Originally Posted by
Three
Like I said it was a link to a retired pro who passed up on the extra as being insignificant as he looked at the hourly but realized in retrospect he cost himself hundreds of thousands of dollars over the course of his career. There is an hourly cost a yearly cost and a lifetime cost. When yowl at the hourly cost you think it isn't worth it but when you look at the cost for your career after having retired you think how nice it would be to have made hundreds of thousands more than you did. Then you decide it would have been worth it. Like they say hindsight is 20/20. Too bad he didn't have the benefit of someone that had retired and looked at things in retrospect to help him make a better career decision. The decision he made for the length of his career and the cost of keeping things simple cost him hundreds of thousands of dollars. Most people don't have a long career as a full time pro but when they figure the cost they need to look at the big picture. If they will never amass much play they are giving up the same percentage but the pie is small. If they will have a ton of hours at high EV that percentage is from a massive pie or a mountain of pies. Hopefully you understand that what you are giving up is proportional to how much you play and at what EV. The same percentage looks like giving up almost nothing for the part time low level player, but for the full time pro with a long career they are giving up a huge amount of money in their career. In the article he pointed this out. There was a link to it on this site a while back. It was written in retrospect from a retired keep it simple career pro lamenting he had left low to mid 6 figures on the table from being so short sighted. The fact that he made millions in his career might make it look small but when he stopped earning he thought it was a huge amount of money to have left on the table over his decades of play and really regretted it.
Depends upon how you look at it. If you really want to evaluate this further the longtime pro who used a simple system turned out making more money percentage wise for actual time spent playing the game including research itself than some idiot who uses an ultimate, consummate system devised by himself. You see things have a way of balancing themselves out as the other guy post 13,942 posts just here on this board alone talking about HIMSELF. The old-time lifer probably made only 5 posts in his entire lifetime. How many hundreds of thousands of dollars do you think that cost? So when you say things like you said earlier this week:
" I think that most APs force the suits' hands by needing to be too aggressive by focusing entirely on generating EV. In a comparison for the sake of measuring the gain it is all made to fall in EV while keeping everything else constant so it can be measured. But you don't have to take the gain as increased EV. You can use it to make casinos more comfortable with your play while still getting the EV of the weaker approach. I always say that I don't use complexity to get more EV. I spend the EV at being able to make money more easily in casinos. All these critical people think the value of complexity is added EV. They are shortsighted and make poor judgement calls. At least if they care about longevity. If they don't then they simply have a different outlook and approach with different goals. We place value on different things. That is just reality."
Essentially you are saying that most all casinos are willing to let you withdraw from there coffers at much higher rate lifetime that anyone else can. Provided of course when you are playing and not posting.
Bookmarks