Printable View
You're going to have to quote me those laws, Alan. I've never even heard a rumor regarding such laws.
More to the point, is your argument about why machines don't employ stop loss/win goal programming really going to be that there exist gaming commission laws preventing it? We can quote you that that is why it isn't done?
You're painting yourself into a very tight corner.
Years ago, while visiting the Castle Casino my wife was playing a ten dollar 2-coin machine. This was when we used coins. She emptied it several times along with two hand pays. She was winning thousands. Finally, she emptied it again and after the refill she got one more spin then the symbols never stopped spinning. They opened and closed it a couple more times never getting the symbols to stop again. They gave her the last two coins she put in and told her it had a problem then closed it with the card in the window. The next day our last day there the card never was removed and the machine was never working.
That’s one way to stop a machine if paying too much.
So here's my question. If you believe in the long term, and certainly the casinos do, why shut off a machine that has been incredibly hot? That machine should actually now get cold and recoup those losses, at least the believers in the long term would assert, as the machine's overall results now begin the return to normalcy.
The casino would be actually hurting itself, unless the machine was malfunctioning. Please don't tell me the casino does not believe in the long term!!!!
They did once close a craps table on me.
So you're saying the machine, or any other casino game for that matter, is "due" to either make you win or lose because the opposite has been happening more frequently? Gamblers Fallacy.
As for tables, yes, we've all seen superstitious floor personnel. They have no reason being a supervisor if that's the case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
Does this qualify? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Redietz you've got to be kidding? Even the rules that govern server controlled machines do not allow the casino to change the games while being played. The laws are specific. Look 'em up.
Any casino can shut down any machine at any time. Nobody said anything about changing the game or the payout while someone was on the machine. What I am saying is that I know absolutely nothing that prevents the casino from programming win goals and stop losses into their machines.
Besides, Alan, you sneaky dude, you didn't answer the question. Are you really saying that the reason win goals and stop losses aren't programmed into machines is that it would be illegal? Can we quote you on that?
P.S. There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying, "I was wrong." I don't think the phrase has ever come out of Rob's keyboard in his 5000 posts, but it is okay to actually say it. I am reminded of the old Happy Days with Fonzie trying to say, "I was wro---wrooo--wwrroooonnnn----wroonnnnnn...."
Alan and company have no clue how VP machines work. The machine does nothing but shuffle the fucking cards. You as the player, when hitting the deal/draw button, determine when the shuffling stops and the cards are dealt. Exactly the same if you did it at home with a real deck of cards. The results will mimic the overall casino machine play. Hot/cold cycles are pure bullshit after the fact garbage and have no bearing on future hands. No wonder he's a loser at VP.
jbjb you should omit the last 2 words in your previous post. :)
*Sorry, this is a joke.
I invite you to call the NGC.
Here's your answer. From NGC 14.040 sentence 2. Now STFU.
This doesn't appear to state whether a machine can be turned off or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by NGC 14.040.2
Sentence 7 might indicate it's illegal to have a machine turn off based on the actual hold percentage.
Read it again. It says right in the first sentence. Care to argue? Call the NGC. They gave me the regulation.
Well that's wrong, then. It just says the probabilities cannot be changed once a game is initiated (ie: wager is made).
I've seen two machines in high limit rooms removed because they lost money over long periods of time. That's what I was told when asked during an interview.
I've also seen it the other way. The 3 royals and four A's w/a kicker I hit in around two hours all on $2 @ SP, on a 25c/50c/$1/$2 bartop machine--which obviously gets mostly 25c play--was checked TWICE for payout % after my 3rd & 4th jackpots. I was told the machine was way over break-even for the player, but they were not shutting it down or replacing it.
I went back a month later and mugged it for another $1900 profit, and I'll try again in Dec.
God bless Donald Trump, and God Bless America!
Everyone read the regulation. Now I'll explain it.
The casino cannot turn off a machine while you are playing it. They can't change the pays while you are mugging it, Rob. But after you leave the machine they can do whatever they want including shutting down a machine.
What this means is THEY CANNOT have a machine programmed to have a loss limit (for the casino) because they're not allowed to change anything when the machine is in play.
Does this make it clear, redietz and others?
In New Jersey the machine must also remain idle for a minimum of 5 minutes after last activation before any changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Good point. If I recall in Nevada server based machines must be idle for 15 minutes before a change can be made. I'm on the road and using my cell to go thru the NGC regs is difficult.Quote:
Originally Posted by blackhole
I have seen machines shut down after paying out a lot. Admittedly, this was not in Nevada but saying a machine cannot be changed and saying it cannot be shut down are two different things. Alan, I think you would need to find a regulation specific to that situation.
