With your success, why don't you play more? Or, by not playing "a lot" are you actually using your own version of "win goals, loss limits, and stop losses"??Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Printable View
With your success, why don't you play more? Or, by not playing "a lot" are you actually using your own version of "win goals, loss limits, and stop losses"??Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
I don't think that's a valid observation at all. I think it's just that if you are good at sports betting it doesn't necessarily mean you will also be good at video poker play. They are totally different, after all.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
And I don't think anyone has ever called Rob Singer a video poker expert. To be an "expert" you only need to know the conventional strategy. Frankly, I know the conventional strategy darn well. And the few games I don't know darn well I could quickly look up and learn. So, there isn't much to being a video poker expert, is there?
I reiterate that I see no connection between VP and sports. Years ago when we put out a sheet, it was mostly based upon my picks and I had final say on all mixed decisions. We consistently won about 57-60% (not great but a profit) and had a good following. I have never had luck at VP whether playing for fun or attempting to play for profit, despite nearly perfect play (nearly because we all make mistakes or don't see that pair of 6's now and then).
We were asked by some nice gentlemen (think Chicago) to stop publishing the sheet and we kindly complied.
Didn't anybody watch the NBA game tonight?
Redietz asks if I'm one of the experts. In a way, yes, I am, but please don't loop me in with the likes of Paymar, Dancer, or Frank. I'm a winning vp player who developed my own way of doing so, using an excellent knowledge of optimal vp play, casino business, machines' operation, and my own contribution which it appears no one else fully understands well enough to try it as a serious approach. I've written books, articles, had a website, been on the Travel Channel, ESPN, and various radio shows, and advise/train other players--at no charge, ever. And that comes from being successful.
These "other guys"....well, using theory as an approach, then as so-called "proof" that you will win...or the much sillier, that you "HAVE WON", and copying one another's sales pitches really doesn't qualify anyone as an expert. Frank, OTOH and as Alan correctly identifies to the chagrin of the forum "AP's" is a simple working stiff who deceitfully claims he wins every year, when all he's EVER done is play with other people's money and got paid, win or lose, so he can say he's "ahead always". That's no expert.
Redietz, here's a little expert advice: you would be a whole lot more understandable, and indeed, more trustworthy, if you stopped the cloak & dagger representations of yourself and just explained who you really are and present a clear explanation of what your qualifications are. You don't have to be concerned with anyone calling you a liar because I believe what you say for the most part, and arci only calls people who get the best of him liars.
I know you consider yourself an AP when it comes to vp, but from the little information you've offered, I don't see it. You seem more like someone who takes his sports betting seriously, and who only plays vp as a low stakes distraction. Forget that you only play FPDW or whatever. Most decent players look for the best pay tables available anyway. I don't know if I've played more or less than you, but I've most probably put a lot more money into vp action than you have. But that's not what makes me an expert. It's my overall commitment, unique abilities, and my ongoing willingness to help other players to become better and enjoy the game as thoroughly as possible that does.
If by "win goal," Alan, you mean I don't play negative EV games, then you're correct. My goal is to win. There is very little in the way of positive vp in Las Vegas these days, outside of the senior circuit bonuses and the occasional FPDW and 10/7, which I don't like. So if one doesn't play negative EV games, then there isn't much to play.
Not much cloak and dagger to it, Rob. People who actually win have no interest in discussing it, explaining it, or being recognized for it.
That's unfortunate redietz. Then why are you here? Is it only to criticize? How about helping the rest of the forum with some helpful information... for a change.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
One of the ways of being a video poker winner is playing the best possible paytable along with the appropriate bankroll to take advantage of the long term advantage you have for the denomination being played. Since you are a winner redietz would you mind telling us the denomination and the game you play along with the bankroll you have in order to take advantage of your "advantage play" formula?
Currently I play 25 cent FPDW. Occasionally I'll play 10/7 Double Bonus for 25 cents. I'll play NSUD for short stints if senior bonuses, point multiplers, and free vp tournaments are tied in with the promotion. That's as far as I go playing a technically-but-not-really negative games. In the past I played up to a dollar on the FPDW and 10/7, but those are very rare today. I've played 9/6 under rare circumstances involving bonuses. Back in the old days, I played Flush Attack games.
