vpFREE2 Forums

xvp dancer /boyd dispute

#1

been awhile since i laughed so hard.

some of you might remember a "couple" of years back when i tried to
inform Ms Boyd of a mistake she might have made on another subject,
She privately sent one of the most angry emails i ever read, & told
me not to forward or post an answer to the group so not to bother
the administrator.
so I forward it to the group of course!!!
( its in are archives i think, could somebody find it or explain to
me how I can, I would like to give the messg numbers to the group so
the newbies can view)

Same as Mr Dancer I presented facts, Same as with Mr Dancer she
responded with emotional diatribe ONLY.

I did say in my response to Ms Boyd's email something about Ms Boyd
showing " a lack of class" for responding privately & the snotty
tone of her email and some of the same people who blasted Mr Dancer
now blasted me then.

I felt at the time that maybe I misunderstood something, maybe she
is as "wonderfull" as they said, i knew i was not being a gentleman
and I let it go. Now I dont know.

So risking more anger, Ms Boyd I have seen your product & it is not
accurate enough even for a once a year player.
There are charts availible that are simple to use & accurate from
fellow members.( Ms Scott, Skippy, Tomski, Mr Shackleford the wizard
of odds}
Whether or not you feel a correction is needed is your bizness .

Responding to a question or a disagreement with EMOTION & not with
facts that can examined is not a new thing, it was taught at a lot
of companies as a proper way to deal with "problems" 20 years ago,
been discredited since thank god but it can generate sympathy still.

Mr Dancer & the rest of us can & will point out mistakes .
Especially mine!! :wink:

Ms Boyd, i sincerely wish you success in your bizness, I hope you
make lots of money.

Mr Dancer, please continue to post , your point of view is
appreciated and needed.

for the rest of you, its math! You can prove correct stratergy with
a calculator right Mickey Crimm ?

You either play right or wrong , if you are like me & avoid most
penalty card situations, then me & you are wrong. I can live with it.

M J

#2

You might want to rethink this statement. You obviously quit reading a
little too soon. Dancer's so-called "facts" have been shown to be
almost entirely in error.

Dick

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "mklpryy24" <mklpryy24@...> wrote:

Same as Mr Dancer I presented facts,

#3

Mklpryy24 wrote: Responding to a question or a disagreement with EMOTION
& not with
facts that can examined is not a new thing, it was taught at a lot
of companies as a proper way to deal with "problems" 20 years ago,
been discredited since thank god but it can generate sympathy still.

Mr Dancer, please continue to post , your point of view is
appreciated and needed.

Your experience with Linda Boyd sounds similar to mine. I find it
strange that a math teacher can't discuss applied math problems (which
is what we are talking about here) without a lot of emotion.

I appreciate your support. Along with Dunbar, you have already found out
that you'll be attacked by mroejacks for having the gall to suggest that
my arguments have merit. Welcome to the club! To my mind, this proves
you are on the right track.

However this particular thread has run its course.

Bob Dancer

For a 3-day free trial of Video Poker for Winners, the best video poker
computer trainer ever invented, go to //www.videopokerforwinners.com

#4

That's right! I used to verify strategy cards of the gurus for
accuracy. The old Russian proverb is "trust but verify." I wanted
to make sure they knew what they were doing. The thing about the
calculator is the answer the calculator gives cannot be improved
upon. Only tied at best. But computer programs have speed working
for them. Doing the math on VP hands with a calculator is boring,
tedious, and it is easy to make a mistake.

When I first discoverd Draw Till U Win I had to write the strategy
with a calculator because the game had never been written about and
the pros who knew about the game were not giving up their
strategies. And I would not have known where it came from anyway.
So it was best to do it myself. I literally locked myself in my
hotel room for two days until I had it finished.

Here's a little test I use on numbers given in a computer derived
strategy:

In a game where the straight pays 4 for 1 and you have a trash hand
where the choice is throw the whole hand away or keep the inside
straight draw then the value of the inside staight draw is 4 cards
times 4 bets equals 16. Divide 16 by the cycle (47 remaining unknown
cards) and the calculator (or by longhand) derived answer
is .340425531%. Then compare the results with the numbers of the
computer derived strategy. If you want it in coins then multiply the
percentage by 5. .340425531 times 5 is 1.702127655 coins. I have
seen discrepencies. If the program is wrong or slightly off on that
one then what else is it off on?

Bob Dancer and I have collided in the past but in the interest of
fairness I think his FPDW, 9/6 Jacks, 10/7 Double Bonus and KBJW
strategies are as accurate as humanly possible.

As a side note I accidentally washed his KBJW level 4 strategy. For
whatever reason KBJW was the hardest strategy for me to memorize. It
took quite awhile for me to get the non-joker hands down. The card
was still perfectly readable but the laminate was separating. So I
stripped off the backside and folded and glued the pertinent part
against itself with the joker hands on one side and the non-joker
hands on the other. It made the card small and compact so I could
hold it in my palm while playing. Since my palm was face down no one
but me knew it was there. Then I could just turn my wrist up and
down to get a quick look.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "mklpryy24" <mklpryy24@...> wrote:

for the rest of you, its math! You can prove correct stratergy with
a calculator right Mickey Crimm ?