I have never been asked for anything in writing to shoot video in a casino, whether it was for the news, for personal use (my wedding for example) or for commercial purposes (my TV show or the interview with Rob in the high limit area of Hard Rock).
Printable View
I have never been asked for anything in writing to shoot video in a casino, whether it was for the news, for personal use (my wedding for example) or for commercial purposes (my TV show or the interview with Rob in the high limit area of Hard Rock).
Based on extensive personal experience with no heat whatsoever, to get banned from Casino Fandango(Carson City), like Rob Singer claims he was, you would have to punch a casino employee or run around naked to get banned from this place - it's really kick-back there. Rob, did you clock a casino employee there ? Did you run around naked there ? What got you banned from there ?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
This was a really misleading and diversionary post. Surprisingly dishonest. Most casinos are not going to allow videotaping on the casino floor . The clear implication here is that somehow Argentino's presence was the reason for the non-allowance of videotaping.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
So, I will ask Mr. Mendelson directly, "Are you suggesting or implying that the videotaping was not allowed because Argentino was banned at most casinos? What precisely was said to you? Do you publicly stand by the statement that Argentino's winning was the reason you were not allowed to videotape at casinos, and can you name those casinos?"
Because, of course, I will ask those casinos if that was the case.
Just really dishonest regarding the videotaping.
As to "It's been well documented..." -- that phrase is passive voice, meaning, Mr. Mendelson does not have his hands on any of that evidence. He's presenting it second hand, based on Argentino's reportage. Now some people might ask (1) what was in the original banning letter from Bellagio -- did it state a banning due to winning, (2) what other casinos banned due to winning, and how does one verify that the banning excluded other reasons (such as vulgar or inappropriate behavior or non-payment of markers), and (3) why follow the "It's been well documented..." slop with a sentence explaining how hard it is to videotape on casino floors?
Without writing in advance for permission, most casinos will not allow videotaping involving people.
Thank you for the kind words, Deech. Sharing my experiences like this has always been something I have done on forums. I have always wanted to share my experiences to the extent that I could, just as other did for me. That is how you learn. You learn by experience. And if you can learn by other players experiences and mistakes, all the better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deech
Unfortunately the politics involved on some of the AP and blackjack forum, got in the way of that and prevent me from doing so today. And the climate here is not about sharing or learning from others....it is about tearing others down and trying to discredit them.
There are backoffs from the casino and there are my own self imposed backoffs due to an incident or perceived heat or even just a big win. (A big win is likely to be reviewed after the fact). So when any of these incidents occur I remove that casino from my rotation for a period of 3 months. Then I return on a different shift, making note not to play with the same pit people involved. This is why we keep detailed records. I will avoid those pit folks involved for another 3 months or so, occasionally longer if I feel the need.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
And this is precisely why my rule of thumb is to exit after a backoff without a word. You don't put up a fight or deny anything. That just makes you and the incident more memorable. You just exit as quietly and quickly as possible, trying to make yourself as least memorable as possible. And that is why a couple of the incidents I shared, like with "Mo" were really self defeating.
Alan, I am really getting tired of your snarky comments and constant attempts to undermine me. I have shared these experiences before on other sites, like WoV. I have shared all my experiences, the good, the bad and the ugly at sites I have been on like WoV. I just don't do it here too much because there is no point. That's not what this site is about. This site is about Hate and trying to discredit and tear down the other guy. So just STFU Alan and grow up and stop with the snarky comments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
That's really stupid. And you really don't know the place. They're a business just like anywhere else. If they can't make a profit off of a customer and that customer makes money off of them, then they don't want them there.Quote:
Originally Posted by tableplayBased on extensive personal experience with no heat whatsoever, to get banned from Casino Fandango(Carson City), like Rob Singer claims he was, you would have to punch a casino employee or run around naked to get banned from this place - it's really kick-back there. Rob, did you clock a casino employee there ? Did you run around naked there ? What got you banned from there ?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzThis was a really misleading and diversionary post. Surprisingly dishonest. Most casinos are not going to allow videotaping on the casino floor . The clear implication here is that somehow Argentino's presence was the reason for the non-allowance of videotaping.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
So, I will ask Mr. Mendelson directly, "Are you suggesting or implying that the videotaping was not allowed because Argentino was banned at most casinos? What precisely was said to you? Do you publicly stand by the statement that Argentino's winning was the reason you were not allowed to videotape at casinos, and can you name those casinos?"
Because, of course, I will ask those casinos if that was the case.
Just really dishonest regarding the videotaping.
As to "It's been well documented..." -- that phrase is passive voice, meaning, Mr. Mendelson does not have his hands on any of that evidence. He's presenting it second hand, based on Argentino's reportage. Now some people might ask (1) what was in the original banning letter from Bellagio -- did it state a banning due to winning, (2) what other casinos banned due to winning, and how does one verify that the banning excluded other reasons (such as vulgar or inappropriate behavior or non-payment of markers), and (3) why follow the "It's been well documented..." slop with a sentence explaining how hard it is to videotape on casino floors?