Since my bankroll is all one big bankroll, and doesn't have a separate vp component, it's generally been well over 200K.
If you asked where I play the games currently, I wouldn't tell you. There's no percentage in it, as they say.
O.K. the truth. I was born in a log cabin. I couldn't attend school cause I had to take care of my six sisters. I almost went blind reading by candle light but I did manage to get a paper or two published in Bulls****ers Digest. I'd state my real name but I'm just way too modest and don't want to upstage all the experts on the forum. Q. U. Ahaug esq.
Since we're coming clean------after my 14 years as a porn star-------oh never mind
redietz has come clean as an advantage player primarily on 25-cent video poker who sometimes works himself up to the $1 level. I can't imagine why with his talent and skill and a $200K bankroll he isn't pounding out the wins on $5, $10, $25 and even $100 machines. But what do I know? I'm not an AP. I guess the real truth to being an AP is to bang out those wins on 25-cents deuces... or to do what another AP does which is to play using other people's money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
I'd guess you really didn't need much of a bankroll for vp then, as most of that has to be for the sports betting, etc. But what's with the part about not saying where you play? There's no secrets in video poker.
Why would anyone play a losing game, whether at $5, $25, or $100? "Casino Philanthropist" is not my title. I detect some disdain for playing 25-cents video poker -- we AP's banging away at 25-cents deuces and so on. I find this disdain really funny given that what I wager in other venues undoubtedly dwarfs anything you do or have ever done. Another thing you seem to miss is that "Advantage Play" can refer to anything -- video poker, poker, blackjack, sports betting, so the mentality needs to be consistent.
Rob, if you think vpfree is constantly up to date on what games are available everywhere, especially off-the-wall locations, you are mistaken. Eventually the public catches up, but there's often a time lag.
I'm just curious about your "hourly earnings" at 25-cents FPDW?? Is it really worth your time and trouble??
People who actually win SHOULD have an interest in sharing how with as many others as possible, and without charge of any kind. My point about what you claim is that it's a moving target laced with criticism of others, and some of us would like to know more about such a personality and their success in order that we can form as accurate a position as possible--and it's only because you have chosen to be a member here.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Not sure how I gave that impression. I do know, however, that what you said about those higher limit games in LV not being offered as part of a "theoretically greater than 100% opportunity" is not true. I keep in touch with several high rolling vp players there, and while neither wins playing vp (they do tell me they win big at live poker and smaller on sports betting) neither plays vp without at least a 2% advantage.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
I'm not privy to promos at those levels or rebates, but without those there are no 2% advantages.
One thing you and I agree on, Rob, is that (cover your ears, Alan) if there is any non-random trickeration by the occasional wayward manager, it would occur during the high-roller promotional offer specials such as pounded by Bob Dancer and cohorts.
Well, certainly Redietz, I think it's safe for us to think that if there were higher denomination machines that offered you an edge you would be playing them... right? So would you think that these gems you are finding hidden on casino floors are just loss leaders for the casinos? Similar to my local supermarket offering a loaf of bread for 19-cents on Wednesdays?
And again I have to ask you just how much money are you earning per hour? Would you be better off flipping burgers at In 'N Out where you also get benefits?
Wow... isn't that the excuse the APs give when they don't win??Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Public address announcer: "Arcimedes. Paging Arcimedes. Mr. Arcimedes. Paging Mr. Arcimedes."
I agree very much with what redietz offered about those "juicy" promos that rope players like Bob Dancer in....and into eventual divorce court. No players bring more cash with them when there's an "on purpose" 2%-4% "edge" and those in the casinos who offers these things know exactly what they're doing. Heck, how do you think arci got all those decks of cards from the Tuscany to now use as a virtual "kitchen table vacation" while ignoring all those knocks on the wall from next door because the device that's pushing all the fluids thru where the gizzard used to be, is making such a racket?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Well, Rob, of course you agree with redietz when he says the machines are not random. Isn't that the excuse all APs use when they don't win? That something must be rigged?
