Have anyone ever had those battles

**lojo** · 26th July 2007, 01:35 AM

It's not inzane at all

Just play highly volatile games and quit when you're ahead. But again, I don't have docs to prove it and some of the play was w/bonuses, so it's anecdotal at best. Of course it takes some good luck, but I've never done a crushing cashout.. little over a grand at best so far. If I would have been betting in the higher numbers it would have been smashing though, .75 on Tombraider paid over a grand (5 laras inside the free spins) ut that's okay if you don't want to comment on my post, and it's okay if you don't want to believe that you will ever be ahead and stay that way

**KasinoKing** · 26th July 2007, 01:41 AM

Originally Posted by Gaahl

I am not even gonna comment lojos post, but claiming, on a reputable forum, that you can beat slots with a HA of over 5% is inzane and I advize you to seek help if that is your thinking. Gambling is "bad" enough (yes I gamble, but I know that I will lose, I do it for fun), but when you state on the forum that it is possible to beat the slots, you are luring naive soles out there to even more gambling. Everyone should read this and accept it, you WILL loose in the long run playing slots.

As for KK, I read your site and see that you make most of your profit from BJ\other low HA bonuses. I still feel it is wrong to proclaim that you can make a consistent profit for 6-7 years without mentioning low HA games and bonuses.

You have obviously not read all of my site!
I do mention card games & definitely mention bonuses!

Yes, when I started I played mostly BJ & other 'low HA games' - I only started playing slots in a big way after joining this site in Aug 2004 & seeing the 'Winner Screenshots' thread.

These days I do still play cards at Crypto, WagerWorks, & others, but at MG casinos I play 99% slots only and still make good profits.

For example, this month:
Right at this moment I am playing Harveys at 32Red - only about $150 from WR & $350 up.
I joined Grand Monaco this month & am over $800 up.
I probably would have bust out at Intercasino if I hadn't got 3 bonus rounds in 10 minutes on Love Bugs - but thanks to that I made a small gain.

Believe what you want - makes no odds to me - but you can win with slots!
(Well, you can if you play like me!

)

Have a nice day!

**KasinoKing** · 26th July 2007, 01:54 AM

Originally Posted by KasinoKing

Believe what you want - makes no odds to me - but you can win with slots!
(Well, you can if you play like me!

)

Well bugger me (gently

), look what happened right after I typed that:-

Harv250707a.JPG

Harv250707b.JPG

Harv250707c.JPG

You don't win 100 x your bet with blackjack very often, do you!

**Gaahl** · 26th July 2007, 02:15 AM

You are missing my point\missunderstood me here, when you wrote you had played profitable from casinos for 6-7 years, you wrote nothing about using bonuses etc. I found that out after I read your site. And lojo wrote that he thought it was possible to remain a profitable player aslong as he quit while ahead at slots, which ofcourse, everyone, over enough spins, is impossible.

As I have seen gamblers fallacy first hand, I just thought it was wrong giving out an impression that you could make a steady profit from playing slots. There are many gambling addicts out there, the last thing these people need is hearing that you can make a steady income out from their "disease".

That is the reason I reacted to the post, and I have reacted to other post in here, but this is the first time I speak my mind about it.

Slot play can be fun (little to fun), but everyone should be aware that it is not possible to make a steady income of it. (only exeption is playing with favourable bonuses).

**KasinoKing** · 26th July 2007, 02:49 AM

Originally Posted by Gaahl

<spell checked with iesplell> You are missing my point\misunderstood me here, when you wrote you had played profitable from casinos for 6-7 years, you wrote nothing about using bonuses etc. I found that out after I read your site. And lojo wrote that he thought it was possible to remain a profitable player as long as he quit while ahead at slots, which of course, everyone, over enough spins, is impossible.

As I have seen gamblers fallacy first hand, I just thought it was wrong giving out an impression that you could make a steady profit from playing slots. There are many gambling addicts out there, the last thing these people need is hearing that you can make a steady income out from their "disease".

That is the reason I reacted to the post, and I have reacted to other post in here, but this is the first time I speak my mind about it.

Slot play can be fun (little to fun), but everyone should be aware that it is not possible to make a steady income of it. (only exception is playing with favorable bonuses).

Totally agree.

I fully support 'controlled gambling' and have numerous warnings of the dangers on my site as well as links to support groups.

e.g. from my 'Funky Slots' page:-

Please play sensibly
If you are playing for profit rather than just for fun, please remember slots are just the same as any other casino game; the house always has the edge.

The average return on most online slots is 94-96% and if you keep playing any one casino game continuously you will lose in the long run.

The only way to win in the long term is by using bonuses and/or money management methods, as described in my guides on other pages of this site. Please remember most slots are high variance; It is possible to hit really big wins, but to fund this they have to take money in with lots of no-win spins, so you need to be patient.

Slots are fun & exciting, but can be addictive just like any other gambling. Please play within your limitations and if you do think you may have a problem which you can�t control, remember there are people you can turn to for help: | Gamcare | Gamblers Anonymous |

Enjoy & good luck! KK.

No-one should EVER play with money they are not prepared to lose or because they need money to pay off some debt - that is a recipe for disaster.