Without writing in advance for permission, most casinos will not allow videotaping involving people.
I didn't play there a lot because we only vacation in the Carson Valley/Tahoe area. It began in 2012 with a $10 royal on the $1/$2/$5/$10 machine in the back. They may have removed it, because I hit a $5 royal on it shortly afterwards. And I've probably won more than 90% of my sessions there. I was told not to return after a $2k hit on $1Super Aces at the front bar so I left with a nearly 6-figure lifetime profit.
Oh....if I ran around naked there, they would never ban me, and the young girls at Ti Amo would not be able to do their jobs.
My philosophy is that no one is required to prove anything on these forums. These are anonymous forums....especially for AP's. Those that don't AP and chose to disclose who they are, that is because they have nothing to lose (like AP's do) and often they have something to gain, if they are selling something. As I have said numerous times, "you can usually figure out who knows what they are talking about and who is just talking".
So to that extent I would never ask anyone to prove anything. BUT Mr Singer says he has posted his trespass letters publicly and if that's the case I hope he will do so here. I would like to see the wording. As redietz has stated, there are many reasons why a patron can be trespassed. Drunk, disorderly, creating a disturbance come to mind. Also, being dirty and smelly, although they would likely classify that under disturbance.
A lot of people don't know it but the casino can ban and trespass a player just for winning. Winning playing a negative EV game. If a player walks in and throws 3 $100 chips in 3 different numbers on roulette and wins, and does that 2 or 3 consecutive times, the casino can say, we don't want your action. Most won't but they could.
So I would like to see Mr Singer's trespass letters, if he is so inclined, since he claims to have publicly posted them before.
Eddie you're an aspiring so. They think they're the smartest people in the room because they like to believe they have "street smarts". But if they really had any intelligence and if they ever had a formal education, they'd understand how a business works...and when changed are made and how to react to them. I went into play at Bellagio some time after they issued and I published my banning, because I knew what I was doing. I know you're speaking to this so-called "elite" base, but it would be a good idea for you to wise up.Quote:
Originally Posted by a2a3dseddie
Mickey, it looks like it's going to depend whether or not Rob is in a "mis-remembering" mood or not. ;)
I'M BANNED!
I'M NOT BANNED!
I"M NOT BANNED!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I"M BANNED!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
If you canvas the highest profile, most-views people who are posting their slot play on youtube and recruiting folks to pool resources for slot machine play, you will find that almost all of them request in writing ahead of time for the opportunity to film. In fact, there was one large friction incident recently wherein someone had gained written permission, but they were removed (and not politely) anyway from the premises of one casino. This resulted in much social media shouting and lawsuit threats, and the casino had to discipline the employees involved and retrain them regarding checking the written permission letters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerEddie you're an aspiring so. :confused: They think they're the smartest people in the room because they like to believe they have "street smarts". But if they really had any intelligence and if they ever had a formal education, they'd understand how a business works...and when changed are made :confused:and how to react to them. I went into play at Bellagio :confused:some time after they issued and I published my banning, because I knew what I was doing. I know you're speaking to this so-called "elite" base, but it would be a good idea for you to wise up.Quote:
Originally Posted by a2a3dseddie
Mickey, it looks like it's going to depend whether or not Rob is in a "mis-remembering" mood or not. ;)
I'M BANNED!
I'M NOT BANNED!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I'M NOT BANNED!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I'M BANNED!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
The Silverton is now the Bellagio? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Misremembering... misspelling... misreading.
Who needs to wise up? :D
I guess I have just lucked out then, not getting any heat whatsoever on dozens of visits with positive vulture outcomes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Eddie even I remember that Rob reported separate banning at both Bellagio and the Silverton.
The Bellagio banning had the letter published in GT. I think the Silverton banning was only in the last couple of years. But Ron should give us a timeline to clear up the confusion.
Rob you are reporting play and bannings in the same posts so yes it can be confusing. Clear it up please.
Kewlj you should understand that you need to be consistent. First you say on this forum no one gave you heat. Then you detail all the heat and now you reveal your own countermeasures.
Just like the rest of us can't sort out Rob's timeline you can't expect me or other forum members here to know what you posted elsewhere. I never read your posts on WOV. I never knew you reported your own death.
And welcome back (from the dead), by the way.
I'm a little baffled by Mr. Mendelson's "It's been well documented that Rob was told not to play in certain casinos because of his winnings." And then Mr. Mendelson suggests Argentino should list his banning timeline. If Mr. Mendelson's going to claim that something is "well documented," then presumably he has seen the documentation, or some of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by tableplayThe casinos rarely allowing interviews on the floor are probably not due to Rob's success rate at VP right ? I certainly hope you're not implying that that is the reason for their main floor reticence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Usually when someone says "well-documented," what follows is either (1) an asterisk leading to a footnote listing the documentation or preferably (2) a listing of references in parentheses explicitly listing at least some of the documentation.