Over on Wizard of Vegas some "dice controllers" were blaming "biased dice" (not random, or rigged) for how they weren't able to control their throws or get the results they expected from their expert throws. Hah!!
Well, Rob, I am glad you found a supporter for your rigged machine theory.
Public address announcer: "Arcimedes. Paging Arcimedes. Mr. Arcimedes. Paging Mr. Arcimedes."
I've never used it, but I agree that we should all keep our eyes open.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Sorry, bowled, played cards and went to casinos to collect some freeplay yesterday and played golf today.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Priorities. Was there something important I missed?
Redietz- I have one problem--I am confused. If you don't believe that the RNG is in fact random, how can you be an AP? The math doesn't work if the RNG isn't random. The ER is a myth if the RNG is not truly random.
I also am a non-believer in the RNG, or at least its randomness, but then I am not an AP.
How do you make peace with this?
If you did that stuff alone, yes, there was something important that you missed. Oh but wait....you're used to it!Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
One more time: non-random machines are not rigged machines. Totally random machines are the biggest hoax ever perpetrated upon the video poker-playing community. In time, even hard-line geezers like arci will come to agree with that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Rob you are going to have to be clear about this:
If you say a machine is not random, does it mean there is some kind of "fix" to make it non random?
Or, are you saying that on a machine that is supposed to be random you will never see true random results because a true random distribution can never be reached?
Or, are you saying that the gaming companies just can't create a random machine?
I say that because, first, of what what told to me by a gaming programmer, and next, because the machine I had for testing confirmed what he said. I was told the machines COULD be programmed to be completely random, but that there was no reason to because of gaming regulations requiring the payback of all machines to be below a certain %, no matter what the paytable theoretically represented. And any machine that somehow went above that proprietary number was to be removed from the floor and immediately returned to the factory. All machines in every casino are leased not owned. So non-random does not mean rigged.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Rob-in what way is it non-random? Are the odds of any card showing not 1/52? Are there pre-designed payouts or occurences rather than a random draw on each hand? Are the odds of a royal not approx 1/40,000? Is it set to not hit royals? Please explain in what way they are not random. Does it go beyond the general feeling we all get that when we have 4 to a flush we never seem to get it?
By the way-----HAWKS WIN!!!!!!
This goes back to our first interview... I disagreed with you then and I disagree with you now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
1. I really doubt this story about the engineer sitting next to you on a plane trip from Europe.
2. Let's not bring up the machine you tested and your results until you can find that machine. Even your results -- if you can find them -- cannot be verified without the machine.
3. You have it all wrong about what the NGC wants with a video poker machine. You said the machines would be legal because of "gaming regulations requiring the payback of all machines to be below a certain %, no matter what the paytable theoretically represented." This is wrong. What you are talking about refers to SLOT MACHINES but with Video Poker machines the regulations are quite clear that each card must have an equal chance of showing. The "return" is determined by the pay table and not by rigging the RNG. Now we can argue this but this is what we debated going back to our first interview and I stand by it and I will disagree with you till the day I am eating dirt.... to quote a phrase from you.
Now, what is your evidence that the video poker machines in use now in Nevada and made by the big gaming companies are not random? And why are they not random?
But yet you guys believe that by waiting a split second, or counting a-thousand-one, thousand-two-PUSH THE BUTTON!-that you can get a winning hand whereas before that you didn't have a chance?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Yes, I believe that most of the modern video poker machines today have the continuous shuffle method. I guess you don't?Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
One can only laugh hysterically at the silly nonsense produced by speedo. Of course, folks like Frank, Dancer, myself and hundreds of APers are proof that he is once again lying just like he always does.
But hey, keep on wearing those tin foil hats. They are very stylish. ;)
Arc, could you be more specific? Just for the record. Tin foil hats could also be a fashion statement. Please refer to the event that the tin foil hat made its appearance. Thanks.
Hard for Arci to prove that they are Random, just as the rest of us can't prove they aren't. I wish we could get further clarification from Rob as to hoe the non-randomness manifests per my previous question in this thread.