'While you are playing it" is the key phrase Alan jammed in here. That would mean after you hit the start button for a particular game, not while you are sitting there between games.
If you are sitting there between games, they can shut it down.
The average person plays 500 games an hour. This regulation simply states that you can't shut down the machine once one of those 500 hands has begun.
Nobody said they could.
So Alan, you are going to stick to your guns and say that "the laws" prevent machines from being programmed to use win goals and loss limits? Is that your argument?
I'm not sure how anyone could arrive at another interpretation. By Alan's interpretation, the next time a tech comes by at 4 AM and tells me they'll be servicing my bank of machines in 10 minutes, I should simply say, "NGC 14.040.2 states I can keep playing as long as I want. You can't shut it down while I'm playing."
Think that'll work?
I don't think a tech is coming by to do anything but empty the cash box while you're playing.
I was not aware of this regulation until the NGC told me about it. But I do recall several years ago playing a machine at Rincon when some techs came to move around machines. They saw me playing and did not move my row of four machines. About ten years ago I was playing a progressive at Caesars and at 4 in the morning techs came to move it to another area. I didn't know they were waiting for me but they stood nearby for nearly an hour till I finished playing.
I'm really sorry that this bit of reality doesn't fit your thinking redietz.
Why don't you just call the NGC Enforcement Division in Carson City and argue with them, redietz? I didn't write the rules nor do I interpret them.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
You have a beef with the NGC. Call them and tell them you're the boss.
You're looking for details that don't exist again Red. No casino in Nevada can shut down a game while a player has credits in it unless there's a malfunction, and they can't force you to cash out unless another issue exists.
They can absolutely 86 you. You should at least understand that, Rob, since you claim you got 86'd from MGM. And if they wanted to 86 you or back you off because you're winning, they could and would, if it had any positive impact on their (casino's) win/loss.
I'm not believing you can properly read RS. No one but a wife can stop anyone from playing a machine because you're winning while there's credits in it, unless a malfunction is declared.
As far as being 86'd, what's that got to do with it? MGM? I was 86'd from playing vp only at Bellagio & Harrahs LV in the mid-2000's and Silverton just a few years ago. They recently let me back in, but only if I agreed not to play higher than $2. None of the machines I played anywhere were shut down or changed as far as I know. So I'm not getting your point.
RS__ what does getting 86d have to do with the question about casinos programming stops on their machines? Nothing. You are just being argumentative again.
This entire conversation is silly because casinos know as well as any intelligent person that win/loss goals do not affect the return of a machine. Only math illiterates believe that kind of nonsense. I've even posted a proof in the past. Not only are these folks math illiterate, but they can't seem to understand simple logic.
Wow, Arc. I wonder what redietz has to say about this? When I told him there was no such thing as a program to stop a machine he wrote:Quote:
Originally Posted by arcimede$
Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
As far as I'm concerned, the discussion is why don't casinos use the "rob singer logic" and quit when ahead. One method of doing that is by kicking a player out of the casino. But guess what -- they don't kick out losers!
I'll be sure to remember this next time I get asked to leave while I have credits in a machine. "No, Mr. CSM, I have credits in the machine and you can't stop me from playing, only a wife can do that!" If the casino doesn't want you to play anymore, you'll be asked to leave.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
"86'd from playing VP" ??? Wtf does that mean. You do realize 86'ing refers to someone being trespassed from a casino, not being asked not to play VP. If you're allowed on the property, you're allowed to play. Period. I brought up your 86'ing at MGM (Bellagio is owned by MGM, you do realize that, right?), because I figured you'd understand that casinos can and do 86 players. From the way you responded, it sounds like you weren't 86'd, but perhaps asked not to play VP anymore (if that's even believable).Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
If a casino wanted to "quit when ahead", they'd ask you to leave when they were ahead on you (ie: you're losing). Of course, they'd never do that (tell you to leave because you're losing). Casino has the edge, so no reason for them to 'quit when ahead' or be worried if they're losing, assuming they have an edge on you and you aren't an AP.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
As far as whether the casino COULD program a machine to turn off in the middle of a session.....I have no idea if it's legal or not, nor do I really care. I agree with arci -- it's silly.
Alan, I'm not sure what it is, but you have a way to make posts that are demonstrably wrong.