So the bottom line, thus far, is that there is no "well documented" documentation. For all we know, Argentino was banned for calling people "noodle slurpers" or for not paying a marker.
Is Mr. Mendelson really claiming he couldn't videotape on the casino floor because of Argentino's winnings? Is he really claiming that the default mode of casinos is to allow videotaping of people live without written permission?
I can report that a sociologist friend of mine was at the Hollywood Casino in Charlestown last week, and he asked if he could film with his cell, and the answer was a polite, "No sir, you may not."
LOL -- this post should be bumped every week for the next decade.Quote:
Originally Posted by a2a3dseddieQuote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerEddie you're an aspiring so. :confused: They think they're the smartest people in the room because they like to believe they have "street smarts". But if they really had any intelligence and if they ever had a formal education, they'd understand how a business works...and when changed are made :confused:and how to react to them. I went into play at Bellagio :confused:some time after they issued and I published my banning, because I knew what I was doing. I know you're speaking to this so-called "elite" base, but it would be a good idea for you to wise up.Quote:
Originally Posted by a2a3dseddie
Mickey, it looks like it's going to depend whether or not Rob is in a "mis-remembering" mood or not. ;)
I'M BANNED!
I'M NOT BANNED!
I'M NOT BANNED!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I'M BANNED!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
The Silverton is now the Bellagio? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Misremembering... misspelling... misreading.
Who needs to wise up? :D
Eddie, there's a simple explanation. I often confuse the Silverton with Bellagio myself. It's the damned Bass Pro Shop. I buy my fishing rods there, and then late at night I lean over the railing and fish in the Bellagio lake. It's understandable how one could conflate the two. You buy fishing rods one place, and you fish with them in the other.
I remember the two separate reports of Rob being banned first at Bellagio and later at Silverton. I also recall his returning to play at both. For those who don't understand this, a timeline might help.
But is a timeline necessary? Must people prove they were banned? What's next, proof you got a speeding ticket?
Redietz the low budget movie called The Gentleman Bandit starring Ryan O'Neal was shot in Beverly Hills of all places WITHOUT permits. I played the role of the news reporter at the various bank robberies. Beverly Hills police saw me with the film crews outside various banks shooting make believe reports... and they waved thinking it was the news.
When it came to doing news reports inside the banks, I walked in with the Executive Producer, explained we were shooting a movie, and on the spot got the OK. Bank employees instantly became "extras" acting as if the place had just been robbed.
Guerilla productions are such a hoot.
IF, and that's a big if, he was banned from those places, it was most likely from his antics. Not from any VP play.
I remember the timelines scattered throughout his forum posts when we actually posted about VP and other casino related articles. You might as well forget proving it here. I'm telling ya'- there is no rhyme or reason to anything posted here- just a crapshoot of who comes up with the most filth- or in Red's case, fence straddling.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Times have definitely changed. Massachusetts has one of the biggest tax credits for filming movies. That is why they have been home to more exterior shooting for films than even New York in the last ten years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Anyhow, last summer there was a court case where the Bravo TV show “Top Chef” sued the local union muscle for stopping protection and physically threatening a majority of the production crew (the incidents occurred in 2014). The picture of the four of five union defendants came right out of casting. I believe they were ultimately found innocent. The comments made by the union individuals to the female production individuals were sad.
Yes, guerilla productions are probably a thing of the past.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
LOL -- Mr. Mendelson says, "I remember the two separate reports...."
Mr. Mendelson, once again there is no attribution. Who provided those reports? Argentino? So what you should have said is:
"I remember the two separate reports -- provided by Rob -- of being banned first at Bellagio and later at Silverton."
Is that true and correct? Or did you read those reports elsewhere? Where, pray tell? Did you happen to stumble onto them walking the strip? In the UNLV library? Did Jerry Logan FedEx them to you? Or is it correct that you "remember the two separate reports...by Rob?"
You're trying, miserably, to plaster over the fact you have never actually read any "reports," other than what Argentino has written, or that you've never seen the "well-documented" material regarding the alleged bannings.
Alan I am so tired of you lying. I can no longer give you the benefit of doubt. Alan you are a liar.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I never said "no one aver gave me heat" or anything like that. It's just false. It's a lie. I challenge you to post where I said that or anything like that.
Axelwolf, I do not recall any such conversation with you in private or public about this topic. I am not saying such a conversation did not occur, but if it did, and this is what you took away from it, something was definitely lost in translation. To explain, I will do a brief recap of my history as a professional BJ player.
