play much faster than I. And, that's with a "with a 95% confidence
factor!" So, it seems to me (if my calculation above is correct), I
will never reach "long term" in my lifetime. And, hence, I will NEVER reach
the expected EV for any game.

My view of video poker that has changed is: Short term wins & losses are now
much more important to me than the long term EV.

Thanks for pointing this out for me, nightoftheiguana2000. I would never
have read that FAQ page, if you hadn't suggested it.

Curtis

···

On 3/20/06, nightoftheiguana2000 <nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com> wrote:

Read the thread on N0, or check the FAQ

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com , "Curtis Rich" <LGTVegas@...> wrote:
>
> What I would like to know is:
>
> If, 1) "....the expected value is .9954...."; and 2) "....it is
impossible
> to get that value after playing one hand, or ten hands or 100 hands...."

> then at what point (how many hands) is it *possible* to get that EV? In
> other words, what is "long term?" I would imagine it is many more hands
> than I will ever play in my lifetime.
>
> If the number of hands needed to reach "long term" is greater than the
> number of hands I will ever play in my lifetime, doesn't that
diminish the
> relevancy of EV?
>
> But, if "long term" is something that can be reached in my lifetime, how

> many hands will I need to play?
>
>
> On 3/20/06, Zaroff, John <John.G.Zaroff@...> wrote:
> > Rick Bronstein, talking about short pay games and long term/short
> > term wrote .....
> > >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.
> >
> > I disagree with the first sentence. It doesn't matter if you play the

> > machine for 2000 hours or not. There is a long
> > term expected value for the game you are playing. I do agree with the
> > second sentence.
> >
> > >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.
> >
> > Whether you belief it or not doesn't determine whether something
is true
> > or not. As far as adding up
> > sessions, what are really doing is adding up a whole lot of 1 hand
> > 'sessions'. For each 'session' ( in 9/6
> > JOB) the Expected value of the hand is .9954 times the amount bet.
I am
> > using expected value to mean
> > average value. Maybe the term expected value is what is
confusing. Even
> > though the expected value is .9954,
> > it is impossible to get that value after playing one hand, or ten
hands or
> > 100 hands. If we take the value to
> > be exactly .9954 and we are betting $1.25 per hand, we have to play a
> > whole lot of hands before we can be
> > at the actual expected value. We can be close to the expected
value after
> > 1 hand if we get a high pair. But to
> > at exactly the expected is very difficult to do. The more hands
you play,
> > the more likely you are to be close to
> > the expected value expressed as a percentage of coin in.
> >
> > John Zaroff
> > Delphi Electronics and Safety
> > 313-996-3682 (w)
> > 313-378-2987 ( Cell)
> > 3133782987@... ( text page)

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

#6

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Cogno Scienti" <cognoscienti@...>
wrote:

<<I think that no one can truly define "long term" as it relates

to vp .

It doesn't seem to be definable in a measurement of time nor in a

number

of hands . Yet, it is a term that has a lot riding on it for many
players. >>

Very good point. There is really no such thing as "long term."

There is only

"term." In other words, every stretch of hands played carries with

it a

probability-distribution function exactly predicting the likelihood

of being

up or down any particular amount. The longer the stretch, the less

likely it

is to be way off the mean (expectation).

On the other hand, for every single stretch of hands played on a

full-pay

machine, you will be at or ahead of where you would have been had

you had

the same hands on a short-pay machine.

Cogno
Unless you happen to be playing a 8/5 ddb instead of 9/6 JOb and

you catch quad aces w/low kicker.
Then you take your short term winnings on your short pay machine and
do long term at the bar...Now your EV (exceptional Vodka) becomes
Absolute.

···
#7

long term is when you add up all your 'short term' wins and losses.
The more short term sessions you play, the closer you get to long
term.

···

On 3/20/06, Curtis Rich <LGTVegas@gmail.com> wrote:

Since I have no idea what "NO" means, I have been ignoring that thread. Per
nightoftheiguana2000's suggestion, I looked for "NO" in the vpFREE glossary
- located at http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Gloss.htm. But, there is no
listing for "NO." Also, there is no mention of "NO" in the vpFREE FAQ page
- located at http://members.cox.net/vpfree/FAQ.htm . So, I still don't know
what "NO" means!