How many customers would the casino have left if they asked the losers to leave?Quote:
Originally Posted by RS__
jbjb's original posit was that win goals and loss limits don't work for players,
because if they did, then the casinos would use them against the players.
The fact that casinos don't use win goals doesn't prove that those strategies can't work for individual players.
Apparently casinos do use loss limit strategies, so does that prove that loss limits work for the players?
Jbjb all I want to say is that in Nevada machines cannot be programmed to shut down when they (the machines) reach a loss limit. You can continue saying whatever you like but I was challenged about the law. Anyone disagreeing with me should call the NGC.
Even if they did have one, I wouldn't use it. I'd have the edge against you so I'd ultimately grind you down to nothing. This is why you keep getting invited back. They know you'll lose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Now go start counting cards in a casino and you'll eventually see a different result. You'll start winning consistently, get figured out that you have the edge and shown the door.
We're not debating your casino super powers. Redietz challenged my statement that programming stop losses was against the rules. We know you have no need for a job and your casino self employment gives you a standard of living we all envy.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
RS, seems like you still don't get it. Bellagio was not part of MGM when I told you I was not allowed to play vp there, and the actual letter was published in Gaming Today for all the crybaby AP's like you. The managing editor certainly had fun on the phones with that one!
In the gaming industry, "86'd" means banned from a casino, a game, or games. I tire of constantly having to school you. Any wonder now why I had such a good time--and why the paper had such a good time--when my 8-yr. weekly column mocked AP's?
A casino can't ban you from a game.
Absolutely false. Casinos have blocked players from blackjack and allowed them to play craps and video poker. There are many instances of this. I was banned from throwing dice at MGM but not from betting.Quote:
Originally Posted by RS__
So they refused your action.
RS--I can't quote any law or rules or regs, but I have seen numerous people barred from playing BJ without being 86ed from the other games in the casino.Quote:
Originally Posted by RS__
I think that the phrase "86ed" doesn't really have a terribly precise meaning. Originally, if someone were "86ed," it was in reference to being trotted 80 miles out of town and made to dig their own grave (six feet under, get it?). It was in reference to an execution style whacking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
When it took on a gaming reference, it was just slang used by people who knew damn well what the original meaning was -- wink, wink.
So, in general, getting "86ed from a casino" meant getting banned from a property with extreme prejudice. While one could sloppily say one was "86ed" from playing video poker at a particular property, but was still allowed on that property, that doesn't really have much of the feel or connotation of what "86ed" really meant.
If this is about me, no. They would take all the betting action I could give them. They just said I could not throw the dice. The pit boss went from table to table and said "Mr M can make bets but cannot throw the dice."Quote:
Originally Posted by RS__
I've never heard of a situation where someone was legally banned from a game but not the property. Is there a regulation/law/statute that I'm not aware of?Quote:
Originally Posted by regnis
They might say you aren't allowed to play a certain game or refuse your action -- but if you're allowed on the property, you can legally play any game.
I think we all agree that a casino can allow you on the property but tell you that you can't play a particular game.Quote:
Originally Posted by RS__
I have seen properties obliquely shut people down from sports betting but allow them to play other (negative EV) games.Quote:
Originally Posted by RS__
By obliquely, I mean they will place limits on you so low that you can't bet any meaningful amount. They can still claim you are allowed to bet, so technically they have not "banned" you from sports betting, but pragmatically, that's what they've done. For example, 15 years ago the manager of the Stardust publicly restricted my parlay card action on a number of occasions.
I would assume, but please inform me if I'm incorrect, that a casino can similarly decide you qualify only for betting a certain amount on table games.
While legally perhaps you can play any game, the question is are they legally forced to allow you to play the amounts you want to play.
I honestly do not know, and look forward to hearing everyone's comments.
Of course they can refuse your action and as far as I know, they can limit your betting amounts. There are some games I believe they would legally have to allow you to play (ie: VP progressive), but that's an entirely different case, I reckon.
If a casino wanted to block you from playing any video poker, they could. Casinos decide who they want to do business with. If they told Rob Singer "no more video poker for you" they would have every right to do that.Quote:
Originally Posted by RS__
Let me say it plainly: casinos are independent businesses and decide who they want to do business with. Provided they are not discriminating because of race, religion, sexual orientation and the usual protected rights, they don't have to let you play or they can decide what games they will let you play.
I don't understand why this is even a discussion. Yes, at least in Nevada, casinos make their own rules so if they want to block you from a single game or restrict your betting they can do it but still allow you on the property. Or they can keep you off their property all together.
