Printable View
Just read Dancer's Million Dollar Video Poker. At the end he wins $500k at the MGM in one night and then they bar him. He says that the way he feels about his 6 month $1 million run to the song The Dance by Garth Brooks where he sings about the pain of losing a lover versus the joy of the relationship. Good Lord! You want to take it from here Rob?
I would love to be barred from a casino after winning a half million dollars in one night. In fact, I might put myself on a "do not ever let him play again" list if I ever won a half million in one night. And if I were barred after winning a half million... I would thank them as they walked me out the door.
Exactly why Dancer has the need to continuously lie in order to keep selling his junk and keep enuf cash coming in so he can still play the high limit vp machines. You've already seen how he treats a relationship when it comes down to a choice between living up to his vows....or keeping his serious addiction to vp alive.
If you want to believe Dancer won the $500k, label yourself as being misled. He and Shirley were both playing the same machine when the $100k hit, but it was only she who hit the $400k royal. And he was not banned after that, in fact, he continued to keep going back to play that "lucky" $100 machine on his own for months, with his wife actually needing to go in after him to drag him out in a humiliating turn of events. These are facts I obtained from both watching him in there on my own multiple trips to play at MGM, and being told about his and his wife's arguing by staff. The reason he eventually was banned was because of the same type of actions that he still engages in today: he manipulated his slot club benefits in multiple ways to get far more points into his account than he earned, and he took comps only allowed for use inside the "Mansion" and sold them on the outside. He got caught, got embarrassed, and got banned.
How is that done? Did he hack the MGM computers?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
If you read that book carefully, you'll also read a bit of a hole in the explanations of how he expanded his bankroll at a couple of points in the narrative. He makes a few leaps in bankroll that go unexplained.
But let's face it. As others have pointed out, "Bob Dancer" is a fictional character. Nothing in the book HAS to be factual. The book's protagonists are fictional. And the endpoint of the book, as Rob pointed out, is convenient in that it fails to mention any post-400K issues and losses. I'm sure the publisher recommended the endpoint.
You have pointed this out many times in regard to Rob's claims since Rob Singer is not his real name. But I have to disagree with you: for both of these men their fictional names are their reputations. So if you were to prove that the one who calls himself Bob Dancer has published falsehoods it would be equally damaging to him as if he published the falsehoods under his real name -- after all his reputation is built under Bob Dancer.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
The same holds true for Rob Singer. Since his reputation is built under the name Rob Singer he must publish the truth as Rob Singer or that reputation is at risk.
But that's a side issue.
Let's get back to the issue at hand. Now, I admit I haven't read the book, but if his book is about how he won a million dollars in a five year stretch then there is no lie if he detailed how he won a million over five years. If he lost it over the next five years that is certainly of interest but it's a separate book.
Let's take Rob Singer. He could write a book that says he won a million dollars over ten years -- and if he did he is not obligated to also report that he had a previous bankruptcy, or that he now lives in a giant RV. Those are secondary "stories."
In my opinion it really is another "issue" if Dancer lost the money later or was divorced, or if Rob had a previous bankruptcy. What is important is this: were the stories that were told accurate?
Did you see where he read his book to his girlfriend? (in his latest article) She can't read herself? Weird.
Maybe see has trouble getting to sleep.
Alan, I'm going to disagree vehemently with you on this one. If an investment specialist wrote a book about how he made his clients 30% return in a year, but neglected to mention the following year when he bankrupted everyone, that just wouldn't fly as a "true" report. Similarly, any events involving variance, wherein one cherry picks the data segment one prefers to report, while ignoring others, is not exactly an "accurate" report by any scientific measure. In science, you can't compartmentalize data and just report what you prefer. You can do that in modern capitalist advertising, but that doesn't make the reportage "true" in any overall sense.
If Dancer did indeed blow a healthy chunk of his 500K immediately after the convenient end-point of the book, as Rob reports, then he's cherry-picking his data. Whatever the opposite of a "hatchet job" is, he's doing it. It's as if I reported winning 17 consecutive games (which I did three years ago), and then neglected to report I immediately lost 18 in a row (which I did not). Did I tell a "true story?" Maybe by modern advertising standards. But certainly not by any scientific ones. You can't just choose what you want to report and think that's a valid representation of reality.
Awww.... how romantic.Quote:
Originally Posted by quahaug
In this context I will agree with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
But suppose Dancer was writing a book about hitting a $400,000 royal on a $100 machine? In the book he detailed his weekend -- the hotel check-in, the room, the dinners, the other key slappers sitting next to him, the fight he had with a cocktail waitress who got his order wrong, and so forth. That book would not have to detail what happened the following weekend... or the following ten years.
But redietz, by your standards, you should want Rob Singer to tell us in detail about every session in between those that include his big wins that he reports here. After all, what's good for the Dancer is also good for the Singer.