But, I did find the entry for "long term" in the vpFREE FAQ page. I find
it VERY interesting. In fact, reading this one FAQ entry has completely
changed my view of video poker. According to vpFREE, the (vague) definition
is: "Theoretically speaking, the long term is forever. For video poker
purposes, the long term is when you have played a lot of hands (several
million at a minimum) and actual results are about the same as expected
results. TomSki calculates (with a 95% confidence factor) that the actual
results for 10/7 DB, played with perfect strategy, should be within 1.0% of
expected results after 1,085,465 hands, and within 0.1% after 108,546,482
hands."

Here is what I find very Interesting: If you use the above definition, the
"long term" is over TWENTY YEARS if you are playing non-stop 24 hours a day
(at 600 hand per hour). It's probably a few years shorter for some of you
who play much faster than I. And, that's with a "with a 95% confidence
factor!" So, it seems to me (if my calculation above is correct), I
will never reach "long term" in my lifetime. And, hence, I will NEVER reach
the expected EV for any game.

My view of video poker that has changed is: Short term wins & losses are now
much more important to me than the long term EV.

Thanks for pointing this out for me, nightoftheiguana2000. I would never
have read that FAQ page, if you hadn't suggested it.

Curtis

On 3/20/06, nightoftheiguana2000 <nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Read the thread on N0, or check the FAQ
>
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com , "Curtis Rich" <LGTVegas@...> wrote:
> >
> > What I would like to know is:
> >
> > If, 1) "....the expected value is .9954...."; and 2) "....it is
> impossible
> > to get that value after playing one hand, or ten hands or 100 hands...."
>
> > then at what point (how many hands) is it *possible* to get that EV? In
> > other words, what is "long term?" I would imagine it is many more hands
> > than I will ever play in my lifetime.
> >
> > If the number of hands needed to reach "long term" is greater than the
> > number of hands I will ever play in my lifetime, doesn't that
> diminish the
> > relevancy of EV?
> >
> > But, if "long term" is something that can be reached in my lifetime, how
>
> > many hands will I need to play?
> >
> >

#8

Interesting approach. Ignore the information (the N0 thread) that
would help you understand. Do I sense a mind that doesn't want to
understand?

I think Cogno answered the question posed by this thread very well.
There is no such thing as the "long term". It is just an English
phrase used to describe the fact that probabilities approach the
mean "over time". They will do it whether you want it to or not,
whether you play a lot or not. You can continue to play anyway you
choose, but claiming disbelief in the long term won't make it go away.

Dick

Since I have no idea what "NO" means, I have been ignoring that

thread. Per

nightoftheiguana2000's suggestion, I looked for "NO" in the vpFREE

glossary

- located at http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Gloss.htm. But, there

is no

listing for "NO." Also, there is no mention of "NO" in the vpFREE

FAQ page

- located at http://members.cox.net/vpfree/FAQ.htm . So, I still

don't know

what "NO" means!

But, I did find the entry for "long term" in the vpFREE FAQ page.

I find

it VERY interesting. In fact, reading this one FAQ entry has

completely

changed my view of video poker. According to vpFREE, the (vague)

definition

is: "Theoretically speaking, the long term is forever. For video

poker

purposes, the long term is when you have played a lot of hands

(several

million at a minimum) and actual results are about the same as

expected

results. TomSki calculates (with a 95% confidence factor) that the

actual

results for 10/7 DB, played with perfect strategy, should be within

1.0% of

expected results after 1,085,465 hands, and within 0.1% after

108,546,482

hands."

Here is what I find very Interesting: If you use the above

definition, the

"long term" is over TWENTY YEARS if you are playing non-stop 24

hours a day

(at 600 hand per hour). It's probably a few years shorter for some

of you

who play much faster than I. And, that's with a "with a 95%

confidence

factor!" So, it seems to me (if my calculation above is correct), I
will never reach "long term" in my lifetime. And, hence, I will

NEVER reach

the expected EV for any game.