My first 5 and a half years, I was based out of Atlantic City, while I lived on the east coast. There were a couple trips to Connecticut and a few trips to Vegas in the later part of those 5.5 years, but the majority of my play at that time was Atlantic City, playing low limit. I didn't have much issues with Atlantic City the first 4 years or so, playing low limit, even as my max bet began to grow a little I was spreading red to light green. It was that final year when my bankroll grew to the point that I could start playing green to black that things almost immediately changed. Those stores and pit folks that didn't care about me spreading $5 and $10 to $75, all of the sudden began to care, when I started spreading $25 to $200.
Most people know AC can not bar players, or even backoff players (no more blackjack) like Las Vegas can. But what they could and did do was start cutting the shoe in half, meaning 50% penetration which is basically unplayable. Borgata where most of my play took place had a different tactic. They would "bet restrict" me only at a table. Despite that it was a $25 table with a card stating table minimum for everyone else, they would pull out a special card for me that said Minimum wager $5, maximum wager $50. They were essentially allowing me to spread 1-10 at the $5 amount, which years earlier I would have been ok with. Unfortunately at this point in my career, that was going to be a problem. With such a small rotation, very well known and counter measures mounting, I decided to head west.
Now when I arrived in Vegas, I didn't want the same thing to occur, that is to say, wear out my welcome, so I devised a plan of attack specifically suited to Las Vegas. On the early blackjack sites that I participated on there was a player with the handle "bigplayer". As you might guess from his name he spent many years as one of the big players on a very famous blackjack team (not MIT) and he is a member of the blackjack hall of fame, not that I put all that much into that status. But this guy knew his stuff. When he advised, people listened (like that old investing commercial). So the big player quote that always stuck with me, went something like this, "The advantage of Las Vegas is quantity, not quality". Those words were the foundation of my plan of attack...a large rotation of games, so I would only be seen several times a month and if I am doing it correctly....on different shifts. And playing short sessions and moving on to the next location. This makes those really big wins of $5,000+ that get noticed so easily, occur much less frequently.
There are also a couple other things I do, some I have talked about, like chip inventory and some I have never mentioned, but all are designed with longevity in mind. Longevity is my top priority. I have the bank roll to play much higher stakes, but I continue at my mid-level play because that offers the best chance at longevity. It is a level of play well tolerated.
I have more to say, so I am going to break this up. (end of Part 1)
Last edited by kewlJ; Yesterday at 09:29 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply Reply With Quote Reply With Quote Multi-Quote This Message
Yesterday, 09:17 PM #230
kewlJ
kewlJ is offline
Senior Member
Join Date
Jun 2016
Location
Las Vegas
Posts
1,412
OK, part 2. (and then I will go back and correct grammar/spelling as best I can).
So as I settled in to Las Vegas and my new style of play, I received many backoffs. In my first years, maybe 6-9 a year. At least one every couple months. It was part of the learning process. As time went on I got that down to 4-6 a year and lately 2-4 a year. It is part of the learning process of reading what is going on, what is being tolerated, or within the comfort level of different casinos and pit. Often I see heat coming before a backoff now, that is why the number is down, but I still occasionally misread a situation and get that "no more blackjack", or "you are too good for us" or whatever other lame statement they make.
Actually about my 2nd or third year here, I actually provoked several backoffs at a small, notoriously sweaty place downtown. There was an older pit guy that I wore out my welcome with and he would back me off saying I couldn't play blackjack. I would show up two days later and he would again back me off. Sometimes he would say "didn't I tell you, no more blackjack" and I would say, yeah that was yesterday, or last week. You could see the steam coming from his ears, but it told him that I knew the law, that a player must be given the opportunity to leave even if previously backed off. (that would be the Wilkenson case). So as you can see, sometimes my arrogance, didn't always serve me well. There was nothing to gain from that tactic.
So I have referred to backoffs only so far, as technically, in my mind that is all I have ever received. I don't consider that I have ever been trespassed, although there were 3 occasions that are close (but not in my mind). One was clearly only a backoff at a very small casino just off of Boulder Highway, south of the town of Henderson. You and I have discussed this property in other matters. So my backoff there, was really still a backoff, but since they only had like 2 blackjack tables and one shift per day (tables were open 4pm to 10pm or midnight), that backoff was for all intensive purposes a baring. No chance to play blackjack there. I was playing above there comfort level anyway, and knew it was just a matter of time. That was a fringe property in my rotation.
Number 2 that was close was again a problem with my arrogance. (I have since gotten that under control ) So I was playing at a very sweaty store in Pennsylvania, near Washington's winter encampment. Got backed off (in my mind). Went back the next day, got backed off again. And then one more time for good measure a week later during the same trip. I figured what the hell, this dump isn't part of my regular rotation. But those backoffs followed me back to Las Vegas, and I lost 3 stores that were in my regular rotation within days...just temporarily. That lesson is that Data base entries travel faster than airplanes.