One of the worst transgressors along these lines is the WSOP, which lists "WSOP Earnings" under players' names during broadcasts, but neglects to tell people "Money Spent Entering WSOP" under those same players' names. In other words, "WSOP Net" never gets broadcast. The "Money Spent" should be just as media-accessible a figure as "Earnings," but they choose to not report the overall truth of the matter.
Good point. But most of the pros make their money playing cash games and not from tournament play.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Some of these big name pros play in a $10,000 tournament every week -- and there is one a week somewhere in the USA. That's an outlay of a half million dollars a year unless they "make the money" which is usually the top 10-percent of players.
Negreanu has been quoted as saying that the number of players who make a living playing tournaments is the same as the number of "birds with thumbs." He's the top-rated tournament player at this point in time, and I believe him. But somehow this context, which frames the entire tournament circuit, doesn't get mentioned during broadcasts. That, my friends, is cherry-picking data at its finest.
Before big poker tournments became soooo big the "winners" made up a small clique. It all changed with Moneymaker. Now tpurneys are nothing more than lotteries.
Dan Negreanu is a big cash player. I was at his table in a tourney about 8 years ago. He busted out before I did.
Alan, here's the scoup on what's happened since I hit the big winner: I went 3-1 in the playoffs yesterday! There has been no vp play since winning almost 50k in 3 ARTT sessions. I expect to play a few days after around the 20th.
How did Dancer manipulate the point-accumulation system? He sat at a high limit machine that was put out of order because it was accumulating points at a slot machine rate, which of course is much higher. He paid certain staff who knew this but allowed him to play it anyway....for weeks. No record of how he did this, but what I was told sounds just like him.
If true it seems to me that someone should have been fired at the MGM. What happened? Or is this another Rob Singer Exclusive that no one else can confirm?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Here's the scoop on what happened to me since I converted $660 of free play into $605.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I went back to Rincon for $440 of free play and got it up to $800, but then lost all but $150 which I took home. Still had a profit, but it was just $150 less the $40 or so of gas. I don't think anyone will dispute this honest report... but I am sure you will criticize me for it.
Alan: If you had played through the $440 only once as Rob usually suggests, where would you have ended the session? I'm assuming it worked its way to $800 after the play-once-through was over?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I can't criticize that because you didn't state what your objective was before going in. But given your track record, I believe a good bet would be that you either had none--or made one up on the go. And probably because you just couldn't bear the thought of pulling yourself away from the machines. However, that's very, very common among vp players, and it greatly contributes to why casinos don't go broke. At least you made something, which is always far better than losing anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
You always ask questions that are of little importance to and have nothing to do with the issue so you can under-handedly criticize points without appearing to. When people get involved with your obfuscations it dilutes whatever's being said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
:cool::cool::):oQuote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
You know, I haven't heard much about selling of high end comps in the last so many years. Dancer and other players made no bones about selling their swag back then, but nobody mentions this stuff, even anonymously, these days. How could casinos have cracked down on re-selling of swag? Or is it just ultra-quiet these days?
Yes-that question interests me. In other words, did you reach the $800 BEFORE the total MUST PLAY of $440, -did you have to keep playing to put all the $440 through?Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Room
When I played it through once, I finished with about $200. I put the $200 back in and started hitting some quads. I ended the session with $150 which was close to the $200 I originally had with a one-time play through. Plus I put on some extra tier points and cash back points from the extra play. And (and this is very important even though Rob will jump up and down about it) by playing more I will help keep the free play offers coming.Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Room
The bottom line is that I left with a $150 profit. No one ever went broke leaving a casino with a profit.
Gee Rob... does it bother you that as a 7 Stars player I got free play? Does it bother you that I left with a profit? Does it bother you that I didn't have to play YOUR way to leave with a profit?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Actually it's a very important point. You made an allegation that Bob Dancer did something that got him banned and if he what you say he also had "inside help" which would seem to imply that a casino employee or employees also got into trouble.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
If they banned a high roller such as Dancer wouldn't they not hesitate in firing a floor person who enabled the scam?
If they did fire someone it might support your claim. Or did this info come from another anonymous person who sat next to you on an airplane... like the IGT engineer who supposedly told you the machines are rigged on your flight?
The point Rob is that when you make allegations that are damaging to someone's good name and reputation you need to have facts to back them up. I cannot allow you to make the claim you did without questioning you and knowing your source and what other events might have occurred to support your claim.
In other words: put up or shut up.
And since Rob never "puts up", hey Rob why don't you just shut up? It's all a bunch of bullhockey anyway. In Holland we have a saying about people like Rob: all foam, no beer. Cheers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
If history is any indication, he'll do neither.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Back from a 4 night trip! It was good to escape -35C wind chills here! Got to see 3 shows. Laugh Factory, Carrot Top and Zumanity. Also came home with a bit of money. I went on a bad run the last day and gave some back though. Overall I'd say I won $1100.