Arci-other than that they are supposed to be random, can you point to any proof that they are. Even your buddy Redietz seems to question randomness, although again, with no specifics.
How else can you explain the fact that some days the quads totally disappear=yet come another day and they're plentiful?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Maybe it's a random game and some days you get lucky and some days you don't?Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
Alan-one of my friends who I play VP with is always complaining about the flush draw on 4 to a flush. So I asked him to keep track one day because I think we forget the flushes that fill and remember what seems like an endless string of failures. He stopped counting at 6 of 213. Obviously, too small of a sample size but now he is even more convinced they are rigged. This also was on an Ultimate X game where, as you probably know, the hand after a flush is worth anywhere from 8-12 times more. He firmly believes that those games are programmed to not give flushes and full houses and are not random.
What a lawsuit if we could ever prove it. So again, Rob, Red, etc.---if you have proof, I'm filing the class action suit.
All people need to do is collect enough results to get close to statistical verification. That why I keep results. Regnis, your buddy should keep on with the numbers. Once he gets to 10,000 tries if he stills sees this level of discrepancy I think he will have pretty good evidence to take to a gambling commission.
Slingshot, the reason quads vary is actually good evidence for randomness. If they were consistent, that would not be random.
It's pretty clear I said, "If there's any non-random trickeration..." which, to my ears, doesn't read like, "there is non-random trickeration." But reading comprehension isn't Alan's strength, so we forgive and move on.
Meanwhile, for those who absolutely think all RNG's are working flawlessly, we present (for the umpteenth time), the difficulty with that assumption:
1) It assumes that, without any trickeration, all RNG's work flawlessly all the time. Do you know any piece of equipment that works flawlessly all the time? And Rob's manhood doesn't count.
2) It assumes no manager, anywhere in the gambling world, would be so devious as to rig a machine at any time. Welcome to the Disney Channel.
3) It assumes the gaming commission checks all machines to ensure there is no trickeration. True enough, but does anyone know the frequency of that checking? I've told you several times.
4) It assumes any casino caught doing that would be severely damaged by fines and public reaction. That, my friends, is incorrect.
5) It assumes any manager caught doing trickerations would never find a job in gaming again. That, my friends, is incorrect. In fact, if you think about it, it's a great reason to hire somebody.
Alan, as I've said prior, you will only believe that machines are 100% random 100% of the time, because where would believing any different leave you when hit with those frequent urges to get some video poker action in? Imagine the predicament.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
1. It was on a plane coming back from Australia, where there are thousands of IGT machines in play. But most of my info came from follow-up talks with him after I began looking into the 5th card flipover anomaly.
2. What's with your penchant for getting your hands on the machine I tested? You know that it wasn't really legal for me to have it, and all I can do is share what I found. True believers such as yourself and most AP's would never change their beliefs even if the case were proven in a court of law. And why not? Because it would compromise that incredible, insatiable need to play the game going forward. People always believe in what they want. It's up to the individual to have the ability to be able to deal with whatever facts they choose are real. I've done that.
3. It's the same with this issue. Common sense says you should not play again if you believed what I said about how wrong you are and how we are not allowed access to the proprietary & confidential portions of the regulations. But not playing again would be inconceivable to you, so nothing could get through to you but whatever it takes to be able to keep playing, thinking everything is random and hunky dory. And just like arci or anyone else can't prove anything to regnis or you or me or anyone that machines are random, I can't prove they aren't. Even though from my own conversations and testing and even my play, I KNOW they are not.
I think the key here is in the classic BS by arci that claims, and I quote, that "any casino caught making their machines non-random would have their doors shut by Gaming". That assertion/guess/lie has continually been disproven. And I agree that if a boss were identified to have been doing that for years for the benefit of his establishment, his hire value would skyrocket.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Just wondering....do you also keep records on how many knocks there are on the wall by your neighbor when that machine is clanging away? Or does the card game get "too loud" at times...Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
Squeak squeak....knock knock :)
To address Alan's question about how much does playing 25 cent FPDW yield, the answer's pretty simple -- six bucks an hour at normal speed, plus comps. Yes, one might be better flipping burgers. Of course, one would be fabulously better off flipping burgers than playing the negative expectation dollar and up machines at Caesars. Unless, of course, one uses the excuse that those machines provide excitement and thrills, which somehow doesn't happen when one plays for quarters. Why it would be different playing for a buck versus a quarter is beyond me. I guess some people have a paper fetish.