KK

**lojo** · 26th July 2007, 03:03 AM

Thanks for clarifying Gaahl,

Someone with an uncontrolled compulsion should not play at all and shouldn't be reading here.

Of course if you play indefinitely the odds will get you. Quitting while ahead is a discipline and it can apply to a set goal, a bankroll not to go under - a session, a month, a year or a lifetime.

If a person has the unwavering ability to call it a day, they can indeed quit when ahead most times and over the course.

Think back to how many times, (or try a new experiment) you were ahead in a session or week or whatever. More often than not I'd guess. Statistics be damned, if you quit when you are 20% ahead six times and blow your whole bankroll once, you are at a 20% profit. And a volatile slot can do more than the whole seven session in one spin. Bonuses are not needed and many times they have cost me (hitting a 50-60% win in early wagering and having to grind it away into nothing where as I would have quit had it been a straight deposit)

I tire of hearing myself type though and there's probably several responses since I went into 'post reply' so I'll stfu

**Gaahl** · 26th July 2007, 03:22 AM

Good that we got to clarify some things here

No one should ever belive that they can "make a living" out of playing slots.

lojo: I see your argument about "quitting while ahead". But to me that is just like saying that the games are not random, I.E rigged. If the game was completly random you could just aswell loose your starting balance 6 times in a row. If you start seeing "trends", like almost always be 20% up before you grind it away again, you are implying that the slots have trends. And that would in other words say that the machines are rigged. If you played your strategy over 1 million spins, I would eat my hat if you would not have ended up with an ROI of +/- 95%. HA is HA. Implying that you could beat it by using trends in the slots would be the same as saying the slots arent random.

Sorry if I ruined your "super system"

But then again, are we shure that the games ARE that random?

**happygobrokey** · 26th July 2007, 09:35 AM

70% of players get ahead in their session.
30% lose from the git-go and never make it back to their original balance.
63% give all their winnings (plus some or all of their original stake) back.
7% will leave the session with winnings in their pocket.

if you can get ahead .7 of the time, and assuming no fees are involved in the buy-in/cash-out, you could consistently make a profit. this is IF you have the courage to quit while ahead and the discipline not to lose all your money chasing a score.

yes my stats are somewhat vague. ahead could mean $0.01 ahead, and yes 93% end up losing some or all of their roll, but if you can vow to be a member of the 7% club, and not chase too hard when you're down, then you can profit.

set your win/loss limit to +10/-5 bet units or something else that you're comfortable with. in a live game or on certain softwares, you can leave some of your stack behind and thus by standing up you can "go south" (i.e pocket your original deposit and just play with the winnings). if you take the right measures to preserve your roll, you can keep from losing too much and make tidy gains along the way.

gambling is statistically a losing proposition, but given the right incentives (bonus/cashback/promos), it becomes easier to play profitably. and even in their absence, you can expect to be on the positive side of variance a lot of the time. maybe not more than half the time, maybe closer to all the time. it's variance.

the normal curve is symmetrical; just don't shoot for wins that are >+3 sigmas, and don't go out of your way to lose more than a sigma or two if you can help it. it's easier to lose a lot than win a lot, but often that's the player's fault. of course you have to factor in the house edge, but a lot of games are close enough to 50/50 props that the game doesn't just eat you for breakfast.

it's wrong to think that you can consistently win, but so is it to think you cannot win with any consistency. that's why they're games of chance.

**KasinoKing** · 26th July 2007, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by happygobrokey

70% of players get ahead in their session.
30% lose from the git-go and never make it back to their original balance.
63% give all their winnings (plus some or all of their original stake) back.
7% will leave the session with winnings in their pocket.

if you can get ahead .7 of the time, and assuming no fees are involved in the buy-in/cash-out, you could consistently make a profit. this is IF you have the courage to quit while ahead and the discipline not to lose all your money chasing a score.

yes my stats are somewhat vague. ahead could mean $0.01 ahead, and yes 93% end up losing some or all of their roll, but if you can vow to be a member of the 7% club, and not chase too hard when you're down, then you can profit.

set your win/loss limit to +10/-5 bet units or something else that you're comfortable with. in a live game or on certain softwares, you can leave some of your stack behind and thus by standing up you can "go south" (i.e pocket your original deposit and just play with the winnings). if you take the right measures to preserve your roll, you can keep from losing too much and make tidy gains along the way.

gambling is statistically a losing proposition, but given the right incentives (bonus/cashback/promos), it becomes easier to play profitably. and even in their absence, you can expect to be on the positive side of variance a lot of the time. maybe not more than half the time, maybe closer to all the time. it's variance.

the normal curve is symmetrical; just don't shoot for wins that are >+3 sigmas, and don't go out of your way to lose more than a sigma or two if you can help it. it's easier to lose a lot than win a lot, but often that's the player's fault. of course you have to factor in the house edge, but a lot of games are close enough to 50/50 props that the game doesn't just eat you for breakfast.

it's wrong to think that you can consistently win, but so is it to think you cannot win with any consistency. that's why they're games of chance.

That is a BRILLIANT analysis!

Would you mind if I quote that on my website?