Here's a question for anyone who cares to answer. What do you consider a "win"? To use numbers from this trip, I left home with $2500. I came back with $2800. I spent about $400 before leaving on tours/shows/flight/car rental. While in Las Vegas I spent an additional $800 on things for my wife and children.
My starting $2500 should be at $1700 now, so I guess I won $1100. BUT the pre-trip expenditures were $400, and I'm $100 short of $2900. In other words, if I didn't go on this trip at all, I would have an extra $100 in my bank account. So did I win $1100, $300 or lose $100? How does everyone else interpret results?
I never count money I spend on hotels, shows, food, etc. as costs that have to be earned back by gambling. I have to spend that money on any vacation. So if you had a gambling budget of let's say $1000 and you came back home with $2100 than you had a $1100 profit in my book.
I'm going to step in here and report that Dancer himself said he did stuff like what Rob reported -- although he referred to the activity as a wink and a tip. So it wouldn't surprise me if Rob is correct. The idea that you would be able to find evidence or some historical data that demonstrate MGM fired employees for this reason is preposterous. Whether it did or did not happen -- there's not going to be someone at MGM who says, "Yeah, we did that." And there will be no newspaper log with a clip stating that. That's just silly.
You know, before dismissing Rob's stuff as purely gossip, it might behoove one to realize that he did have his ear to the ground for a decade in that town, and his knowledge of what did or didn't happen there outstrips all other posters regarding video poker and such.
The reason I asked is that many times with my penny-ante free play I start out great and wish I could cash out then-only I have to finish the free play. I guess this is the reason that free play is annoying at times. Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I agree. Trip expenses are separate from gambling money unless you are a professional gambler.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegas_lover
Sorry redietz but we have to draw the line between gossip and "ear to the ground" info and what is fact. This is a serious allegation. I want to see facts to support it. This goes beyond claims of personal big wins or success at picking NFL games. I'm setting the rules on this one.
Then any discussion of who has or has not been backed off by a casino is verboten, as none will ever be verified.
Here's the difference: I was "backed off" by NYNY, MGM and Bellagio and no verification is needed -- it happened to me and I admit it happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
But if I were to say "Joe Blow was backed off because he put glue on the dice" I had better have supporting evidence.
And of course if you could show us a quote from a column or web article where someone wrote about how he was banned or backed off then that would be okay for discussion.
The point is this: to discuss Bob Dancer's strategy for playing various promotions (trying to win a car) is perfectly acceptable even if you are totally critical of it. And to comment about how he didn't pay for a breakfast buffet (he wrote about it in his web article) is also perfectly okay. But to make an allegation that the man cheated the system without any evidence of it is not okay.
I'll even cut Rob some slack about his claims about sitting next to an IGT engineer on a plane with the engineer allegedly spilling the beans about flaws with video poker games. But the difference is Rob's comments about Dancer are no less than a personal attack without evidence presented.
I think my "rules" here and explanations are fair.
There's your main issue with having a gambling problem. While you dodge the issue of what exactly was your objective before going in, you obviously have no ability to leave even when way ahead, as you continuously produce excuses to justify reasons why you don't have to end the casino action. The only thing that matters to vp addicts is more action in order to keep the opportunity for those intermittent doses of satisfaction to keep on coming.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Did you ever think that this is how you keep getting to 7-Stars every year, why you get all that rope-'em-in free-play, and why you get so giddy talking about and going to those silly GGWU's? And have you ever wondered even a tidbit's worth why you say you always have losing years? How hard is adding 1+1?
When will you ever learn to read? Ans: probably when you can get your craving for casino action off your mind. Pay attention this time--I was told this by MGM employees in the high limit room. He even wrote about some of it. And why do you care....you think Dancer has a good name now that he's a fellow divorcee? Get real.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
No wonder you made up such a syruppy handle. Not only do the Dutch have a penchant for Harleys....the bleed American red, white & blue! Can you imagine this guy coming up with "Macau_lover" as his pride and joy :) and have a burning interest in the Chinese?Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegas_lover
And again more blablablablabla. I don't ride motorcycles and even if I would it would never be a Harley. They're more broken than running. Rob you have an "America the greatest arrogance" that makes people around the world hate Americans more and more. Why? Because your arrogance is misplaced. Want some examples? The debt load of your country is incredible, your automobile industry uses ancient technology (big petrol burning engines, shaky technics, break down easily, etc), the differences between rich and poor in your country are enormous, you're not the economic world leader anymore, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Why is it I see more and more Hyundai's, BMW's, Honda's, Nissan's, Acura's, Volkwagens, Mercedes, etc in the United States? Because they are generally more reliable than American cars and because they don't burn so much fuel. The intolerance between black and white in your country and the way the majority looks at gay people is startling. But yet, you claim to bring democracy around the world. How many people in your country live in poverty? How many people in your country don't have health insurance?