First royal of the year last night.
Congrats!
In February, 2000, I had been at North Shore Lake Tahoe for four months. It was much longer than I usually stayed. My trips there were normally for 4 to six weeks. I was vulturing a lot of games, stand alone flush attack, jackpot cards, Visions, Williams Games, Silicon games, etc. Most of the money I was making was coming out of Harrah's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
One day I walked into Harrah's and started my normal sweep of the flush attacks. A security guard tapped me on the shoulder and said I wasn't allowed to play machines anymore but i was welcome to play anything else. I objected in a nice way to what he told me so he said he was just following instructions from surveillance. He called surveillance and a suit security came down and told me the same thing.
I should have kept my trip to the 4 to six weeks. I wore out my welcome. Whether or not it was legal for them to restrict me from machines is irrelevant. If I didn't follow their instructions I would have lost the place altogether.
Dollars to donuts mickey could never produce his ban in writing from Harrahs, you know, like the one I published in Gaming Today that had all the AP critics whining like babies! In fact, to this day, with all the claims on WoV, vpfree, etc. of being "barred" or "backed off" or "restricted", I remain the only one to ever produce the proof.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
At this moment I am restricted from ever getting points for my play at the Tropicana in Laughlin, I'm not allowed to play above $2 at the Silverton, I am no longer allowed points on my card at the Eldorado in Reno, and I am banned from playing vp at the South Point. I was just informed of the latter today, as I called to ask where my offers were. I have the restriction from Trop in writing.
I'm happy for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Rob, their banning me from playing machines was a verbal communication. I didn't ask them to put it in writing, lol! But since you are bragging about all this proof you have in writing why don't you go ahead and give us a screenshot of it....along with your tax transcripts for the years 2000 thru 2009.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Rob, if all this is true then you are living proof that a machine player can be restricted. However, according to what you have written you don't need any card benefits. And South Point? Rob, you do know don't you that Dancer was instrumental in your banning at vpFREE? And you do know that Dancer is friends with Michael Gaughan don't you? Do you think Dancer played a roll in your banning at South Point?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
mickey, I explained where I am restricted from earning points for my play, and not that I worry over not getting the benefits from them. I simply won't play where I'm restricted. They tire of me winning and basically don't really want me to play at their casinos. It is a bit on the dumb side for them to do this. I've mugged their machines, so they're treating me like someone who cares about and needs the points.
Maybe Dancer read about and saw my post from June where I mauled a single line 25c thru $2 bartop for a $25k profit in 2-3 hours....which includes the wait for handpays. I know he knows those people. He teaches there "for free" because he likely drops $10k+/mo. at their poker machines.
There's plenty of other casinos in NV.
Yes, most reputable casinos frown on smelly derelicts frequenting their properties:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Rob, everyone is eligible to get lucky, including you. Your getting lucky there doesn't prove anything. There is always someone getting lucky in the casinos. But whether you know it or not, you are on the bottom of a long list of video poker players that have been restricted at South Point. Dancer is somewhat restricted too. He and Gaughan are friends. They frequently have meals together. Gaughan has appeared on GWAE a couple of times. Gaughan lets Dancer get away with a little bit of winning but Bob is not allowed to run over the joint.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
The big difference mickey is, you have all seen the overwhelmingly likely reason why I got restricted there, and it's not from being able to use my player's card like these other "long line of players" claim. To them--and to someone like you--it's an "impressive" thing to say to other "AP's" because you all get off on it. But has there ever been any tiny bit of proof, other than them claiming this for that reason? Nope.
Glad to see you're finally coming on board with good luck--and how giving myself the best opportunity for it to appear in every session at the optimal time--as being a staple in why I've been such a consistent winner....not to mention the best VP expert ever.
It's quite clear Rob is trolling: "the best VP expert ever."
Not saying this because I don't think he's the best VP expert ever (he's not), but because only a troll would make such an unfounded claim.
Rob, wanna post up the proof you got 86'd or "restricted" at Silverton, South Point, Trop Express, Eldorado Reno, or anywhere else?
Rob hasn't lost since 1996. Neither has Charlie Sheen.
Winning!!!!
'Nuff said.
Rob, I've seen players get restricted right in from of me. Your reaction to that is just to call everybody a liar. That's your schtick. Everyone is a liar. Fuck off, idiot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
mickey, all you do is tell made-up stories all over internet forums, so why would anyone with a brain not laugh profusely at you claiming to have seen "players restricted in front of your very eyes"? :)
I have seen players restricted from sports betting in front of my eyes. I have also seen ridiculously low limits placed on them in lieu of formal banning. And it isn't always a quiet, non-public conversation.