I noticed 2 examples from my recent play. Today, I took the $20 free play and turned it into $35 and left-I finally got pissed at their reduction in offers and inordinate amounts offered to friends who only played there once or twice=$85. Last visit, however, I noticed that whenever there was a choice between two hands, I wouldn't have gotten a winner on either hand on 2-3 card draws. While playing dp vs ddbp, there were few 2 pair draws on bp but almost always 2 pair on ddbp-which is what I played today=and which was fine because that's a push and I got to KEEP playing until the freeplay was played through.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Unfortunately for you and for Rob, if the machines are not 100% random the burden is on you to prove they are not. So what is your proof?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Rob... you haven't presented your data after all these months and even if you did present your data without the machine to connect with the data the data is meaningless. You might have stumbled upon the story of the century but you have no way to prove it.
I never said they weren't random. I gave you a list of reasons why the assumption every machine was random was flawed.
"The burden of proof?" Alan, I'm assuming you mean that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof," which I agree with. Now the key question here isn't "Is it likely this machine in front of me is non-random?" The question is whether, "Is every single one of these thousands of machines' RNGs operating flawlessly?"
Now I take it your position is that it is more likely that each one of tens of thousands of machines is operating flawlessly than that one or more are operating in a flawed fashion. If that is your position, good for you. I would submit that position, since it is extremely unlikely, would carry a very heavy burden of proof.
I'm not trying to prove anything to anybody, except the limitations of what you actually know to be true. Evidently Alan knows that none of the tens of thousands of machines is flawed. That is an extraordinary position.
Well now you can disregard my question about burden of proof. "I never said they weren't random" is all the response I need. Your list of reasons is argumentative and without merit.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Redietz, I must say you are very imaginative at creating arguments over just about everything on this forum whether it be Rob's strategy, or my credentials, or even how I operate the forum. You make a lot of critical noise for someone who makes little in the way of positive contributions.
Alan, as I said, I can't prove to anyone that the machines are not random, and I really don't need to because I've proven it to myself--which in gambling, is all that counts. I passed along my info and that's all I can do. If anyone chooses not to believe me, I gave you the spot-on reason for that also.
What I find confusing is why you don't believe you should present similar proof that the games are random. Simply saying you saw so on the Internet and the regs say so, is very inconclusive. That's like arci or Dancer or redietz claiming they all win, and their "proof" is because that's what the math says they should do under perfect circumstances throughout the life of their play. Fine & dandy, except for one glaring missing fact: saying something SHOULD BE is not anything near proof that it HAS HAPPENED. It's just a crutch....and a weak one at that. So I ask you: can you present absolute proof that the games are indeed random everywhere in Nevada all the time, or is that locked up in one of your ex-wives' garages?
Yes-and I would still like to know how you (Redietz) justify playing VP as an AP if you believe they are not random. How can you rely on the math if the math is a myth?
Can you explain?
Rob--you know ex-wives only get things of significant monetary value
As I said before, the burden of proof is not on me. It is on you. And you've admitted that you can't prove it to anyone but yourself. Now, even redietz says "I never said they weren't random."Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
If you want to believe games are totally random and you proclaim they are as a site administrator, why in the world would you think there is no burden of proof on you?? If anything, my inability to prove they aren't random would seem slightly more credible than your inability to prove they are, since I've explained my reasons for my position. What's yours--because you read about it on the Internet?
Because the law is on my side. Who is on your side, Rob?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
is that I used to play longer sessions and I now heed Rob's advice to get outta there as soon as possible.
Video poker machines are nothing but small computers. Everyone knows that computers fail now and then, but it is not a common occurrence and generally it is obvious when it happens. One of the most reliable components of computers is the central processing unit. It would take failures in the CPU to cause the RNG to fail. As part of the power up code on these system they run diagnostic checks that would find most problems. In addition, if any internal error is detected the machines run diagnostics. And, even on the small chance it wasn't detected, the problem would most likely impact other programs in the machine. Things like displaying cards or counting down credits might fail. The RNG is probably less that .01% of the code.