Let me tell you something about the Chinese. I've never been to China but I know a lot of Dutch Chinese people. Never have I met a disrespectful Chinese person. Never have I met a Dutch-Chinese entrepeneur who went bancrupt. Wanne know why? Those people help eachother, they want their own people to succeed. My children play with Chinese children. So yes Rob, I would choose 99% of the Chinese population over arrogant American blowhards like you.
Folks, don't get me wrong, you have a beautiful country and wonderful people living there. I call many Americans friends. It's the ultra right-wing, redneck, arrogant, intolerant SOB's like Rob Singer who are giving Americans around the world a bad reputation. It's the "bow down or be crushed" additude that's sickening. Remember Rob, America is what it is today because Holland, Great Britain and France OWNED you in the past. It's incredible to see how a person who claims to be so intelligent can act so ignorant.
Being up $800 on free play is not "way ahead" in my book.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Hearsay if it came from employees. So why don't you quote or link to the articles where Dancer wrote about it -- because that would be important information.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
*Count Room prepares himself some hot, fresh, fluffy, buttery popcorn in anticipation of Rob's response.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegas_lover
Did anyone else notice that the doomsday clock is at 5 minutes till midnight? The announcement was made yesterday. I wonder if this forum had anything to do with it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Room
You made me google that one Alan. I had never even heard of the "doomsday clock". Some days I feel my alarm clock is a doomsday clock though!!
The Doomsday Clock was closer to midnight back in our youth, Alan, if I recall correctly.
Vegas Lover, you skipped the stuff about the US science and math ratings, so I am very disappointed. Those ratings explain why Penn says, at the beginning of his show, "People see 99% Return signs all over the casinos and think THAT'S A GOOD THING!!" It explains why people love going to Harrah's properties, which consistently provide the worst gambling returns. It explains diamond and seven-star nonsense, which would have been considered insulting 50 years ago. It explains a lot.
Redietz, are you sure you're not really Rob Singer in disguise? Or maybe one of his multiple personalities?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
What exactly do you consider "nonsense"?? That Diamonds and 7Stars get extra perks? Or that they have to play to get them? Or that they are members of players clubs which Rob says will doom you to addiction, bankruptcy or heaven knows what other evil fate?
The nonsense lies in the trade-off between comps and gambling percentages. We all know CET's vp payouts suck. Their blackjack sucks. You play craps, and they can't really muck with craps odds, so you are protected. I have to admit that, for craps players, CET may make sense. For everybody else, they're a horror. They have lousy comps for sports and race betting. They have inconsistent, idiocy-dependent ways of establishing limits for sports and race betting which really are Harrah's inventions.
The science/math deficiencies have to do with how people arrive at CET as a good deal. Now for you, a craps player, the comps offset the damages. For people playing blackjack, or video poker, or sports, or race -- the CET math is bad.
redietz, but what you said has nothing to do with Diamonds or 7Stars -- it's like that for everybody.
Ironic as it sounds "Vegas" is not for gamblers anymore.
Diamond and 7Stars play more at games with terrible odds than their counterparts at other properties. They enter into a bad-math contract with CET wherein they get lots of (not-so-great) comped rooms and such, and the trade-off is they play high volumes of rotten-odds games.
The manipulation/grooming/addiction of the Diamond and 7Stars players creates a lower floor for gambling odds than would otherwise exist. This hurts people who actually know what they are doing.
This is a ridiculous statement. I personally scored more than 960,000 tier points in 2013 playing only 8/5 Bonus and 8/5 Aces and Faces plus conservative craps betting with very low HE.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Frankly, it's a statement I would expect Rob Singer to make.
CET plays these higher tier "special" players like cheap fiddles. The execs continually degrade their rewards program, all we hear is complaints about how CET's doing this and reducing that along with constant whining about points accumulation, etc. etc. etc. So what happens? Absolutely nothing. These groomed addicts stay loyal to the abuse, because they just can't resist all those blinding "freebies". And the most cunning part of the CET deception program is how they get these constant losers to get all excited over the enormously successful year end GGWU, where balance sheets can be evened out by unopposed self-evaluation of all the wonderful "free stuff" that these played players stuff into their golden stockings. Jan. 1st....here we come!
Ya know Rob, you have become so predictable you are now a caricature of yourself. I didn't see anyone here saying they were happy about the downgrades and that they were playing more in spite of the downgrades. I'm certainly not running to Vegas to play reduced pay table video poker, or full pay machines that require $25 per tier point. When I want VP Rincon still has full pay machines with free play, cash back, tier points at $10 each, plus the comps I can use in Vegas including Great Gift Wrap Up points, plus comps that can be converted to free play.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
But you have to unleash your usual Singerisms which come as no surprise, and add nothing to the discussion at hand.
You have become a bore.
