This is really informative.
I just do not understand the 1% advantage.. what does it mean?
A 1% advantage means that either the gamble or house has a 1% maethmetical edge on the game. In the gambler's case, for every $100 that cycles through the machine, they will win $101.00. The trick is to find and maintain enough cash flow and also to play high stakes machines so the 1% advantage can add up. Likewise, a dual goal would be to increase the advantage to say 2%.
This is really informative.
Or inherent patterns within the machine itself/
When I lived in Greece I used to spend time with the old men playing backgammon- they were considered genius.. they could actually predict the dice... the odds on getting a 6 and a 2, for example..
The basis is that the card hands and wheel combinations in video gambling machines are not truly random in the mathematical sense. Truly random events are impossible for a computer to generate as the software is written by humans and relies on some basis for generating the events.
As casinos hate losing money, the software used is very complex and produces highly variable results. Even still, after years of mind numbing play an intelligent, perceptive person can start to piece together how the algorithms work.
This can be done formally via studying random number software, then to match what one observes playing the machine (Hey, this machine looks like it is using a Herman Randomstein algorithim. Hmm, I wonder if I do “G” after “X’ several hundred times, what could I learn?). Likewise, it can be done informally ie- After thousands of observations, the gambler realizes that after the machine is more likely to do “X” with bet “b”. Or, the machine rarely does “b” in response to “y and c”.
I suspect that most such players use the informal approach. Then factor in that some people are not only bright, but also have a higher than average ability to identify subtle patterns in a jumble of information. The casinos know that these "pros" exist and thus switch machines out, upload better software etc.
Interesting insights. Thanks! Even though some might master the algorithms and manage to eke out a 1% win over the house, it doesn't seem likely the gambler wins in the long run. I realize a lot of these people brag, but outside of comps, I imagine they're still losing money over time. That's probably why LV still keeps them around.
Good summary, and I think you are 100% right. Early card counters and systematic video slots / poker players may have done well (gotten a meaningful advantage by card counting or taking advantage of primitive computers with say, basic algorithms). But, as you stated, casinos hate losing money.
Thus new dealing techniques and the rotation and upgrading of video machines with new and better algorithms. Today, there are too many hard “ifs”: if the gambler plays perfectly, if they know the machine, if they have enough cash flow for dry spells due to algorithm changes and raw statistics, if they play long term.... .
In the end, as you state, even the “pros” lose in the long term. They may lose very slowly, but they still lose. If they “win”, they are really just winning comps. Then factor in that for every one pro that can win alot of comps while losing very slowly, there are alot more people who think they are "pros" when they are not.