In other words, the chances of undetected failures in the RNG of VP games is very, very small.
Regarding Alan's comments vis-a-vis me: consider me an editor, Alan.
What Alan said about me is completely true. But it seems to me that when it comes to gambling, somebody who can tell you what you shouldn't be doing is actually pretty valuable. Readers are going to get more financial value from me telling them what they shouldn't do than from just about anyone else telling them what they should do. Not much warm-and-fuzzy, just value.
Are you absolutely sure about that? First I'll ask you to point that out to me anywhere but on the NGC site, because I told you that they will never publish proprietary or confidential policy. Then, simply prove that the games are 100% random. Have you tested any machine(s) and if so, may I see the printed results?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
"proprietary or confidential policy" would be against the law. Only a dufus would make such a claim.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Arci--I think that those that believe they are not random believe it is intentionally so, not a case of CPU failure. I believe that they believe it is more diabolical than computer error. I, myself, am still not sure what I believe. But I do agree with Red that the belief that a casino would get fined a significant amount and/or lose its license is fairy tale. The state, city, municipality---whatever--that relies on the casino revenue is not going to bite the hand that feeds it.Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
What both of you seem to be overlooking is that the casino business is competitive, and no one casino and no one slot maker dominates the industry. So if one casino has rigged machines or if one slot maker is making rigged machines I am sure there is no way that the regulators would protect them when there are other competitors ready and I am sure willing and able to take up the slack.Quote:
Originally Posted by regnis
If for example Casino X knew that Casino Y were cheating, don't you think Casino X would be bringing on the pressure? And the same with VP Maker A if they found out that VP Maker B had a problem with its machines -- don't you think Company A would be raising holy hell?
As long as the market is competitive, and as long as government officials are either elected or appointed, they will be looking over their shoulders to be sure they do the right thing. Only rarely do the bad guys get away with it -- and not for long.
Let's be realistic here. Rob has been making these same allegations for years and so far they've gotten no where. Why?
"Only rarely do the bad guys get away with it." Yowza. Talk about statements that can't be falsified. Alan appears to be of the opinion that "bad guys" rarely being caught means they rarely get away with anything. Gag me with a spoon.
So Red--you keep dancing around this. Do you think the RNG is in fact random or not. And if not, is it malfunction or intentional.
You misinterpreted. What you should be thinking is this: there are few bad guys who do few bad things. This is why I don't think there is any conspiracy to have non random video poker machines. It is also why on the Wizard's forum I fought with those who suggest there is a conspiracy to use biased dice on craps games and that the casinos and the employees and dice makers are all part of the conspiracy to manufacture and use biased dice.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
I dont believe any of this crap. There is no reason for anyone to cheat when they can make money legally. And if there were biased dice and non random video poker machines, someone in the world besides the couple of fanatics on the Wizard forum who talk about biased dice, and Rob Singer who talks about VP machines here, would have said something. The silence of everyone else is deafening.
There's a lot of differnece-and it fit's into the casino's hold, take, and staying legal.
Slingshot, I'm sorry but I really don't understand what you are talking about with "simulated randomness." To me the system is either random or it isn't. If it's "simulated" then does that mean it's made to look like it's random but it really isn't? Pleases explain this to me.
Also, you keep talking about the "casino's hold." This is a term which is better suited for slot machines and not video poker. The hold or profit from video poker is determined by the pay table only. If you don't believe that are you saying they program video poker machines to only hit a certain number of winners?
I'm shaking my head in disbelief Alan. You actually do believe the caSINo industry does not sin and does everything related to the vp machines according to the book because they make "enough" money "legally"! Phew!! And I'll bet you think no one in the Obama Administration has broken any laws, the murder of 4 Americans in Benghazi was "unfortunate" and the entire story is on the up & up, Wall St. bankers never broke any laws, and priests could NEVER have committed any crimes because they all took vows.
Wow!!