#3, just before I moved to Las Vegas, I took a month long trip to figure things out and be sure this is what I wanted to do. I stayed in a boarding house on Ogden Avenue right behind El Cortez. It was like $45 a week. Bathroom in the hall. That boarding house is now gone, and has been converted in to what is now the Cabana Suites, part of El Cortez.
So anyway, during this period, I was playing the strip, Caesar's and was backed off. Told no more BJ and escorted to the backroom. I was probably 25, looked barely 21 and they were out to intimidate me. I am sure that was heading for a full trespass. But in travel to the "back room" escorted by a couple suites and security guys, I stated that I wanted to call my attorney, Bob Nersesian. I hadn't met, nor knew Bob at the time, just his name and reputation. Upon mention of his name, the parade stopped, one of the suits turned to me and said "get the hell out of here". And I did. I ran half way to Mandelay Bay.
So I have had my issues with backoffs. I don't consider that I have ever been trespassed, although I am now remembering a kind of oral trespass at South Point, that I have since ignored. But for the most part I have become pretty good at identifying potential situation before they occur. So it's not by accident that I have gotten better...I have worked hard at it. Longevity is my top priority and I work hard at it.
Last edited by kewlJ; Yesterday at 09:49 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply Reply With Quote Reply With Quote Multi-Quote This Message
Yesterday, 10:15 PM #231
kewlJ
kewlJ is offline
Senior Member
Join Date
Jun 2016
Location
Las Vegas
Posts
1,412
So in thinking about this topic for the past hour, I am remembering some things.
I was orally trespassed at South Point. I don't know if that counts. I didn't sign anything. But I was orally threatened with trespass arrest if I returned (which I have).
The small casino off of Boulder Highway, the General manager actually called my cell phone and left a voicemail that I could not play blackjack. Yes, he had my cellphone number. I played a promotion there every week that required me to play rated. The backoff there was really inevitable.
At El Cortez, the older pit guy that I tried to agitate actually followed me into the men's room, saying "no blackjack" "no Blackjack". As I stepped away from the urinal and stepped to the sink to wash my hands, I said to him, something like "be sure and wash your hands, Mo" (his name was Maurice). I think THAT is the moment he actually realized that he had followed me into the men's room. I really did get under that poor old guy's skin. There was absolutely no benefit to doing so. It was really unprofessional of me. He is since retired.
Quick reply to this message Reply Reply With Quote Reply With Quote Multi-Quote This Message >>>>>KJ
facinating.....CAN YOU EXPAND ON JUST THE PART THAT CAME AFTER ..."Axelwold, I do not recall"
I have no idea what the LarryS post above is about? He combined and quoted 3 different posts of mine and then concluded with this question/comment. :confused: To quote Denzel Washington "can someone explain it to me like I am a six year old?"Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryS
https://youtu.be/mIqkmguW35Y?t=68Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJI have no idea what the LarryS post above is about? He combined and quoted 3 different posts of mine and then concluded with this question/comment. :confused: To quote Denzel Washington "can someone explain it to me like I am a six year old?"Quote:
Originally Posted by LarryS
Red, as much as you detest these things about me, there is only one instance of my being banned that was proven, and that's because it was published in Gaming Today. Perhaps, because you have said how many times you went over to GT to check up on me, you could check with Eileen D. to review my past columns in the 2004/2005 timeline. The title has the word "Bellagio" in it.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
LOL -- Mr. Mendelson says, "I remember the two separate reports...."
Mr. Mendelson, once again there is no attribution. Who provided those reports? Argentino? So what you should have said is:
"I remember the two separate reports -- provided by Rob -- of being banned first at Bellagio and later at Silverton."
Is that true and correct? Or did you read those reports elsewhere? Where, pray tell? Did you happen to stumble onto them walking the strip? In the UNLV library? Did Jerry Logan FedEx them to you? Or is it correct that you "remember the two separate reports...by Rob?"
You're trying, miserably, to plaster over the fact you have never actually read any "reports," other than what Argentino has written, or that you've never seen the "well-documented" material regarding the alleged bannings.
And since I am the ONLY professional vp player or otherwise to have ever proven I was banned, it shouldn't be difficult to ascertain the fact that there have been--and currently are--other bannings. Or, you could believe what the AP crowd likes to do on forums and elsewhere: claim they or other "strong ap's they know" have been "backed off or restricted" just because they're, well, AP's!
I don't remember ever seeing anything written in Gaming Today that was negative toward a casino. Rags like that who depend on selling advertising to survive just don't do that. So DiRocco made an exception in your case? I don't think so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerRed, as much as you detest these things about me, there is only one instance of my being banned that was proven, and that's because it was published in Gaming Today. Perhaps, because you have said how many times you went over to GT to check up on me, you could check with Eileen D. to review my past columns in the 2004/2005 timeline. The title has the word "Bellagio" in it.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
LOL -- Mr. Mendelson says, "I remember the two separate reports...."