In Las Vegas, CET has the worst games in terms of house edge. That would include blackjack, roulette, video poker, and comp rates for race and sports. We obviously do not know non-vp slot returns, but I doubt they outperform the other companies with slot percentages.
In other locations, CET features better returns than in Las Vegas. Video poker for CET is better in Reno and Tunica, for example. Since this is a Las Vegas forum, I was referring to Las Vegas.
Correction: For low to medium rollers, and even some high rollers, Wynn has worse sports comps than CET. Their race comps are better, however.
Not exactly true. I can't speak of all of the CET casinos but there are full pay 8/5 Bonus games even at the $1 level at Rio and Flamingo. At Caesars you will find 8/5 Bonus at $5, $10, $25 and $100 per coin which is right up Rob Singer's alley. The edge on those games is no worse than at any competing casino in Vegas.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Caesars still has 3/2 blackjack outside of their "Pussycat casino." I don't play the game but it wouldn't surprise me if 3/2 blackjack is at the Flamingo and Rio as well.
Planet Hollywood is loaded with full pay video poker machines according to my son who stayed there over New Year's.
Roulette? Im not a roulette player either but Caesars does have a single 0 game and I don't think the pays at Caesars' double-zero games are any worse than the pays at any other casino in Vegas.
I can't speak about comp rates because the reality is that comps for table game players vary dramatically -- unlike comp rates for machine players where actual bets can be recorded by a computer. Comp rates for table game players can vary based on what the floorman sees and what he enters into the system. I've played craps for four hours at Caesars and had zero play recorded.
So redietz/Rob be more careful with your CET bashing. Sure there are some lousy pay tables on lower denomination video poker machines -- but I doubt you professionals would be playing them. But if Rob wanted 8/5 Bonus at 25-cents I think he will find them at Flamingo and Planet Ho and maybe even the Rio.
My apologies. Rio just recently introduced the superior video poker -- concomitant with their problems with SARS or whatever the bug was. I'm simply pointing out a correlation, not a cause-and-effect. I'll take wagers on how long it lasts. Any takers? I'll say these paytables are gone by June 30.
The question isn't "Who has 3-2 blackjack?" That's really a silly question. The question is, "Who introduced and has 6/5 blackjack?" Basically, 6/5 makes the game unplayable. It's not as if 3-2 should be viewed as some rare creature -- it was always be the basic, standard game until CET decided it shouldn't be. Again, we have the issue of lowering the floor for gambling odds.
I give Caesars' Palace a pass on many things because it was a standalone property until recently and Harrah's/CET hasn't quite figured out how to ruin it yet. If you're looking for the best limits for race/sports among the Harrah's collective, CP would be the property. Planet Hollywood is not loaded with full pay machines. Check the machines. Of course, my definition of full pay may differ from Alan's. Somehow Alan believes machines that pay less than 100% are full pay. An excruciating manipulation of basic math is required to label a machine that pays less than the full amount with optimal play into a "full pay" machine, but if you say something often enough and put it on enough signage, people tend to accept it. I think Brave New World addressed that issue quite a long time ago.
Are you some kind of revisionist?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
You are losing points with me, redietz. You used to come across as being knowledgeable. Now I wonder?
"Full pay" does not mean 100%+ or 100% payback and never has. "Full pay" is commonly used to refer to the best of the regular paytables for various games -- and it always has.
Please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_poker which says, in part: "When modern video poker games first appeared, the highest-paying common variant of a particular game was called "Full-Pay". Game variants that returned a lower payback percentage were termed "Short-Pay". Though the term Full-Pay is still in use, today, there are many game variants that return more."
Now, some specifics: 9/6 Jacks or Better returning 99.54% is considered "full pay." 8/5 Bonus returning 99.17% is considered "full pay." These are accepted definitions. If you want to say they are not positive expectation machines or 100%+ machines you certainly can say that, but they are "full pay."
You can criticize these games for being less than positive, but please don't try to rewrite everything to fit your arguments. Let Rob do that.
I can't comment about your experiences with sports betting since I just don't bet on sports with the exception of when my college frat brothers and I went to the Belmont Stakes to bet on Canonero in 1971.
What is really being discussed here? Is redietz accusing CET for the creation of 6/5 blackjack? Doesn't Rob prefer -EV VP machines anyways?
You'd never here me say that the CET properties in Las Vegas are the best, but their loyalty program may very well be if you consider that comps earned are transferrable to all their other casinos across the US and in Canada.
I have reached diamond status only a couple times, and enjoyed comps in CET hotels / casinos that I previously never set foot in before. Sure it's a "hook" that they have, but if you are going to frequent casinos regularly, you could do a lot worse than Total Rewards.