Alan, the conspiracy nuts will never accept that business follows rules and regs because it really is in their best interest. The number of potential whistle blowers in the casino industry is huge. But, the illogical, nut jobs will never go away.
Rob until you show me any evidence how can I believe you? Show me something.
Over on the Wizard's forum, I think the guys who came up with the conspiracy theory about biased dice did so after they found they couldn't "influence" the dice. It's a pretty imaginative excuse, isn't it? Oh... I'm throwing too many 7s because the dice are biased. Yeah, sure.
Absolutely brilliant. Watch the IRS as they "follow the rules" because "it really is in their best interest"!Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
ROTFLMFAO!!!
Other than the cases you already have read about, nothing I can show you would prove wrongdoing because the machines are not totally random by agreed upon design. Even so, it's no stretch at all to expect casino hanky panky with machines in order to make an even higher profit and/or percentage. The gaming industry doesn't exactly sit at the right hand of God.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
What agreed upon design? Who agreed to what?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
In video poker each card is supposed to have an equal chance of showing in the deal and in the draw each of the remaining cards is to have an equal chance. Do you have any evidence that shows this is not true?
We're back to the regs that are confidential but you don't believe exist again. Tell me this: have you even seen, written, or been involved in a Federal, State, County, or City Government Contract, and have you ever seen the multiple proprietary and/or confidential clauses contained within? Many have them Alan. And then, what in the world makes you want to believe that the casino business is any more ethical than the prostitution business, which is "against the law" in Clark County?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Come on Rob, do something that matters: tell us about the other gunmen at Dealey Plaza, find where Jimmy Hoffa is, uncover the studio used to broadcast man walking on the moon and why they forgot to put stars in the sky, and how about showing us the bodies of those aliens who crashed in the flying saucer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Here's something that matters. We've got the family all coming up to Tahoe again the first week in July, so we're taking off today for a ride up the Oregon coast and an RV park we like that's right on the ocean. The nights in Carson City are very cool which is great, but the days are just a little warmer than we'd like. And after our get-together for the 4th we'll head over to the N. Calif coastline, where it's also on the comfortable side. So adios northern Nevada, and when we're in the Lake Tahoe area next month I hope to be able to put up some more winners. In the meantime, I'll be on the lookout for Jimmy Hoffa:) C ya in a month!
Quick comment -- for regnis. I believe 99.99% of all RNG's operate properly. I would estimate, at any given time, a very tiny number go rogue in and of themselves. I think it very possible that a similarly small number go rogue not in and of themselves, and that these would happen in specific conditions that most folks could figure out.
Points to consider -- if you are relying on tenths of percentage points to make your vp profit (as huge players sometimes do), then running into one rogue machine at any time flips you into the negative and means you are losing money. And you will never, ever know if a machine is rogue if it is intentionally adjusted.
I don't think these observations are flawed or illogical, but if there's a lack of logic here, please point it out.
Rob and I consider, given human nature/history/inclinations, that what's been suggested here has occasionally happened, and will occasionally happen going forward. Other folks argue that it has never happened and will never happen. I think the first position is eminently more reasonable. The second position requires an unhealthy dose of hubris.
For those who think the gaming commission keeps tabs on everything, let me repeat that they get around to checking each machine every 18-24 months, if they are on schedule, which they never are. And if their schedule is leaked by anyone (as in anyone) in the commission office, then it all becomes just a wink-wink shell game.
But you all knew that, right?
Thanks Red-that's all I was looking for. So in theory, if 99% are indeed random, you can, with some degree of comfort, play as an AP. I thought from your earlier comments that you believed that a greater % of non-randomness was out there.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
I think certain scenarios are more likely to result in you running into a non-reg situation, but playing 25-cent machines isn't one of them.
I place no faith in anecdotal evidence, but it does seem as if the high-stakes vp population is taking an unprecedented beating that appears to be way out on the end of the bell curve. I suspect Frank could have something to say about that, if he appeared from the internet ether.
Absolutely hilarious. Speedo thinks the IRS is a business. No wonder he is such a doofus.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
However, the situation is perfect evidence of what I just said. Eventually, breaking the law comes back to bite you.