Mr. Mendelson, once again there is no attribution. Who provided those reports? Argentino? So what you should have said is:
"I remember the two separate reports -- provided by Rob -- of being banned first at Bellagio and later at Silverton."
Is that true and correct? Or did you read those reports elsewhere? Where, pray tell? Did you happen to stumble onto them walking the strip? In the UNLV library? Did Jerry Logan FedEx them to you? Or is it correct that you "remember the two separate reports...by Rob?"
You're trying, miserably, to plaster over the fact you have never actually read any "reports," other than what Argentino has written, or that you've never seen the "well-documented" material regarding the alleged bannings.
And since I am the ONLY professional vp player or otherwise to have ever proven I was banned, it shouldn't be difficult to ascertain the fact that there have been--and currently are--other bannings. Or, you could believe what the AP crowd likes to do on forums and elsewhere: claim they or other "strong ap's they know" have been "backed off or restricted" just because they're, well, AP's!
86ings in LV casino's don't alway
There you go again mickey making believe you've been part of the gaming scene all along.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmI don't remember ever seeing anything written in Gaming Today that was negative toward a casino. Rags like that who depend on selling advertising to survive just don't do that. So DiRocco made an exception in your case? I don't think so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerRed, as much as you detest these things about me, there is only one instance of my being banned that was proven, and that's because it was published in Gaming Today. Perhaps, because you have said how many times you went over to GT to check up on me, you could check with Eileen D. to review my past columns in the 2004/2005 timeline. The title has the word "Bellagio" in it.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
And since I am the ONLY professional vp player or otherwise to have ever proven I was banned, it shouldn't be difficult to ascertain the fact that there have been--and currently are--other bannings. Or, you could believe what the AP crowd likes to do on forums and elsewhere: claim they or other "strong ap's they know" have been "backed off or restricted" just because they're, well, AP's!
Since when would publishing a player/columnist's ban letter be considered anti-casino--especially from someone who'd been writing about being a consistently successful hi-limit VP player for years leading up to it? This is where your lack of education shows all over again.
Kewlj wrote "My philosophy is that no one is required to prove anything on these forums."
So does this mean only kewlj has an exemption about speaking the truth or everyone can lie? LOL
Of course the kew is vehemently opposed to providing proof of claims on forums. If it were expected, he and his pile of bs would be bleeding black & blue instead of that silly neon rainbow gay crap he likes to believe he bleeds.
Rob you're out of line with your insults.
But if people can make statements willy nilly without proving them what is the point of any discussion with opposing views?
Now I'm sure someone is going to say "but Alan you never proved 18 yos were rolled in a row." And my answer to that is "correct, I never proved it happened and I can't. I tried to get the tape and I tried to reach the dealers (there was no boxman or floorman) but I couldn't."
Now according to the kewlj philosophy he should never criticize me again over the 18 yos because "no one is required to prove anything on these forums." Those are his words.
All casino execs swear they don't throw out players that win.It's bad publicity so they lie about it. Remember Dancer and Suncoast? And the dozen other players they 86'd. You helped facilitate the Suncoast lying about 86'ing them right here in this forum. You swore up and down that the Suncoast doesn't bounce players that win....and Dancer and the others were lying. Every single one of them lying. Now you want us to believe that you were 86'd for winning. Fuck off, idiot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerThere you go again mickey making believe you've been part of the gaming scene all along.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmI don't remember ever seeing anything written in Gaming Today that was negative toward a casino. Rags like that who depend on selling advertising to survive just don't do that. So DiRocco made an exception in your case? I don't think so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Since when would publishing a player/columnist's ban letter be considered anti-casino--especially from someone who'd been writing about being a consistently successful hi-limit VP player for years leading up to it? This is where your lack of education shows all over again.
Mickeycrimm not a bad post above... until the final three words. Then you ruin it. You almost had me.
So if Dancer doesn't get blocked from casinos for winning why does he get blocked? Because he had fights? Because he smashes screens when he loses?
Isn't it well known that Dancer is barred from certain casinos because he "over APs" the drawings?
Personally, I believe that everyone has a certain level where they will accept comments at “face value”. For the most part I give everyone the benefit of doubt. Why not? I have not met anyone on this forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
For me, the demarcation line is when a member accuses someone of an act and the other member vehemently denies it. Sorry, proof is needed.