If room comps is your end-all, no program offers a better deal for different parts of the country. But I think redietz is rightfully bringing up CET's overall poor gaming odds for their customers, and I'm degrading their stupid GGWU baloney that encourages players to play far more than they would or should. Why do you think Alan gets all excited when he continually brings up items about Caesar's and Rincon? Because he can't stop....he can't walk away from the machines when he knows the more he plays, the more GGWU points he'll get for their year-end "everybody gets even!" redemptionfest.Quote:
Originally Posted by a2a3dseddie
Players who are both strong and intelligent have to be able to see thru and understand all this. CET does a superb job neutralizing these patsies even in the face of a policy of "everybody knows". CET has no problem seeing and ignoring all of the complaints seen here, because they know what they do is more powerful. And Alan is the company's foremost enabler.
Rob: you are really being ridiculous. I don't think anyone would play more than they would normally for the Great Gift Wrap Up in December in Las Vegas when there were so many chances that they would not make the event. You continue to harp on this allegation that the GGWU is some masterful magnet for getting Total Rewards members to play more than they should want to -- and you are just flat out wrong. Ironically, it was about two years ago that you told me that you didn't realize that your play at other Total Rewards casinos gave you points for the GGWU and you missed out on cashing them in. I sense a lot of sour grapes coming from you because you may finally be realizing that you missed out on a lot of Shell gas cards to fill up that RV of yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Alan: With some trepidation I am going to step into this and say if CET didn't believe the GGWU would help them to make more money overall from gamblers, why would they have it in the first place? There is no free lunch.
I realize the GGWU rewards loyalty from previous gambling, but the whole point of showing outward appreciation of a good customer in the first place is to hopefully keep him (or her) loyal.
Count Room I don't have the statistics but I think it's a pretty good bet that only a small percentage of the Total Rewards members around the country and around the world actually go to Las Vegas for the Great Gift Wrap Up events. Therefore I don't think many players even bat an eye at the promotion.
Frankly, I think Rob is making a big deal out of it because he finally realized how many thousands of dollars of gas cards he could have gotten but didn't. It must really hurt him.
That's funny. While you and others like you were over-anxiously waiting for & going to the GGWU complete with racing hearts and sweaty palms for all those "free":) gas cards, I was winning almost $50,000 at a CET property. You see, all it takes is smart gambling--not a continuous, rambunctious point accumulation frenzy.
And yet again another post filled with complete and utter BS. It's very clear you're just being a troll Rob. Since one thing has absolutely nothing to do with the other. Your only purpose is to piss people off and make an ass out of yourself. Alan, why do you keep giving this trailer trash a platform?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Vegas_lover what Rob is doing is obvious. Next he will tell us that he planned on hitting that $50k winner and it wasn't luck at all. Let him keep digging... he can't get out.
I see two options here with Rob. Remember that I write this down not knowing for sure whether he won the million dollars or not.
a) Rob won the million dollars and is living the life he claims he is living: Good for him, and in a way I need to defend him in this case. If you ran into a person who made a million dollars at the casino and he was willing to share for free exactly how he did it along with dispensing with worldly advice on how to deal with the casinos in general, wouldn't you overlook his abrasive tendencies to some extent?
b) Rob didn't win the million dollars and is living in a dilapidated trailer park or apartment faking his wins on the internet. In that case I won't blame any forum administrator for banning him, but keeping him on would still provide entertaining emotional stirrings for the other forum onlookers. (In other words, it would be a more boring place without him even if he's a total liar....which....I truly don't know.)
EDIT: We all know what a brutal and cruel game video poker can be. It probably makes for angry souls even amongst the ranks of long-term winners.
STORY: I once knew a Vegas AP years ago who would email me regularly. Whenever he was pissed off at me about politics all I had to do was ask: "Did you have a tough day at the machines today?" "Yeah." The political chat always ended immediately thereafter.
Yet another example of menstrual-mouth type babble from jealous Euro-trash :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegas_lover
A. Other than oneself, no one would ever KNOW for certain if and how much anyone else has won or lost. So your first point is moot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Room
B. The life we are living, to many, would in fact be less than ideal. We never had a clue up until we became interested, and right up until then, this type of life either didn't exist, it was for losers, or it made no sense. But when it all came together for us, we bought the best RV we could afford ($600k), and we went big (44', or about 4x the biggest available in beautiful Holland....and don't say this too loud, but it even has its own little engine along with one of them AUTOMATIC transmissions :)). Our being blessed with good health so far contributed to this decision. You've seen a partial picture of it with Cindy & Porsha this past year. However, my vp success has zero to do with our life today. We'd be doing this whether I won a million dollars or lost $171,600.
C. Your use of "brutal & cruel" is the same as my labeling the game as "unforgiving". And that's exactly why there is so much animosity that always surfaces when I explain what it took--and yes, continues to take--to consistently beat the game, and the torment I cause whenever I or Alan posts my larger winners. It is no different than the contemptuous reactions from certain readers of my past Gaming Today column.