LOL...that about sums it upQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I was out in eastern Nevada working things. My buddy, Al, called me and told me they put in a couple of banks of $1 FPDW in the Peppermill/Reno. The Peppermill was known for having a strong slot card, generous comp, drawings, specials, etc. Just the FPDW straight didn't mean that much to me. At my speed it was only about a $38 an hour play. But the drawings were strong which effectively doubled the hourly rate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I didn't intend to pound it, just about six hours a day. Al had been on the play for a week when I got there....and he had a casino host. I told Al I didn't want anything to do with a casino host. He told me it was hard to avoid. After I quit play on the first day I went to the booth for a meal comp. The lady cut me the comp then told me I hadn't met my casino host yet. Evidently, there was something on her computer indicated when a casino host should be assigned. She told me she would set up an appointment. I walked off.
The next day I went back to the booth to get another meal comp. It was a different lady but she told me I had an appointment to meet my casino host at 5 PM. It was the same casino host Al had. I blew off the appointment.
On the third day Al and I are playing when Al got up to talk to some friend that came marching along. While they were talking the casino host walked up to him and said
"Al, sorry, but I have to suspend you from all drawings and special events."
"Why?" Al asked
"C'mon, Al. You know you're a pro!"
"What about the comp?" Al asked.
"I'll leave the comp alone for now. Now I have to find this Crimm guy and tell him the same thing."
"I know him" Al said. "I'll let him know." The casino host walked off.
Al and I both knew there were better things around than playing $1 FPDW straight up for only about $38 an hour. So we drug up on the pay.
That's the booze talking again mickey. Your stories all have the same ho-hum theme: Make it about years gone by so none of it can be corroborated, pretend to be pals with some other made-up gambling slug, then create some "+EV" play out of thin air lore that fits in nicely with the other BS.
FYI: I'm sure you're unaware of this. Peppermill has recently put in four of those 5c/10c/20c/25c FPDW machines that your ilk goes gaga over, and each denom. can play 1-25 credits.
Maybe if you get down there you might run into your made-up pal Am....or even that fatass slob Tuna. Imagine how much cheap draft beer and how many cancer sticks your trio of low-lifes could go thru!
Rob, you're funny, dude. You are accusing me of doing the same thing you do. All of your stories are about days gone by. And you are always hammering everyone about putting up proof. Yet you have never put up a shred of evidence on anything. And when arci trapped you in a bet that you never thought he would go through with, you ran and hid, welshed the bet. You are obviously looking in the mirror when you write your posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Ding ding ding!!! And yet, suckers like Slingshot believe his bullshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
LOL! It's a trap, Rob. You obviously don't know anything about Peppermill history. The casino hosts are trained to cull out pros. They use FPDW to do a lot of the work for them. They caught me in the trap in 2002. They occasionally will put the game back in to identify more pros. So go on up there and pound on it, Rob. See how long your card benefits last.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Got my second royal of the year last night. Third lifetime drawn royal.
I love to see dealt royals. Congratulations. Of course the machine locked up?
That looks great. Congratulations.
Congrats Dannyj.
I looks like the Royal was just over the amount to trigger a W-2, but a hand pay is always good even with a Bonus Poker game with a five coin two pair payoff.
Where's the "math" critics saying "you may have won THIS hand, but every hand you play on that game, including the royal, cost you X amount and you therefore didn't win anything at all"?
Waiting for their twisted words of wisdom.
Actually... I didn't notice that on this version of 8/5 Bonus the two-pair payoff is even money. But you have to pay for the various progressives. And it's not 8/5 bonus either.
Nice catch, Rob.
Right here...Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
Yes, coach. He is going to lose. That is, if he keeps playing that game. That payscale is a 94% base pay. The meters don't run fast enough to make up for it. I can tell the generic and small quad meters run at a snail's pace. The 4 Aces and RF meters appear to be faster. But still not strong enough. I wouldn't touch this game with a ten foot pole.Quote:
Originally Posted by coach belly
Yeah... forget the royal. It's a losing game. He's laughing all the way to the bank.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
There seems to be a difference of opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Quote:
Originally Posted by RS__
Every time I walk out of a casino with more money than what I had when I walked in, I have a hard time thinking of myself as losing.