My view of video poker that has changed is: Short term wins &

losses are now

much more important to me than the long term EV.

Thanks for pointing this out for me, nightoftheiguana2000. I would

never

have read that FAQ page, if you hadn't suggested it.

Curtis

> Read the thread on N0, or check the FAQ
>
> >
> > What I would like to know is:
> >
> > If, 1) "....the expected value is .9954...."; and 2) "....it is
> impossible
> > to get that value after playing one hand, or ten hands or 100

hands...."

>
> > then at what point (how many hands) is it *possible* to get

that EV? In

> > other words, what is "long term?" I would imagine it is many

more hands

> > than I will ever play in my lifetime.
> >
> > If the number of hands needed to reach "long term" is greater

than the

> > number of hands I will ever play in my lifetime, doesn't that
> diminish the
> > relevancy of EV?
> >
> > But, if "long term" is something that can be reached in my

lifetime, how

>
> > many hands will I need to play?
> >
> >
> > > Rick Bronstein, talking about short pay games and long

term/short

> > > term wrote .....
> > > >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.
> > >
> > > I disagree with the first sentence. It doesn't matter if you

play the

>
> > > machine for 2000 hours or not. There is a long
> > > term expected value for the game you are playing. I do agree

with the

> > > second sentence.
> > >
> > > >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.
> > >
> > > Whether you belief it or not doesn't determine whether

something

> is true
> > > or not. As far as adding up
> > > sessions, what are really doing is adding up a whole lot of 1

hand

> > > 'sessions'. For each 'session' ( in 9/6
> > > JOB) the Expected value of the hand is .9954 times the amount

bet.

> I am
> > > using expected value to mean
> > > average value. Maybe the term expected value is what is
> confusing. Even
> > > though the expected value is .9954,
> > > it is impossible to get that value after playing one hand, or

ten

> hands or
> > > 100 hands. If we take the value to
> > > be exactly .9954 and we are betting $1.25 per hand, we have

to play a

> > > whole lot of hands before we can be
> > > at the actual expected value. We can be close to the expected
> value after
> > > 1 hand if we get a high pair. But to
> > > at exactly the expected is very difficult to do. The more

hands

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Curtis Rich" <LGTVegas@...> wrote:

On 3/20/06, nightoftheiguana2000 <nightoftheiguana2000@...> wrote:
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com , "Curtis Rich" <LGTVegas@> wrote:
> > On 3/20/06, Zaroff, John <John.G.Zaroff@> wrote:
> you play,
> > > the more likely you are to be close to
> > > the expected value expressed as a percentage of coin in.
> > >
> > > John Zaroff
> > > Delphi Electronics and Safety
> > > 313-996-3682 (w)
> > > 313-378-2987 ( Cell)
> > > 3133782987@ ( text page)

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

#9

Since I have no idea what "NO" means, I have been ignoring that

thread. Per

nightoftheiguana2000's suggestion, I looked for "NO" in the vpFREE

glossary

- located at http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Gloss.htm. But, there

is no

listing for "NO." Also, there is no mention of "NO" in the vpFREE

FAQ page

- located at http://members.cox.net/vpfree/FAQ.htm . So, I still

don't know

what "NO" means!

But, I did find the entry for "long term" in the vpFREE FAQ page.

I find

it VERY interesting. In fact, reading this one FAQ entry has

completely

changed my view of video poker. According to vpFREE, the (vague)

definition

is: "Theoretically speaking, the long term is forever. For video

poker

purposes, the long term is when you have played a lot of hands

(several

million at a minimum) and actual results are about the same as

expected

results. TomSki calculates (with a 95% confidence factor) that the

actual

results for 10/7 DB, played with perfect strategy, should be within

1.0% of

expected results after 1,085,465 hands, and within 0.1% after

108,546,482

hands."

Here is what I find very Interesting: If you use the above

definition, the

"long term" is over TWENTY YEARS if you are playing non-stop 24

hours a day

(at 600 hand per hour). It's probably a few years shorter for some

of you

who play much faster than I. And, that's with a "with a 95%

confidence

factor!" So, it seems to me (if my calculation above is correct), I
will never reach "long term" in my lifetime. And, hence, I will

NEVER reach

the expected EV for any game.