Again, we all have the pole vault height set at different levels for accepting comments. As we all know, frequently, it is not what is stated, but who said it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzLOL -- this post should be bumped every week for the next decade.Quote:
Originally Posted by a2a3dseddieQuote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerEddie you're an aspiring so. :confused: They think they're the smartest people in the room because they like to believe they have "street smarts". But if they really had any intelligence and if they ever had a formal education, they'd understand how a business works...and when changed are made :confused:and how to react to them. I went into play at Bellagio :confused:some time after they issued and I published my banning, because I knew what I was doing. I know you're speaking to this so-called "elite" base, but it would be a good idea for you to wise up.Quote:
Originally Posted by a2a3dseddie
Mickey, it looks like it's going to depend whether or not Rob is in a "mis-remembering" mood or not. ;)
I'M BANNED!
I'M NOT BANNED!
I'M NOT BANNED!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I'M BANNED!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
The Silverton is now the Bellagio? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Misremembering... misspelling... misreading.
Who needs to wise up? :D
Eddie, there's a simple explanation. I often confuse the Silverton with Bellagio myself. It's the damned Bass Pro Shop. I buy my fishing rods there, and then late at night I lean over the railing and fish in the Bellagio lake. It's understandable how one could conflate the two. You buy fishing rods one place, and you fish with them in the other.
BUMP. I'll be heading to Bass Pro Shops tomorrow. I'll try to not confuse it with Bellagio.
BUMP. Just wondering if Mr. Mendelson has tracked down any of the undocumented documents or the "reports" other than Argentino's posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzThis was a really misleading and diversionary post. Surprisingly dishonest. Most casinos are not going to allow videotaping on the casino floor . The clear implication here is that somehow Argentino's presence was the reason for the non-allowance of videotaping.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
So, I will ask Mr. Mendelson directly, "Are you suggesting or implying that the videotaping was not allowed because Argentino was banned at most casinos? What precisely was said to you? Do you publicly stand by the statement that Argentino's winning was the reason you were not allowed to videotape at casinos, and can you name those casinos?"
Because, of course, I will ask those casinos if that was the case.
Just really dishonest regarding the videotaping.
As to "It's been well documented..." -- that phrase is passive voice, meaning, Mr. Mendelson does not have his hands on any of that evidence. He's presenting it second hand, based on Argentino's reportage. Now some people might ask (1) what was in the original banning letter from Bellagio -- did it state a banning due to winning, (2) what other casinos banned due to winning, and how does one verify that the banning excluded other reasons (such as vulgar or inappropriate behavior or non-payment of markers), and (3) why follow the "It's been well documented..." slop with a sentence explaining how hard it is to videotape on casino floors?
Without writing in advance for permission, most casinos will not allow videotaping involving people.
I still don't understand the importance of proving you were banned or being banned?
Doesn't being banned indicate a certain level of failure?
In the case of an AP the failure would be getting caught being too good for the casino. And for the non AP the failure would be doing one or more of many things including being too good or just being bad.
So why would anyone want to prove they were banned or even claim it?
In my case I openly talked about what happened at MGM and NYNY and Bellagio just to show their paranoia about DI. I wasn't actually controlling the dice when I got banned -- I was just getting lucky.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Alan, when you were banned did the pit crew think you were holding up the dice?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Do casinos ban people who win the Megabucks because they got too lucky?
Eddie somehow the anti DI crowd thinks dice setters delay the game. The truth is it takes three seconds to set dice and throw them when you know what you're doing.
You know who delays the game? Shooters who can't decide what bets to make, players who make late bets, shooters who stop to order a drink, shooters who chant six, six, six and shooters who need to tell the dealers how rich they are and what sports bet they won the day before.
People who are serious about DI approach the game seriously. They do their business.
I HAVE NEVER BEEN TOLD TO HURRY UP OR THAT I DELAYED THE GAME.
What happened at MGM and NYNY and Bellagio was simply this: I was getting lucky and winning and because I was setting my dice all three casinos in those days of paranoia gave me grief.
I wasnt controlling the dice. I just got lucky.
Red, as much as you hate it, my Bellagio ban letter stated exactly what I've stated here many times before: that they did not allow me to play VP any longer because they could not make a profit off of me. It also stated that I could come in and get involved in any other activities other than play vp.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzBUMP. Just wondering if Mr. Mendelson has tracked down any of the undocumented documents or the "reports" other than Argentino's posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzThis was a really misleading and diversionary post. Surprisingly dishonest. Most casinos are not going to allow videotaping on the casino floor . The clear implication here is that somehow Argentino's presence was the reason for the non-allowance of videotaping.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
So, I will ask Mr. Mendelson directly, "Are you suggesting or implying that the videotaping was not allowed because Argentino was banned at most casinos? What precisely was said to you? Do you publicly stand by the statement that Argentino's winning was the reason you were not allowed to videotape at casinos, and can you name those casinos?"
Because, of course, I will ask those casinos if that was the case.
Just really dishonest regarding the videotaping.