Finally, it takes tough words to help people see beyond the fluff of the Total Rewards program, and even those won't make it thru their thick blinders. But everybody gets it, for sure. And with even greater certainty, no one ever wants to read about their addiction to gambling by a bona fide winner. Especially the arrogant Dutch :)
All the other things you said are fair enough, but I have to disagree with the quote above. You can take the Mitt Romney approach and never show the tax returns, but just know that if what you are saying isn't truthful it would be to your advantage to keep the crowd confused as to what actually happened. In other words, the confusion keeps the fun going for many years even if you didn't win anything overall..Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Personally if I was a million dollar winner the solution would be very simple: Only show Alan the returns and have him verify the contents personally without having to post everything to the public at large. I would definitely trust Alan's ethics as a journalist for something like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Poor Robbie, he's trying so hard to insult me and he's getting nowhere. Let me enlighten you again Bubba:
About the big ass trailer that's not available in Holland, nobody cares! We live in a small country, you couldn't go anywhere with a monster like that. So your attempt to insult Europeans with the fact that your RV's are bigger than ours is just plain funny. Are you compensating for other shortcomings Rob? What's also very funny is emphasising the automatic transmission as if it's something special. On this side of the ocean we've had that feature for decades so hooray for Rob :). Want to talk about fuel consumption? You may pass some beautiful sights during your travels but there's one thing you won't pass, a fuel station. I hope you're happy driving through the most beautiful National and State parcs while destroying them at the same time with the horrible amounts of exhaust fumes you're spreading. I know you don't care about that, you only care about Robbie.
The arrogant Dutch would certainly be interested in reading your gambling stories and advice. But the arrogant Dutch call it as they see it and poor little Robbie has so many ego issues he doesn't play well with people who don't agree with him. Have you been beaten alot when you were a child Rob? You really seem to have some mental issues. You call people gambling addicts at random and whenever they don't agree with you. People you don't know at all! I for example only gamble when I'm in Vegas, the last time I was in Vegas was 10 months ago, I don't even belong to the TR club, I only play and stay at Mlife properties. So Rob, the last time I gambled was 10 months ago, you're still gambling daily, who's the addict around here?
When you are talking about needing to use tough words to guide the misled sheep, you claim to be doing so with noble intentions. Let's please stick to the facts Robbie shall we? You start shouting and insulting as soon as somebody disagrees with you or as soon as somebody demands some proof for all the bullshit you spread. Since you don't have ANY proof the only thing you can do is divert. And that's exactly what you do all the time in a poor attempt to cover up al your fantasies. Continue to enjoy your life in lala-land Rob while the rest of us stick to reality.
The funniest response you've got when people don't worship you is playing the jealousy card. News flash Rob, there's absolutely nothing about you to be jealous about. I raise my kids to be the exact opposite of characters like you. And don't be too excited about that 1 million dollars Rob, it's really not that big of a deal.
Signed, Euro trash number 1 and proud of it!
I've never doubted Rob's wins but I think luck played more of a factor than Rob will own up to.
His behavior on forums including this one is unforgiveable.
How he treats those who disagree with him is infantile.
He has destroyed his chance for respect and admiration by how he attacks others who challenge him. Politics is not in his future.
He probably does have much to teach but he has alienated so many he lost his potential audience.
He will never be remembered as a winner. Too bad.
So let me get this straight, Alan. Wikipedia is a fine source for defining what "full pay" video poker is or should be, but somehow falls short of defining Bob Dancer? You really should make up your mind.
I was in Las Vegas approximately 100 days a year when video poker became more than a couple of wayward machines here or there. At that time, full pay did not refer to the best-paying variant of particular games. It referred to games that returned 100% if played properly. The corrosion of that definition, of course, started when pay tables began to be gutted.
So by your definition, if 8/5 JoB is the "most common variant" of video poker, then it becomes, by definition, "full pay."
CET must love you.
What was written about Dancer was a hack job. I only cited Wikipedia as being one source of what "full pay video poker" is. Here are more places to find this info on the web:Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
http://www.online-casinos.com/video-...ideo-poker.asp
http://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic...as_Nevada.html
http://gambling.answers.com/online-c...ay-video-poker
http://wizardofodds.com/games/video-...er/9-6/simple/
I also put the question on the Wizard's forum, check the responses here plus the Wizard's own response. Redietz why don't you challenge the Wizard? I am sure he would like to hear from you.
http://wizardofvegas.com/forum/gambl.../2/#post314785
You know damn well that even at Caesars Palace FULL PAY 9/6 Jacks of Better video poker is available.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
I think you've become a troll.
Debating the definition of full pay is stupid.
Times change, and so does video poker.
There are so many absolute crap machines these days that 99%+ machines are considered the good ones, if you want to play video poker.
Obviously those machines will add up to a loss in the long run. I don't think anyone except Rob Singer is arguing against that.
So Alan and Dan, if 8/5 JoB were the most common variant of video poker, would you be referring to it as "full pay?"