My view of video poker that has changed is: Short term wins &

losses are now

much more important to me than the long term EV.

Thanks for pointing this out for me, nightoftheiguana2000. I would

never

have read that FAQ page, if you hadn't suggested it.

Curtis

That is exactly the strategy I use.

Play a full pay JOB and get the flushes and full house as they should
appear and you're going home a loser a majority of the time. Premium
hands (quads and royals) usually determine your session.
Since royals don't appear every session I'm looking for the most on
the quads.

What I have changed to recently is AC joker (5 of a kind pays 4000).
While it is very volatile the rewards can be great. Have had 36
jackpots in the last 8 months on that game. There are only 4 ways to
catch a royal in any JOB or bonus game. There are 13 ways to get
5oak. The game is about 96.5 % but it's been a great short pay game
for me...

> Read the thread on N0, or check the FAQ
>
> >
> > What I would like to know is:
> >
> > If, 1) "....the expected value is .9954...."; and 2) "....it is
> impossible
> > to get that value after playing one hand, or ten hands or 100

hands...."

>
> > then at what point (how many hands) is it *possible* to get

that EV? In

> > other words, what is "long term?" I would imagine it is many

more hands

> > than I will ever play in my lifetime.
> >
> > If the number of hands needed to reach "long term" is greater

than the

> > number of hands I will ever play in my lifetime, doesn't that
> diminish the
> > relevancy of EV?
> >
> > But, if "long term" is something that can be reached in my

lifetime, how

>
> > many hands will I need to play?
> >
> >
> > > Rick Bronstein, talking about short pay games and long

term/short

> > > term wrote .....
> > > >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.
> > >
> > > I disagree with the first sentence. It doesn't matter if you

play the

>
> > > machine for 2000 hours or not. There is a long
> > > term expected value for the game you are playing. I do agree

with the

> > > second sentence.
> > >
> > > >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.
> > >
> > > Whether you belief it or not doesn't determine whether

something

> is true
> > > or not. As far as adding up
> > > sessions, what are really doing is adding up a whole lot of 1

hand

> > > 'sessions'. For each 'session' ( in 9/6
> > > JOB) the Expected value of the hand is .9954 times the amount

bet.

> I am
> > > using expected value to mean
> > > average value. Maybe the term expected value is what is
> confusing. Even
> > > though the expected value is .9954,
> > > it is impossible to get that value after playing one hand, or

ten

> hands or
> > > 100 hands. If we take the value to
> > > be exactly .9954 and we are betting $1.25 per hand, we have

to play a

> > > whole lot of hands before we can be
> > > at the actual expected value. We can be close to the expected
> value after
> > > 1 hand if we get a high pair. But to
> > > at exactly the expected is very difficult to do. The more

hands

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Curtis Rich" <LGTVegas@...> wrote:

On 3/20/06, nightoftheiguana2000 <nightoftheiguana2000@...> wrote:
> --- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com , "Curtis Rich" <LGTVegas@> wrote:
> > On 3/20/06, Zaroff, John <John.G.Zaroff@> wrote:
> you play,
> > > the more likely you are to be close to
> > > the expected value expressed as a percentage of coin in.
> > >
> > > John Zaroff
> > > Delphi Electronics and Safety
> > > 313-996-3682 (w)
> > > 313-378-2987 ( Cell)
> > > 3133782987@ ( text page)

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

#10

I have a couple of points to offer:

The reason there is no standard defintion of long-term is that it's a relative term. John Kelly once wrote about playing next to a DW player who threw away single deuces "so that they would come back in bunches". This player might actually win in the "short-term" (a session or two), but the "long-term" for him will come very quickly. In fact the best definition of long-term is all your play, for your playing career. We are all playing in the long-term, all the time.