As to "It's been well documented..." -- that phrase is passive voice, meaning, Mr. Mendelson does not have his hands on any of that evidence. He's presenting it second hand, based on Argentino's reportage. Now some people might ask (1) what was in the original banning letter from Bellagio -- did it state a banning due to winning, (2) what other casinos banned due to winning, and how does one verify that the banning excluded other reasons (such as vulgar or inappropriate behavior or non-payment of markers), and (3) why follow the "It's been well documented..." slop with a sentence explaining how hard it is to videotape on casino floors?
Without writing in advance for permission, most casinos will not allow videotaping involving people.
Now go to your corner and keep on crying.
I love that Bass Pro Shops! How was it at the Silvagio? Bellverton? BellSilvagioton? See anyone getting their banning papers? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by redietzLOL -- this post should be bumped every week for the next decade.Quote:
Originally Posted by a2a3dseddieQuote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerEddie you're an aspiring so. :confused: They think they're the smartest people in the room because they like to believe they have "street smarts". But if they really had any intelligence and if they ever had a formal education, they'd understand how a business works...and when changed are made :confused:and how to react to them. I went into play at Bellagio :confused:some time after they issued and I published my banning, because I knew what I was doing. I know you're speaking to this so-called "elite" base, but it would be a good idea for you to wise up.Quote:
Originally Posted by a2a3dseddie
Mickey, it looks like it's going to depend whether or not Rob is in a "mis-remembering" mood or not. ;)
I'M BANNED!
I'M NOT BANNED!
I'M NOT BANNED!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I'M BANNED!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
The Silverton is now the Bellagio? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Misremembering... misspelling... misreading.
Who needs to wise up? :D
Eddie, there's a simple explanation. I often confuse the Silverton with Bellagio myself. It's the damned Bass Pro Shop. I buy my fishing rods there, and then late at night I lean over the railing and fish in the Bellagio lake. It's understandable how one could conflate the two. You buy fishing rods one place, and you fish with them in the other.
BUMP. I'll be heading to Bass Pro Shops tomorrow. I'll try to not confuse it with Bellagio.
It's funny that you mention that, Eddie. I actually went to the Bass Pro Shops located in Bristol, TN -- or is that Bristol, VA? It's a tale of two cities (see Gregory Schneider's Washington Post article). The state line of demarcation cuts right through the Bristol downtown, and one side (the Bristol, VA) is broke, while the TN side has plenty of cash. Kind of reminds me of -- will the real "greatest video poker player in the world" stand up? Is it the guy who conquered Bellagio? Or is it the dude hauling around the country in an RV, studiously avoiding Las Vegas due to either (his story) the minority demographic or (not his story) unpaid debts and markers?Quote:
Originally Posted by a2a3dseddieI love that Bass Pro Shops! How was it at the Silvagio? Bellverton? BellSilvagioton? See anyone getting their banning papers? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by redietzLOL -- this post should be bumped every week for the next decade.Quote:
Originally Posted by a2a3dseddieQuote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerEddie you're an aspiring so. :confused: They think they're the smartest people in the room because they like to believe they have "street smarts". But if they really had any intelligence and if they ever had a formal education, they'd understand how a business works...and when changed are made :confused:and how to react to them. I went into play at Bellagio :confused:some time after they issued and I published my banning, because I knew what I was doing. I know you're speaking to this so-called "elite" base, but it would be a good idea for you to wise up.Quote:
Originally Posted by a2a3dseddie
Mickey, it looks like it's going to depend whether or not Rob is in a "mis-remembering" mood or not. ;)
I'M BANNED!
I'M NOT BANNED!
I'M NOT BANNED!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I'M BANNED!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
The Silverton is now the Bellagio? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Misremembering... misspelling... misreading.
Who needs to wise up? :D
Eddie, there's a simple explanation. I often confuse the Silverton with Bellagio myself. It's the damned Bass Pro Shop. I buy my fishing rods there, and then late at night I lean over the railing and fish in the Bellagio lake. It's understandable how one could conflate the two. You buy fishing rods one place, and you fish with them in the other.
BUMP. I'll be heading to Bass Pro Shops tomorrow. I'll try to not confuse it with Bellagio.
Now, to point out another analogy, I bought an A400 Beretta shotgun there, and when it came time for the "gun check," the guy behind the counter just swiveled the screen around and let me fill out my own stuff. Kind of like how a certain intrepid reporter allowed a certain unpaid Gaming Today stringer to fill out his own biography.
And nobody was banned. I could have been a psychopath with a hankering to wipe out the Chik-Fil-A across the street, but when one gets to fill out one's own credentials with nobody checking the realities, well....
Have I ever been convicted of a felony? Of course not. Seventeen felony arrests, no convictions. Do I have a mental illness? Hell no, although the guys behind the counter did their best to ignore me when I referred to the tablet I was filling out as "Mr. Mendelson."
Was that seventeen felony arrests in a row?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Did they happen at Caesars?