I feel it's my job to remind people that there was a time, an era, longer than the present era, when "full pay" meant "full pay" -- not "most common variant." It's also my job to remind people that 6/5 blackjack is a latecomer freak game that did not exist for the majority of casino existence in this country. At one time, there were "good gambles" -- as Binion used to say -- in Las Vegas casinos that were superior to what is available today. Without these comparisons, newcomers to the gambling scene would think that today's odds were yesterday's odds, and that today's comp systems were yesterday's comp systems, which is not the case. And this "not the case" is to the detriment of the players. What 50 years ago would have been considered playing the customer for a fool is now the widely accepted status quo both in terms of odds and comps.
The dominant monopolies, CET and MGM/Mandalay, have lowered the floor for gambling odds in Las Vegas. They, especially CET, have driven the changes in gambling odds.
I was at Caesars over the weekend. There are plenty of machines that pay 9/6 on DB by the sports book and the video poker room by the entrance to the Forum Shops. I don't know if they are new there or not as I usually stay at Harrah's or Planet Hollywood. Aside from the royal that was dealt to me on DB I actually did better over the long run on TB.
Why do you "feel it's your job"? I think for the most part the people on this forum are fairly knowledgeable when it comes to casino gambling in their respective games of choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
If you're going to be gambling anyways, shouldn't you shop around for the best odds as well as the best comps? I imagine Alan could could acheive the highest tier level in any of the casinos in Las Vegas. To my knowledge though, there isn't a MGM Mirage resort, a Wynn resort, a Station's resort or a Coast Casino in California. Why all the hate for CET?
I think you asked a fair question, even though you are trying to be silly, arrogant and combative:
No, it's not. We all know that "full pay JOB" is 9/6 and we know that the casinos have downgraded their paytables. 8/5 Jacks would never be called "full pay" because it is now the dominant game at casinos such as Rincon.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Your job? Since when are you the video poker authority? I thought you sold sports betting tips? I also thought you rarely play video poker? Again, I think you should be raising these questions and making these statements over on The Wizard's forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
I think you're coming late to the party redietz. You're not telling us anything new.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
This is a real problem that I discussed with a friend last night. We all know that with a few exceptions like the remaining 8/5 Aces and Faces games at Rincon that video poker sucks at Rincon. In the California Casinos forum I wrote about a small casino a short distance from Rincon that has better video poker than Rincon. Pala and Pechanga also have better video poker games than Rincon. But none of these casinos is linked to a Vegas casino.Quote:
Originally Posted by a2a3dseddie
Now, if I were a professional player and had to play at the absolute best machines because my career depended on it, I would certainly play at one of these other casinos. But as a recreational player I am also concerned with the "fringe benefits" that I get from Rincon including those Vegas trips and events and shows. This is why we initially switched from playing at Pechanga to Rincon. While Pechanga had its own yearly gift bonus (like the Great Gift Wrap Up at Caesars), and also had cash back and free play offers -- playing at Pechanga did nothing for me when it came to going to Vegas.
And getting back to my discussion last night -- I said to my friend that if the last of the "good video poker" were to be removed from Rincon then instead of making my trips to Rincon I would be better off taking advantage of the monthly offers I get from Caesars and just go to Vegas once a month.
In fact, as it stands now, I get $1,000 of free play in Vegas each month, which is about the same as what I am getting now from Rincon each month. But with Rincon I would have to make four trips per month vs one trip to Caesars. Factor in the gas and mileage it makes more sense to make one trip to Caesars per month than four trips to Rincon. In the short term what keeps me going to Rincon is that there are some smaller fringe benefits that I am still getting such as extra Total Rewards comp dollars which can be converted into free play either at Rincon or Caesars. Right now, those extra comps that are converted could be worth as much as about $1,300 of free play if I "work the system" right.
And for Rob: that $1,300 of extra free play per month is about $16,000 of free play a year... just for swiping my card.
Alan you're so misguided and could use a little advice. You're using those one or two games at Rincon as some sort of crutch, when you well know you can beat any reasonable pay table at any casino if you approach it properly. You need a change just like I did when I found that ap play was a loser for me.
All that wonderful sounding free play? The more you play, the more free play they bestow upon you. That's irrelevant. The only important aspect is if you win. Period. All the rest is a result the psychologically superior game the casino plays with you....they toy with you just like the foolish GGWU makes fools out of all you oh-so-special 7-Stars folks.
Rob, step back a minute and take this in: your comments are irrelevant. This is not a discussion about beating negative paytables, so take a time out. This is only a discussion about the paytables and quality of the games being offered.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Because I play less -- much less -- than I used to play my free play has been cut and cut and cut. And never did I say anything about winning or losing... so these are more irrelevant comments.
For once... just once... please put your own agenda aside or put them into your own thread. Must you muck up every discussion with your own crap?