  Regardless of the definition of "long-term", one might well reach (or exceed) the theoretical return of any game after 5 hands, 100 hands, 1,000 hands, 1,000,000 hands or whatever. We are just not "guaranteed" to reach it. In fact one is ever guaranteed to reach it, which is why the word infinite is mentioned in the FAQ. But if one is looking for guarantees, video poker (or any form of gambling) is probably not the best place to look. I don't know if there is any other form of gambling where people expect to be guaranteed a certain percentage, but it keeps coming up in video poker. That's no doubt because we are able to identify the exact Expected Return with perfect play, thanks to VP software. People tend to misinterpret those numbers as some kind of guarantee, instead of what they are.

Note that being within 1% of the theoretical return for a game means we might be at 99% of the expected return, or we might be at 101% of that return. That assumes perfect play - bad strategy will skew those numbers (for the worse) in a relatively short time. If one plays a 99% game with a strategy that reduces it to a 98% game, being within 1% of the expected return is cold comfort.

As Cogno Scienti pointed out, for just about any term, higher percentage machines are generally better than lower percentage machines, although variance can enter into this depending on your goal. Actually, the most important message one can derive from numbers like this is the importance of playing the play with highest possible return you can find, as accurately as you can, since it's lot better to be within 1% of 102% than the 98% I mentioned above.

Playing multiplays, one can reach the million hand mark in a relative short time. I recall clocking my play at about 15,000 hands an hour on a fifty play I played on a regular basis a couple of years ago. I think that on a fast (and some are blazing fast these days) 5-play, base hands can be played just as fast as one used to be able to play single plays. So a 700 hand an hour player is now a 3,500 hand an hour player. 8 hours a day for a four-day trip and you are over 100K hands. Of course, good plays on multiplays are not always readily available.

For a non-technical defintion of "NO" as well as a method to calculate it, I suggest you download Dunbar's free spreadsheet (it's in the VPFREE files). You will find numbers there that are much more reasonable than a 108 million hands. I also suggest Dunbar's VP Risk Analyzer as a great tool for calculating both "long-term" (infinite play) and short-term bankroll requirements for a given amount of risk.

I hope this helps,
Skip

Curtis Rich wrote:

···

So, it seems to me (if my calculation above is correct), I
will never reach "long term" in my lifetime. And, hence, I will NEVER reach
the expected EV for any game.

--
Thanks!
Skip
http://www.vpinsider.com

#11

<<My view of video poker that has changed is: Short term wins & losses are
now much more important to me than the long term EV.>>

Whether you're playing for short- or long-term results, 50 coins is five
more coins than 45 coins.

Cogno

#12

Typo:

Skip Hughes wrote:

In fact one is ever guaranteed to reach it

NEVER guaranteed...

Thanks,
Skip
http://www.vpinsider.com

#13

Thank you, Skip.

I appreciate the time that you took to respond to my post. I never thought
about some of your points (like, how multiline games enable a player to get
so many more hands played in their lifetime).

You said, "I don't know if there is any other form of gambling where people
expect to be guaranteed a certain percentage, but it keeps coming up in
video poker."

Well, I can think of a few reasons why this is so.

1. Casinos advertise the hell out of "100% payback" (and similar phrases).

2. Video poker advocates (aka 'gurus') almost always mention the payback
percentages when referring to specific video poker games in their books and
magazine

3. Websites, even vpFREE, often present payback percentages when discussing
or listing specific video poker games.

Sure, these payback percentages are sometimes accompanied by the phrase,
"....with optimum play" or "....with perfect play." But, without a
meaningful discussion of "....over the long term...." and variance, I can
see how one would think that these percentages should be the expected
return.

Yes, Skip. Your post did help. And, I think your definition of "long term"
the best that I've heard, so far ("....all your play, for your playing
career.").

Thanks again.

Curtis

···

On 3/20/06, Skip Hughes <skiphughes@earthlink.net > wrote:

I have a couple of points to offer:

The reason there is no standard defintion of long-term is that it's a
relative term. John Kelly once wrote about playing next to a DW player
who threw away single deuces "so that they would come back in bunches".
This player might actually win in the "short-term" (a session or two),
but the "long-term" for him will come very quickly. In fact the best
definition of long-term is all your play, for your playing career. We
are all playing in the long-term, all the time.

