Good post/ I will quickly respond with some quick thoughts. Then respond/elaborate more at a later date.
For the most part many of the general statements above would be considered mostly accurate for the average(i.e., most typical) gambler. Meaning the gamer that wagers nearly all hands dealt, balls spun, dice tossed, every day, and continuously to perpetuity. This average gamer is the type that does not record data, doesn't study or try to improve ones skills, ...etc/ 20-30 years later is still at the skill level as year one. For this type of gamer I say most of the above assertions about ruin, h.e., ...etc are mostly accurate.
re: H.E. I agree with the above about how small H.E. add up. The same is true when the player has an edge. Even when a player does not always have a H.E. the player can still go on significantly long and massive winning streaks. Meaning prior to seeing the casinos' written-in edge start to show as (+) for them.
It is my opinion the player has many options and tools the casino does not possess. One main advantage for the player is the fact the casino must offer the game 24-7.
The player can play(or not play) as much or little as one desires.
The player can play very few (or many) hands.
Players can select only the hands more favorable to the player.
Players select how much to wager in each spot and the casinos' only option is to match it.
A player should think of the casino as a robot that's only allowed to match our move--this alone gives us many favorable options. If it wasn't for low table max bets a larger-funded player could bust the casino(especially if one knew how much liquid assets the casino could access quickly).
IMO one of the main advantages the casino has is the option to select(limit) the table max bet. If it wasn't for the casino limiting this(Tmax) I perceive we would see many of the poorly managed casinos go bust. Just like the players do that exhibit poor money management skills.
More later /have a good week.kfb
For the most part many of the general statements above would be considered mostly accurate for the average(i.e., most typical) gambler. Meaning the gamer that wagers nearly all hands dealt, balls spun, dice tossed, every day, and continuously to perpetuity. This average gamer is the type that does not record data, doesn't study or try to improve ones skills, ...etc/ 20-30 years later is still at the skill level as year one. For this type of gamer I say most of the above assertions about ruin, h.e., ...etc are mostly accurate.
re: H.E. I agree with the above about how small H.E. add up. The same is true when the player has an edge. Even when a player does not always have a H.E. the player can still go on significantly long and massive winning streaks. Meaning prior to seeing the casinos' written-in edge start to show as (+) for them.
It is my opinion the player has many options and tools the casino does not possess. One main advantage for the player is the fact the casino must offer the game 24-7.
The player can play(or not play) as much or little as one desires.
The player can play very few (or many) hands.
Players can select only the hands more favorable to the player.
Players select how much to wager in each spot and the casinos' only option is to match it.
A player should think of the casino as a robot that's only allowed to match our move--this alone gives us many favorable options. If it wasn't for low table max bets a larger-funded player could bust the casino(especially if one knew how much liquid assets the casino could access quickly).
IMO one of the main advantages the casino has is the option to select(limit) the table max bet. If it wasn't for the casino limiting this(Tmax) I perceive we would see many of the poorly managed casinos go bust. Just like the players do that exhibit poor money management skills.
More later /have a good week.kfb