Regardless of the definition of "long-term", one might well reach (or
exceed) the theoretical return of any game after 5 hands, 100 hands,
1,000 hands, 1,000,000 hands or whatever. We are just not "guaranteed"
to reach it. In fact one is ever guaranteed to reach it, which is why
the word infinite is mentioned in the FAQ. But if one is looking for
guarantees, video poker (or any form of gambling) is probably not the
best place to look. I don't know if there is any other form of gambling
where people expect to be guaranteed a certain percentage, but it keeps
coming up in video poker. That's no doubt because we are able to
identify the exact Expected Return with perfect play, thanks to VP
software. People tend to misinterpret those numbers as some kind of
guarantee, instead of what they are.

Note that being within 1% of the theoretical return for a game means we
might be at 99% of the expected return, or we might be at 101% of that
return. That assumes perfect play - bad strategy will skew those numbers
(for the worse) in a relatively short time. If one plays a 99% game with
a strategy that reduces it to a 98% game, being within 1% of the
expected return is cold comfort.

As Cogno Scienti pointed out, for just about any term, higher
percentage machines are generally better than lower percentage machines,
although variance can enter into this depending on your goal. Actually,
the most important message one can derive from numbers like this is the
importance of playing the play with highest possible return you can
find, as accurately as you can, since it's lot better to be within 1% of
102% than the 98% I mentioned above.

Playing multiplays, one can reach the million hand mark in a relative
short time. I recall clocking my play at about 15,000 hands an hour on a
fifty play I played on a regular basis a couple of years ago. I think
that on a fast (and some are blazing fast these days) 5-play, base hands
can be played just as fast as one used to be able to play single plays.
So a 700 hand an hour player is now a 3,500 hand an hour player. 8 hours
a day for a four-day trip and you are over 100K hands. Of course, good
plays on multiplays are not always readily available.

For a non-technical defintion of "NO" as well as a method to calculate
it, I suggest you download Dunbar's free spreadsheet (it's in the VPFREE
files). You will find numbers there that are much more reasonable than a
108 million hands. I also suggest Dunbar's VP Risk Analyzer as a great
tool for calculating both "long-term" (infinite play) and short-term
bankroll requirements for a given amount of risk.

I hope this helps,
Skip

Curtis Rich wrote:

>So, it seems to me (if my calculation above is correct), I
>will never reach "long term" in my lifetime. And, hence, I will NEVER
reach
>the expected EV for any game.
>

--
Thanks!
Skip
http://www.vpinsider.com

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

#14

http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Bank_NO.htm

Since I have no idea what "NO" means, I have been ignoring that

thread. Per

nightoftheiguana2000's suggestion, I looked for "NO" in the vpFREE

glossary

- located at http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Gloss.htm. But, there is no
listing for "NO." Also, there is no mention of "NO" in the vpFREE

FAQ page

- located at http://members.cox.net/vpfree/FAQ.htm . So, I still

don't know

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Curtis Rich" <LGTVegas@...> wrote:

what "NO" means!

#15

What I would like to know is:

, if "long term" is something that can be reached in my lifetime, how

many hands will I need to play?

short term=next hand

long term=till death do we part

M J

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Curtis Rich" <LGTVegas@...> wrote:

#16

I looked for "NO" in the vpFREE glossary
- located at http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Gloss.htm. But, there

is no

listing for "NO." Also, there is no mention of "NO" in the vpFREE

FAQ page

- located at http://members.cox.net/vpfree/FAQ.htm . So, I still

don't know

what "NO" means!

Curtis,

One would expect to find at least a reference to NO in either
Glossary or FAQ with at least a link to a more detailed page. I
tried for the longest time to find it also, as I knew that I had
read it and wanted to review the math.

So after much clicking and clicking and clicking, I found it under
Home page, then links, then bankroll.

Sometimes the classification of info(although excellent) on vpFREE
causes items to be hard to find.

Hope this helps.

DWK

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "Curtis Rich" <LGTVegas@...> wrote: