Overcomped

I'm so overcomped that I have zero Vegas offers of any kind. Not one.

Even Rincon has slammed the door on me, since I did a no-play stay last time and used their freeplay.

My friend who used the "on-off" trick is still getting $200-$300ish offers. They did get a NYE offer for $225 freeplay, but it doesn't include Caesars Palace. This person is only a Diamond.

Of course, being a Seven Stars, I could get a room at New Years, but I will be skipping Vegas for New Years this time around, as I will have just been there right beforehand.

Dan you still don't get it. You're not overcomped anymore. You're now considered a PITA and they don't want you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Dan you still don't get it. You're not overcomped anymore. You're now considered a PITA and they don't want you.

---

Basically he's being what we call getting "no mailed."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

Basically he's being what we call getting "no mailed."

---

Or possibly he is over estimating his importance to Caesars.

I'm sure Dan's heart broken.

Now he'll just have to sign up his girlfriend and do the same things with her card.

Oh, the humanity....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

I'm sure Dan's heart broken.

Now he'll just have to sign up his girlfriend and do the same things with her card.

Oh, the humanity....

---

This is why I stick with a small amount of recreational play and don't try to make it any more than than that. I get a few comps along the way and I'm happy with what I get. I get calls from hosts periodically, I'm guessing they have a schedule for checking in on card holders. I've never asked them for anything, as any special requests I've had (additional rooms etc.) I've handled through the 1-800 numbers. I've always found Caesars accommodating for the few requests I've had. I do my dinner reservations through opentable or the hotel. Same with shows, either at the ticket booth or Total Rewards desk if it's for comp tickets.

I don't particularly want a closer association with Caesars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Dan you still don't get it. You're not overcomped anymore. You're now considered a PITA and they don't want you.

---

I've gotten no offers for NYE either. I must be overcomped also. I visited Caesars once this year.

Yup, every legend in their own mind is overcomped.

Has anyone even thought about spending NYE at any place other than a casino?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Dan you still don't get it. You're not overcomped anymore. You're now considered a PITA and they don't want you.

---

Yes I am overcomped.

I don't know why you refuse to accept an established term in the casino industry, and realize it applies to me.

I still get all of the standard Seven Stars benefits, which more than pay for the -EV of the games I pay to get there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Yup, every legend in their own mind is overcomped.

Has anyone even thought about spending NYE at any place other than a casino?

---

Back in the day when I was considered a preferred patron in three A.C. casinos, my offers for New Years were always considered top shelve.

Not being a professional winning A.P. gambler I had to place my faith on luck to leave a winner. The odds obvious were not in my favor, so I always refused all New Year offers.

I never wanted to bring in any New Year on a negative note. I turned down every offer for over 30 years. I always felt losing money on the last day of a year and on the first day of a new year might be a bad omen.

To get those top shelve offers means you are a wanted income for the casinos. Even if you had a great winning year, the casinos share a crystal ball and know the future with 99.0% accuracy. That missing 1% is of course for you professional winning A.P. pros.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Yes I am overcomped.

I don't know why you refuse to accept an established term in the casino industry, and realize it applies to me.

I still get all of the standard Seven Stars benefits, which more than pay for the -EV of the games I pay to get there.

---

Dan did you just fall off a turnip truck?

Dan... SAY NO MORE... YOU are overcomped. You were told you were overcomped and you believe you are overcomped. Okay. You are overcomped.

But the bottom line is... you're not getting the offers. If you want to say it's because you are overcomped, well, that's just fine.

A stinkweed by any other name would stink as bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Dan did you just fall off a turnip truck?

---

Turnip
Root vegetable

The turnip or white turnip is a root vegetable commonly grown in temperate climates worldwide for its white, bulbous taproot. Small, tender varieties are grown for human consumption, while larger varieties are grown as feed for livestock.


Alan, please explain to me what falling off a Turnip truck implies? Is there some type of metaphor I’m not aware of?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackhole

Alan, please explain to me what falling off a Turnip truck implies?

---

You didn't want to Google it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

You didn't want to Google it?

---

Good ole goggle, your right it was there. I'll use old for my excuse for not running to google first.

If someone has just fallen off the turnip truck, they are uninformed, naive and gullible. (Often used in the negative)

I was born at night, but not last night.

Actually, there was a real rural denigration connoted by that phrase. If you "fell off the turnip truck," it meant you were a rural bumpkin bringing crops to market and were unfamiliar with city life. Turnips were in-the-ground vegetables, so growing and harvesting them was considered lower than, say, growing corn or tomatoes. So, if you fell off the turnip truck, you were not only a rural bumpkin, you were the lowest of the rural bumpkins. And many rural folks were unschooled.

It was actually a class slur.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Yes I am overcomped.

I don't know why you refuse to accept an established term in the casino industry, and realize it applies to me.

I still get all of the standard Seven Stars benefits, which more than pay for the -EV of the games I pay to get there.

---

If there truly were such a term that's standard within the industry, it would be easy to produce one piece of written evidence from CET that uses it for your denial of whatever benefits you're being blocked from.

And of course, you and all the other 7-Stars no doubt whatsoever have been given enough "freebies" so that you folks can proclaim winning years. After all, CET isn't in the business of making money, and they didn't create the 7-Stars level for anything other than to have a level for all their "winners".....

It doesn't matter if you are overcomped or undercomped. What's important is... are you getting the offers you want?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Dan... SAY NO MORE... YOU are overcomped. You were told you were overcomped and you believe you are overcomped. Okay. You are overcomped.

But the bottom line is... you're not getting the offers. If you want to say it's because you are overcomped, well, that's just fine.

A stinkweed by any other name would stink as bad.

---

I'm getting no offers BECAUSE I'm overcomped.

Overcomped = used more comps than one was entitled to

Used more comps than one was entitled to = No more comps for the future

Why is this so hard for you to understand?

And now Rob is asking me for written proof that I'm overcomped.

This is just comical.

Sadly this is just rationalization by non-AP players that they must be the ones doing it right if their comps are better. Never mind that the number of comps I redeem per dollar lost is FAR greater than theirs. That's not important, right?

Perhaps you're underplayed and not really overcomped? Either way are you getting the offers you want? That's the bottom line.

Dan, you make a silly claim with that "overcomped" thing so you're being challenged to support it. Either you have it in writing or you don't. And if you don't, your explanations alone have never been enough to convince anybody of anything other than you want more comps than you're entitled to so the casino just says no. Why you persist on trying to pull the wool over the eyes of a bunch of players with far more experience in the comp game than you, is baffling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Dan, you make a silly claim with that "overcomped" thing so you're being challenged to support it. Either you have it in writing or you don't. And if you don't, your explanations alone have never been enough to convince anybody of anything other than you want more comps than you're entitled to so the casino just says no. Why you persist on trying to pull the wool over the eyes of a bunch of players with far more experience in the comp game than you, is baffling.

---

Let me get this straight.

Rob Singer, the guy who makes outlandish and mathematics-defying claims about his results, the guy who won't provide us a shred of proof about these claims.....

.... is chiding ME for not providing proof in writing about something?

Now that's rich.

Dan's comps are in that storage locker in Arizona with Rob's tax returns and Bigfoot.

Dan I think Rob's point is this: if you gambled more than the base minimum you would be entitled to more comps. However you have chosen only to play the base minimum to secure Seven Stars and the comp level it offers. There's nothing wrong with that and good for you for sticking with your plan. With that said, the rest of us have never heard the term "overcomped" before except as a euphemism to say no to a request for additional comps.

I don't think there is a list at Caesars called "overcomped players." I do think that hosts look at play levels to decide if additional comps can be offered.

You have very successfully engineered getting Seven Stars and the comps that come with it. Unfortunately your play probably doesn't warrant anything more. Frankly that just might mean YOU ARE AHEAD OF THE GAME since comps will never make up for expected losses.

So when you're told you're "overcomped" congratulate yourself that you didn't lose more nor did you play more than needed to get Seven Stars. But the reality is you are not overcomped but you are underplayed to get more comps.

I can't believe nobody has said this, so I may as well.

If there is a category of player deemed to be overcomped, you will never find the word "overcomped" in any CET literature because they don't want to publicly acknowledge anyone can do it or that there is a formula for doing it.

That seems so obvious to me that it's ridiculous. Why would CET state in any public literature that it can be done? Of course they won't!

Jesus, guys, use some common sense. Until 20 years ago, when it finally leaked, nobody knew people were getting rebates on losses. Casino management was able to keep a lid on that for decades. Do you really think 20% or more rebates on large-scale losses gets mentioned in any public literature? Is that the first thing your host brings up when he meets you, "Oh, by the way, the people betting a hundred times as much as you get 20% loss rebates annually?"

Of course not. And they're also not going to admit to the existence of a group of players who have gamed the system to the max while betting minimum amounts. Why would they?

Ironically, there is a program at Rincon to reimburse table game players with a percentage of their losses. This is done because table players are not eligible for cash back or many other free play offers that slot and video poker players get.

I think I mentioned this percentage amount a while back but I don't remember what it is. Someone who is a table player at Rincon might know. By the way, there is a threshold minimum for table losses before the rebate kicks in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Dan I think Rob's point is this: if you gambled more than the base minimum you would be entitled to more comps. However you have chosen only to play the base minimum to secure Seven Stars and the comp level it offers. There's nothing wrong with that and good for you for sticking with your plan. With that said, the rest of us have never heard the term "overcomped" before except as a euphemism to say no to a request for additional comps.

I don't think there is a list at Caesars called "overcomped players." I do think that hosts look at play levels to decide if additional comps can be offered.

You have very successfully engineered getting Seven Stars and the comps that come with it. Unfortunately your play probably doesn't warrant anything more. Frankly that just might mean YOU ARE AHEAD OF THE GAME since comps will never make up for expected losses.

So when you're told you're "overcomped" congratulate yourself that you didn't lose more nor did you play more than needed to get Seven Stars. But the reality is you are not overcomped but you are underplayed to get more comps.

---

You realize that any "extra play" would earn MUCH less in the way in comps per dollar gambled, right?

I'm earning the peak of possible comps per dollar, and then utilizing almost all of them.

This is why I am listed as overcomped.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

This is why I am listed as overcomped.

---

We'd love to see that "list."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

We'd love to see that "list."

---

Ask your host if "overcomped" is a real term in the casino industry.

I don't see why you don't understand this.

Let's say a Seven Stars who earned their status playing the minimum in early 2015 has spent 400 comp days in CET hotel rooms since (this is possible), and hasn't wagered another penny.

Do you think he would be overcomped? Would he have used far more benefits than he earned?

Come on, Alan, stop being stubborn.

You may not want to be overcomped yourself, and you may not want to play like an AP, but at least admit that overcomping is a real thing, and that I am likely in that status.

This is getting tiresome.

Let's make it simple for the Alans and Robs of the forum, who somehow don't understand the concept of becoming overcomped.

Take a fictitious national chain high-end steakhouse. We'll call it "Jon's Steaks".

Jon's Steaks has a promotion that you can earn free soup and salad every day for the current year and the next year, as long as you dine there 50 days in the year and spend at least $75 on food. per visit Once you've earned the soup and salad, you are allowed (but not encouraged) to come in, eat your soup and salad, order nothing else, and walk out with no bill.

Also, Jon's sends you offers and promotions for other free things, if they identify you as a regular customer.

Noticing an opportunity here, I dine at Jon's 50 times in the first two months of 2015, spending barely over $75 each time.

Then I start coming there every single day after that, redeeming my free soup and salad over and over. I do not spend another penny at Jon's throughout 2015 and 2016, but simply keep redeeming my free soup and salad every day.

Eventually, the profit Jon's made from me during my first 50 visits will disappear, due to my repeated free redemptions. Jon's notices this and stops sending me their other promotions, but continue honoring the free soup and salad thing, even knowing that I am costing them money overall.

This would mean I am overcomped at Jon's Steakhouse. This would also mean that I used the promotion at Jon's to my favor, and ended up coming out ahead -- I got much more out of them than I paid for.

During that same time period, Alan also ate at Jon's. He also ate there 50 times and earned the free soup and salad. However, Alan only redeems the free soup and salad when he's there to eat other things he pays for.

Alan is the type customer they prefer, as this was the spirit of the promotion in the first place. As a result, Alan receives mailers from them offering free appetizers, 50% off meals, etc.

When I tell Alan that I am "overcomped" at Jon's, he laughs at me and tells me that I'm actually undercomped, because I am only entitled to the free soup and salad, while he still gets those other offers.

I respond to Alan reminding him that I'm eating for free every time, while he keeps spending money and thereby allowing them to make further profits off of him, but he still insists that he's getting the better value here.

Ignoring the fact that I would get sick of soup and salad every day (since this is just a hypothetical example), this is pretty much exactly the difference in our two approaches, and it's mind-boggling how Alan fails to understand what overcomped means.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Ask your host if "overcomped" is a real term in the casino industry.

I don't see why you don't understand this.

Let's say a Seven Stars who earned their status playing the minimum in early 2015 has spent 400 comp days in CET hotel rooms since (this is possible), and hasn't wagered another penny.

Do you think he would be overcomped? Would he have used far more benefits than he earned?

Come on, Alan, stop being stubborn.

You may not want to be overcomped yourself, and you may not want to play like an AP, but at least admit that overcomping is a real thing, and that I am likely in that status.

This is getting tiresome.

---

The problem is, you are calling it "earned" when it's a reward for losing money. Nothing more, nothing less. You may have lost the minimum while gaining 7 Stars, but at the end of the day you lost to get these comps.

Comps are a reward for losing. You just haven't lost enough lately to have "earned" further comps. Step up your losses and I guarantee the comps will come rolling in. Read the Watanabe article again.

As far as what a host is telling you, he or she works for the casino and has a stake in keeping you losing money to the casino. If it makes you feel better about losing, I'd tell you you were overcomped in every conversation.

People are very weird about what Dan's saying.

It's easy enough to determine if what you lose pursuing a particular status is more than made up for by the comps used. If it's possible to earn and use more comps than one loses in cash, then why won't anyone believe a person actually pulls it off?

If Dan wants to call himself overcomped it's okay with me. I'm sorry I won't see him at the New Year's Eve party and event. I'll be there with the other non overcomped players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

People are very weird about what Dan's saying.

It's easy enough to determine if what you lose pursuing a particular status is more than made up for by the comps used. If it's possible to earn and use more comps than one loses in cash, then why won't anyone believe a person actually pulls it off?

---

Because gamblers lie. Most of the claims on this board prove that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by james40

Because gamblers lie. Most of the claims on this board prove that.

---

That wasn't my point. My point was that if one concedes that a person could garner more in comp value than they lost, then why -- if one concedes that -- is it so difficult to believe a particular person actually did so?

I'm ahead 5K lifetime playing vp -- a modest sum, to be sure, but I'm actually, truly ahead. My playing that vp at various places around town has probably garnered me between $400 and $500 a year in various and sundry comps, including free rooms. That's not much, but over 20 years, it adds up to 8K or 10K in comp value. I don't count that comp value towards my definition of "winning," but it's not farfetched to do so.

I know I'm not lying, so why would I automatically assume someone else is?

Redietz are you on a list of "overcomped players"? Have you ever asked for a comp and been denied because you were told you were overcomped?

No one is saying that there aren't players who have a profit. No one is saying you can't get comps worth more than your losses. What some of us are saying is the explanation that a player has been denied comps is because of a lack of play and "overcomped" is a euphemism for not having the play to get comps.

Who besides Dan has ever heard the word "overcomped" used?

Comps are supposed to be based on action, not wins or losses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by james40

The problem is, you are calling it "earned" when it's a reward for losing money. Nothing more, nothing less. You may have lost the minimum while gaining 7 Stars, but at the end of the day you lost to get these comps.

Comps are a reward for losing. You just haven't lost enough lately to have "earned" further comps. Step up your losses and I guarantee the comps will come rolling in. Read the Watanabe article again.

As far as what a host is telling you, he or she works for the casino and has a stake in keeping you losing money to the casino. If it makes you feel better about losing, I'd tell you you were overcomped in every conversation.

---

I know all about the Watanabe situation.

You are correct that I will see some comps again if I start losing again, but not for the reason you think.

This is because of the "on-off" trick you can use at casinos. If you are overcomped, but then wait 18 or so months and start playing again, it will "forget" your overcomped status from the past, and essentially start you with a clean slate. Then you milk the comps super hard again, then stop playinig/staying for 18 months repeat again and again.

I have a friend who does this and it WORKS.

I don't do it because I want/need all the Seven Stars benefits, and don't want to go through an 18-month lapse without redeeming anything.

Regarding what you were saying about the host, you are misunderstanding. The hosts are actually telling me NOT to come. They are telling me that they can't give me anything at all, and in fact quote a really high rate (the standard going rate for anyone off the street) for any rooms I want. When I ask them if there's anything they can do for me, they always say some form of, "Sorry, I can't. You're way overcomped." One even showed me on the computer how much overcomped I was, when I was there in person.

Rarely do these hosts volunteer that I can stay there free anyway with my guaranteed 4 nights Seven Stars benefit. They're hoping I hear the high rate they quote me and just go away, not realizing I'm entitled to stay free. Even when I do bring that up, sometimes they will claim they can only book 2 or 3 nights, and give me some nonsense like, "That's all the system is letting me do, you are very overcomped." They are also typically rude and snippy with me, and you can tell they just want me to get off the phone and go away.

In reality, they just don't want me there.

If this is some sort of reverse psychology act, then they all deserve Oscars for Best Peformance by a Casino Host.

I also have talked to former hosts (ones who no longer work in the industry, but have recently), and all have verified to me that being "overcomped" is a real thing, and that hosts avoid these customers like the plague.

Besides, I can approximately quantify the value of the comps I redeem (the wholesale cost, not retail), and that number dwarfs my expected loss getting to Seven Stars. So it all makes sense.

I don't understand why you, Alan, and Rob are doubting this is real.

Why is is so hard to grasp that, if the casino spends more in comping me (and I mean actual cost, not retail cost) than my expected losses, I'm not a profitable customer for them?

It seems that some people are just bending over backward to convince themselves that it's impossible to advantage-play the comp system. Instead, they're convinced that the casino just wants me to keep coming back over and over for 2 years, never playing, and utilizing guaranteed comps every time.

Right. I'm falling right into their trap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Redietz are you on a list of "overcomped players"? Have you ever asked for a comp and been denied because you were told you were overcomped?

No one is saying that there aren't players who have a profit. No one is saying you can't get comps worth more than your losses. What some of us are saying is the explanation that a player has been denied comps is because of a lack of play and "overcomped" is a euphemism for not having the play to get comps.

Who besides Dan has ever heard the word "overcomped" used?

---

Alan, call your host and ask if the term "overcomped" is used. Don't mention my name, but just ask them if there's such a thing for a player to be overcomped, and what that means.

Ask if it's a real term used in the industry.

Report back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

If Dan wants to call himself overcomped it's okay with me. I'm sorry I won't see him at the New Year's Eve party and event. I'll be there with the other non overcomped players.

---

I actually could go to the NYE Party with my friend who does the on-off play thing. That person got invited, and I could be their +1!

I won't be there for NYE this year, though.

Even if I was, I wouldn't be interested in attending the party, as I would be with my young son, who could not go. Besides, NYE parties with strangers never really thrilled me.

I guarantee your expected losses dwarf mine by a massive amount (I'm talking expected, because that's how CET comps, and it's silly to factor luck into whether it was "worth" earning comps.)

You can have your NYE parties and freeplay offers, and I will stick to redeeming far more in comps than my expected losses.

Dan if in reality they really don't want you there you must be a real problem player. What are you not telling us?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

Comps are supposed to be based on action, not wins or losses.

---

Comps can be based on many factors including coin in, losses, marketing decisions, lack of play, extra play and yes even wins. Cash back or bounce back is usually just a percentage of your action or coin in.

Dan, hosts at Caesars use the phrase "Diamonds from Tunica" but they won't discuss it with the public. Sure there might be the term overcomped but it's probably a euphemism for telling a player they're not entitled to what they're asking for. In other words, they're a Diamond from Tunica.

Frankly after you said in the other thread when you said they really don't want you back it makes me think you really are a problem player and yes they probably don't want you back. Now I think there is something else you're not telling us. I can only wonder what it might be?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Dan if in reality they really don't want you there you must be a real problem player. What are you not telling us?

---

Hosts don't want me there. They make zero commission off of me, due to my overcomped status.

The rest of CET doesn't give a crap if I come or don't come.

I am not a problem player. Other than complaining about real customer service fails (which happen more on the hotel side than the casino side), I do not make any waves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Dan, hosts at Caesars use the phrase "Diamonds from Tunica" but they won't discuss it with the public. Sure there might be the term overcomped but it's probably a euphemism for telling a player they're not entitled to what they're asking for. In other words, they're a Diamond from Tunica.

Frankly after you said in the other thread when you said they really don't want you back it makes me think you really are a problem player and yes they probably don't want you back. Now I think there is something else you're not telling us. I can only wonder what it might be?

---

As I explained in the other thread, I am not a problem player, other than using Seven Stars to get way overcomped.

I am not a "Diamonds from Tunica" type, because I know exactly what to expect and not expect. I do not ask hosts to give me anything, unless it is required to go through them for something.

You still aren't understanding the situation, apparently, unless you're just trolling me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Hosts don't want me there. They make zero commission off of me, due to my overcomped status.

---

I didn't know that your comp level has any bearing on hosts? I thought hosts earn a bonus based on your play. Am I wrong about that?

I was also wondering about your mega reward credit balance that you told us about. I never quite understood how a player who had the minimal amounts of tier points earned during the year to obtain 7 Stars status which included using tier credit bonus points, happened to also have a big balance of reward credits? My undertanding is that there are no bonuses for reward credits, so when you play 5,000 tier points to get a 10,000 tier point bonus, you only earned 5,000 RCs and there is no bonus for the RCs.

So where did the huge balance of RCs come from, since you always minimized your play to get your "overcomped" status?

I know Dan can speak for himself but I did want to let others know that the term overcomped is real and can be achieved for a variety of reasons. In our case it happened to us several years ago at our home property in Bossier City. With us it had nothing to do with inconsistent play but we had about a 3 or 4 month period of time that we invited friends and family members to our casino and our host gave us free rooms, free concert tickets, and free extra room credit to compensate for the extra guests. We thought nothing of it at the time. For the first month or so after this time our free play offers and other mailers remained about the same and then all of a sudden we quit getting offers. We contacted them thinking somehow they had a mixup with our addresses. They said they would look into it but we never heard back.

We were still able to get free rooms through our host so on our next trip to Bossier City we paid a visit to our host's office to see if they could give us an idea what was going on because we were somewhat irked that we were not getting any freeplay. After about 30 minutes or so meeting with the director or marketing and her computer we were told that we were overcomped. That was the exact work she used. She said that there was nothing she could do but for us to be patient and that it would take a couple of months for our offers to go back to normal. To make a long story short that is exactly what happened.

Maybe overcomped needs its own thread as it is kind of taking over the discussion on this and the GGWU thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I do not ask hosts to give me anything, unless it is required to go through them for something.

---

What were the circumstances that prompted a host (or hosts) to offer the information that you are overcomped?

seemoreroyals so you abused the system and got cut off. It happens. This is a warning to everyone else who "double dips" and tries to get more than what they are "entitled to."

How you differ from Dan, is that he said he asked for nothing extra, did not deal with hosts, and says his "overcomped status" is the result of maximizing his 7 Stars benefits. That's very different from your situation, isn't it?

I think in your case you took too much. In Dan's case I think the issue is he didn't play enough. But the bottom line is you both got "no mailed" and had your offers stopped. Sounds like the same result to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Hosts don't want me there. They make zero commission off of me, due to my overcomped status.

The rest of CET doesn't give a crap if I come or don't come.

I am not a problem player. Other than complaining about real customer service fails (which happen more on the hotel side than the casino side), I do not make any waves.

---

If CET has so little regard for you, why do you remain loyal?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Ask your host if "overcomped" is a real term in the casino industry.

I don't see why you don't understand this.

Let's say a Seven Stars who earned their status playing the minimum in early 2015 has spent 400 comp days in CET hotel rooms since (this is possible), and hasn't wagered another penny.

Do you think he would be overcomped? Would he have used far more benefits than he earned?

Come on, Alan, stop being stubborn.

You may not want to be overcomped yourself, and you may not want to play like an AP, but at least admit that overcomping is a real thing, and that I am likely in that status.

This is getting tiresome.

---

You were spending and losing money throughout the year to gain 7 Star, CET was providing plenty of comps while you were spending and losing. At some point you curtailed your play after you attained 7 Star and the comps dried up. CET doesn't care about you now because you are not spending and losing. Go back to the spending pattern you displayed while "attaining" 7 Star and the comps come back. This does not seem like a mystery.

This is all total nonsense, and it's nonsense because Dan keeps saying what many, many other players say on public forums all the time--that they're slick enuf to outsmart the system so they can get more "freebies" than they deserve.

C'mon, no one ever is "overcomped" and no one is pulling the wool over casino eyes with their personal antics. Everything is pre-calculated, checked, and checked again when it comes to formulas and giving out stuff to loyal players. The only people who get "over & above" are those who casinos deem a good risk whenever these players disappear for a specific amount of time, so they send out very lucrative offers in an effort to get them back. And if the player is astute enuf not to fall into the casino trap by only taking what's being handed him or her on a silver platter and then walking (until the next time, if it ever happens again) then and only then can a player expect to label himself as having received more "comps" than he actually deserved.

"Overcomped" as in somehow "tricking" the comp system?Hogwash. It's simply being smart enuf to take maximum advantage of an offer--and not go around claiming how you've worked and weaseled your way into getting the "stupid people" from marketing to succumb to your demands in order to say you're "overcomped". Pure fantasy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Dan, hosts at Caesars use the phrase "Diamonds from Tunica" but they won't discuss it with the public. Sure there might be the term overcomped but it's probably a euphemism for telling a player they're not entitled to what they're asking for. In other words, they're a Diamond from Tunica.

Frankly after you said in the other thread when you said they really don't want you back it makes me think you really are a problem player and yes they probably don't want you back. Now I think there is something else you're not telling us. I can only wonder what it might be?

---

The 7 Star card is just a piece of plastic, your coin in dictates how the casino and the host is going to treat you. Put the coin in and you are royalty, short them on coin in and demand things because you carry a piece of plastic and you become a pain in the ass. The card a reflection of how much you spend, quit the spending and yes they don't care if you come back.

Generally speaking, people who are not welcomed back as customers are in fact problem people....aka, people with too many issues for their own good.

How many times has Dan painstakingly explained his phobia about being "overcharged" for some small item or being "mistreated or dissed" by someone of authority in person or on the phone....only to waste huge amounts of effort and spend days chasing his loss?

It isn't too difficult to see why these things keep happening to him. Some people have these type of annoying personalities--that's all it is. They go around always feeling entitled to getting special treatment, getting more than the other guy, and they live their life in "paranoid mode" always thinking that other people are doing to them what they take enormous pride in doing: taking advantage of others in some way, shape, or fashion.

So for Dan to persist in this fantasy world of being overcomped, it seems all too normal and it won't change. When someone lives a life totally based on conflict, you're gonna be fed a constant flow of this type of goofy stuff.

Again, I agree with Rob. This "comped stuff" that you all get from CET, they (CET) get for free or next to nothing. Think of CET as the game show The Price is Right. Do you think all that stuff and money they give away is making them lose money? If you do you're completely wrong. That "stuff" is provided to them for NOTHING in return except for advertising commercials. It comes back to what I said before. You guys place way to much value on this stuff when in reality is basically worth nothing and CET paid NOTHING to give it to the player. Just because Amazon is selling it for such and such price doesn't make it worth that price.

That's a strange thing to say, jbjb. If something can be sold on ebay for a price, then that's what that something is worth. If I inherit something, it doesn't lack value just because I didn't pay for it per se.

Rob, I'm surprised at your view of casino management as omniscient, detail-oriented, and fluid so as to ensure no player can game them. I've been dealing with casinos just about as long as you and Alan, and probably in a more probing fashion, and I just do not see it. Casino management, especially with the entity that is CET, appears to be a disorganized cluster**** to me. They have what I would call a forced accretion organization -- they acquired pre-existing organizations with separate rules, regs, clientele, and managements, then tried to impose a system over top of what already existed while keeping whole chunks of previous managements, with separate styles and rules for customers, in place.

I can tell you for a fact that the race and sports end of the various CET properties not only are not organized, they will quote you completely different rules, regs, limits, and comp returns when you survey them. They are the opposite of some all-knowing data system. It doesn't surprise me that players can abide by the rules of CET and extract value from them by being extremely disciplined.

I probably didn't make my case strongly enough in the previous post. I believe what Dan is saying. I don't necessarily share his priorities and such, but I have little doubt he's extracting value.

Let me give you an example from my personal experience. I am ahead at Boyd properties lifetime. That's more than 30 years of gambling. According to Rob, they should have cut off all comps ages ago. But they don't. They want me to come in. I'm not costing them much, and maybe I'll lose. Maybe I'll change games. Maybe I'll introduce other players. It doesn't hurt them to give me meals and rooms and tournaments and other stuff. As jbjb said, it costs them next to nothing. On some low level, it could be said I'm gaming their system. Personally, I don't think of it that way and never really have. I'm gambling. They are giving me stuff. That's the way it's supposed to work, from my perspective.

Dan's doing the same thing on a larger scale with CET. He isn't killing them by extracting 100 free room nights and 50 meals and a handful of trips. He uses those things, so they have value to him. The individual hosts, who get graded on what they give out versus take in, hate him. Good for him. But CET isn't going to change their melded, constantly changing rules and regs just to shut Dan down. It would be like performing major surgery to remove a splinter. So Dan gets to extract value from them.

Not that unbelievable. Not that complicated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

That's a strange thing to say, jbjb. If something can be sold on ebay for a price, then that's what that something is worth. If I inherit something, it doesn't lack value just because I didn't pay for it per se.

---

Understandable, but to me it's value is the cash I get for it if "I" sell it. Not what's I may pay for it. We over pay for just about every purchase we make from food in a grocery store to cars to home essentials.

Casino freebies are just promotional products provided to them for nothing. So they're not losing a dime by pawning them off on the player.

If Dan is happy with his offers and with whatever he's getting that's all that matters.

But what I am questioning is how he is twisting his lack of play and how he has been no-mailed into his belief that he is overcomped.

As soon as he starts playing again, the comps will come back. (Well, not immediately, because we know it takes a couple of months for the computer program to kick in.)

The most important point for everyone to remember -- and I am addressing the general public that reads this -- comps are not designed to make you, the player, whole after a loss. Comps are designed only to return a small percentage of what the casino expects you to lose playing whatever games you lose. The ONLY WAY to come out ahead in the "comps game" is to actually win in the casino AND collect the comps you are entitled to.

This means that the only way to truly be OVERCOMPED is to actually have a profit in the casino AND collecting the comps you are offered. If you lost in the casino, you can't be overcomped. Ever. Period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

Casino freebies are just promotional products provided to them for nothing. So they're not losing a dime by pawning them off on the player.

---

I am not sure this is correct. I think casinos pay a lot of money to vendors for various products and gifts and they certainly have to cover the costs for meals and show tickets that they give away.

While a player might value a shopping spree for $500 the casino might have paid $300 for the "voucher" that was given to the player.

It's absolutely true--the casinos pay little to nothing for all that stuff they "give away"....esp. at the year-end giveaways. The companies involved in the GGWU for instance, make their money back plus much more from the enormous amount of advertising it creates. Anyone who's been to business school and anyone who understands what marketing & selling is all about can easily figure this out. It has nothing to do with casinos, lawnmower stores, or any other specific business.

Red, you & Dan must believe the casinos want to make losers into winners--and winners feel like the casinos are their own personal ATM's--by handing out just enough freebies in order to accomplish this amazing feat. Do you guys claim a profit just because you get a few free flights from your airline miles? Do you claim a profit from your grocery store points? Then why claim a profit from gambling rewards? The stuff is nothing more than what jbjb said it was, and any self-valuing is purely for those who want or need to distort figures for whatever reasons.

Someone like Jean Scott is the ultimate in this kind of deception. She claims to be a winning gambler, and does so via a method only she can come up with without ever revealing her value system. Dancer has always used the same trickery to do the same thing, when we all know nothing other than direct gambling results tells the tale of a successful or losing gambler. This loose use of the word "overcomped" simply grew out of all the misleading discussions about what roll comps actually play.

Uhhh, Rob, I don't claim a profit from gambling rewards.

I've said this about a dozen times, but I'll say it again. The only thing I count towards profit is what is gained playing through the free play once. I do NOT count rooms, or meals, or tournaments, or anything like that. I don't even count the occasional elevator ride with hookers at 6 AM as they leave their clients' rooms, and I'm going for a jog. None of that counts.

I don't know any way of saying this any more clearly. Rob, do you need a translator? Braille?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Uhhh, Rob, I don't claim a profit from gambling rewards.

I've said this about a dozen times, but I'll say it again. The only thing I count towards profit is what is gained playing through the free play once. I do NOT count rooms, or meals, or tournaments, or anything like that. I don't even count the occasional elevator ride with hookers at 6 AM as they leave their clients' rooms, and I'm going for a jog. None of that counts.

I don't know any way of saying this any more clearly. Rob, do you need a translator? Braille?

---

Okay. But Dan is counting free rooms especially when he uses them to play in the WSOP. So do free rooms for the WSOP count? I would agree with Dan that they do.

Red, did you even read what you wrote? First you say you don't claim a profit from gambling rewards....then you say you claim whatever is gained as profit from using free play once. I know this is a tough subject, inasmuch as attempting to claim anything other than direct gambling as profit goes.

Dan claims Rio rooms during WSOP as profit because he refuses to realize that the ONLY reason he goes is because he is easily reeled in by the CET marketing dept.--which he of course understandably badmouths. Now we'll hear all about he was going to go anyway. But if anybody actually believes he'd be going if he had to pay for a room each if those nights, which is doubtful he could afford anyway for reasons I won't discuss here right now, then you must be his mother.

I think there are a lot of reasons Dan would be staying at the Rio during the WSOP. First is convenience. He doesn't want to be commuting from a rental in Summerlin and being at another hotel (even across the street) presents problems when tournaments have long days and nights.

I fully support any value he gives to having rooms at the Rio. I think he can value them at full price, too. But I doubt they make him overcomped to the point that he gets no-mailed and hosts don't want to talk to him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I didn't know that your comp level has any bearing on hosts? I thought hosts earn a bonus based on your play. Am I wrong about that?

I was also wondering about your mega reward credit balance that you told us about. I never quite understood how a player who had the minimal amounts of tier points earned during the year to obtain 7 Stars status which included using tier credit bonus points, happened to also have a big balance of reward credits? My undertanding is that there are no bonuses for reward credits, so when you play 5,000 tier points to get a 10,000 tier point bonus, you only earned 5,000 RCs and there is no bonus for the RCs.

So where did the huge balance of RCs come from, since you always minimized your play to get your "overcomped" status?

---

I don't use my RCs very often, so they add up. I also have gotten big globs of RCs from various promos, such as the 5x RCs at Rincon, the $500 in RCs for taking the annual trip to New Orleans, etc.

I also earn $500 worth for my play through the base tier credits I run each time I earn Seven Stars.

Regarding hosts, they do not earn commission on an overcomped player. The player has to basically "earn themselves back to zero" (meaning no longer overcomped) before the hosts earns commission in that market.

Even in other markets, hosts are reluctant to touch overcomped players, as they suspect the same thing will happen in their market. Hosts need to justify to their boss why they give comps to a player, so if that player has an overcomped history, the host is told not to give anything but the minimum benefits his tier status entitles him.

There are a few markets where I'm not overcomped -- namely Tahoe, New Orleans, Laughlin, and Rincon. However, I've also no-played all of these except New Orleans in my last visit, so I can't imagine hosts are dying for me to return to these places, either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I think there are a lot of reasons Dan would be staying at the Rio during the WSOP. First is convenience. He doesn't want to be commuting from a rental in Summerlin and being at another hotel (even across the street) presents problems when tournaments have long days and nights.

I fully support any value he gives to having rooms at the Rio. I think he can value them at full price, too. But I doubt they make him overcomped to the point that he gets no-mailed and hosts don't want to talk to him.

---

You're half right.

Yes, I decided I prefer staying at the Rio during WSOP. When I lived in Vegas, it was a pain in the ass playing the WSOP and not having a place on premises, even though I only lived about 8 minutes away (though it took about 15 with the walking back and forth from the car).

I stay over 20 nights at the Rio during WSOP -- usually around 23 or so. That by itself doesn't make me overcomped, but it sure as hell contributes to the situation.

I just don't play at all in the Vegas market because the VP sucks, and where it doesn't suck, the tier credits are degraded.

However, I redeem many of my comps in Vegas (hotel rooms and food, primarily), and my home property is there, so they also pay for my annual trip.

Trust me when I say that I am massively overcomped in Vegas, so much to where hosts are actually shocked when they look at it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

If Dan is happy with his offers and with whatever he's getting that's all that matters.

But what I am questioning is how he is twisting his lack of play and how he has been no-mailed into his belief that he is overcomped.

As soon as he starts playing again, the comps will come back. (Well, not immediately, because we know it takes a couple of months for the computer program to kick in.)

The most important point for everyone to remember -- and I am addressing the general public that reads this -- comps are not designed to make you, the player, whole after a loss. Comps are designed only to return a small percentage of what the casino expects you to lose playing whatever games you lose. The ONLY WAY to come out ahead in the "comps game" is to actually win in the casino AND collect the comps you are entitled to.

This means that the only way to truly be OVERCOMPED is to actually have a profit in the casino AND collecting the comps you are offered. If you lost in the casino, you can't be overcomped. Ever. Period.

---

So if I lost $10 overall in the casino, yet had free rooms comped for 2 years, including at times I really had a need for them, I couldn't claim that as a net gain?

That's a pretty ridiculous statement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbjb

Understandable, but to me it's value is the cash I get for it if "I" sell it. Not what's I may pay for it. We over pay for just about every purchase we make from food in a grocery store to cars to home essentials.

Casino freebies are just promotional products provided to them for nothing. So they're not losing a dime by pawning them off on the player.

---

That depends upon which freebies you're talking about.

In cases such as the "free" NCL cruise, you're correct. That's a marketing partnership, and CET does not pay NCL to give that to you.

In cases such as food, you're partially correct. $100 worth of free food doesn't cost the casino $100, but at the same time, it's not free. They still have to pay for the food, the employees serving it to you, and give up a space in the restaurant which could otherwise be held by paying customers.

In cases such as hotel rooms, you're partially correct. If the hotel is not full, and if your type of room has others which are sitting vacant anyway, then your stay with them costs next to nothing. However, if you are hogging up a room which would otherwise be in demand and occupied by a paying customer (think New Year's Eve, or during other high-profile dates), then they are losing real money by having you occupy it.

In cases such as freeplay, you are mostly incorrect. Freeplay, on average, will translate into a high percentage of its face value, though there will be plenty of variance. Yes, they hope you will lose back what you win (and perhaps bet even more on top of it, and also lose), but that's the gambler's choice. When I run freeplay, I run only the freeplay and keep the real money it generates for me.

In cases such as airline flights, you are incorrect. Other than charters, they are paying retail price (or very close to it) to fly you to these destinations. They hope to recoup it via your gambling losses, but again, you are not forced to play to "earn" it on the back end.

The bottom line with comps is that you have to be honest about their value TO YOU.

For example, I like taking cruises. I took cruises for years before I got them via Seven Stars, and didn't get them comped or mostly comped. So when I get a highly discounted cruise via CET now, it has value to me, as it's a vacation I enjoy, and had paid for previously.

Alan does not like cruises. That benefit is worth zero to him. He doesn't even use it.

See the difference?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by james40

If CET has so little regard for you, why do you remain loyal?

---

Because I can get more out of them than they get out of me. I don't care what their "regard" is for me.

I care what my friends and family think of me, not large corporations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by james40

You were spending and losing money throughout the year to gain 7 Star, CET was providing plenty of comps while you were spending and losing. At some point you curtailed your play after you attained 7 Star and the comps dried up. CET doesn't care about you now because you are not spending and losing. Go back to the spending pattern you displayed while "attaining" 7 Star and the comps come back. This does not seem like a mystery.

---

I don't earn many comps on the way up to 7 Stars, except some mediocre ones in the markets where I play (such as Tahoe).

I redeem far more comps compared to my amount of play compared to the average player. Not just more, but FAR more. That's what's going on here. This can occur because Seven Stars guarantees your comps, whereas the normal casino model takes a "what have you done for us lately" approach, and you get denied after your play dries up. Seven Stars allows you to override that denial, which is why it's so unique and powerful compared to other casinos' comp programs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seemoreroyals

I know Dan can speak for himself but I did want to let others know that the term overcomped is real and can be achieved for a variety of reasons. In our case it happened to us several years ago at our home property in Bossier City. With us it had nothing to do with inconsistent play but we had about a 3 or 4 month period of time that we invited friends and family members to our casino and our host gave us free rooms, free concert tickets, and free extra room credit to compensate for the extra guests. We thought nothing of it at the time. For the first month or so after this time our free play offers and other mailers remained about the same and then all of a sudden we quit getting offers. We contacted them thinking somehow they had a mixup with our addresses. They said they would look into it but we never heard back.

We were still able to get free rooms through our host so on our next trip to Bossier City we paid a visit to our host's office to see if they could give us an idea what was going on because we were somewhat irked that we were not getting any freeplay. After about 30 minutes or so meeting with the director or marketing and her computer we were told that we were overcomped. That was the exact work she used. She said that there was nothing she could do but for us to be patient and that it would take a couple of months for our offers to go back to normal. To make a long story short that is exactly what happened.

Maybe overcomped needs its own thread as it is kind of taking over the discussion on this and the GGWU thread.

---

Thank you for verifying this. And yes, I think I will take this overcomped stuff into its own thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

What were the circumstances that prompted a host (or hosts) to offer the information that you are overcomped?

---

Oh, so many of them.

- During my Seven Stars Annual Trip, I ask if they can give me a suite (which most people get on these trips). Not only am I denied, but I've been told on more than one occasion (at multiple properties) that I'm so overcomped that they are going to have to find some special override code to get the system to both comp my room and allow the $500 folio credit which comes with the trip.

- Occasionally the CCS (800 number) cannot book my guaranteed 4-night reservation, and they have to put me through to a host. The host then bristles, telling me that I'm overcomped, and that the system keeps rejecting his/her attempt to get the 4 nights through, as it will only give me 3 and then wants to charge me a rate for the 4th. After a lot of work, they get it through, but I can tell it's a hassle, and they're not acting.

- I get Vegas offers where it gives me something small, such as $50 freeplay and $25 food credit with my hotel stay. If I'm going to Vegas anyway, I figure I might as well book with that code rather than just use the standard Seven Stars free room benefit. However, EVERY TIME I try to use it, it fails for some reason, and I have to talk to a host to get it put through. In many cases, the host tells me that they can't put it through for me because I'm overcomped (even though this was an offer I was mailed!), and that I just need to forego it.

- When I attempt to inquire about a 2nd room in Vegas for friends or family, I get instantly denied, and am told I'm overcomped. If I ask for at least a discount or casino rate, again I'm told that I'm overcomped and will have to pay rack, or I'm quoted a casino rate which is WORSE than rack rate!

- When I attempted to make my first reservation for Tahoe in many years, they had no play history on me, and all they could see was that I was overcomped badly in the Vegas market. I wanted 5 free nights there, which I could get anyway as a Seven Stars, but the host refused. He said he would give me four, and evaluate my play to see if I've "earned" the 5th. Knowing he was rightfully concerned I would no-play, I offered to play a minimum of $250,000 coin-in, and told him that all I wanted was a conditional agreement that I would get that free 5th night if I lived up to that minimum coin-in promise. He refused, telling me that I was too overcomped and that he still could not promise anything. Laughably, I then hung up on him and called the CCS (who can't see my play history), and they snap-booked the 5 free nights for me. And guess what? I played that $250,000 in coin-in as promised anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Generally speaking, people who are not welcomed back as customers are in fact problem people....aka, people with too many issues for their own good.

How many times has Dan painstakingly explained his phobia about being "overcharged" for some small item or being "mistreated or dissed" by someone of authority in person or on the phone....only to waste huge amounts of effort and spend days chasing his loss?

It isn't too difficult to see why these things keep happening to him. Some people have these type of annoying personalities--that's all it is. They go around always feeling entitled to getting special treatment, getting more than the other guy, and they live their life in "paranoid mode" always thinking that other people are doing to them what they take enormous pride in doing: taking advantage of others in some way, shape, or fashion.

So for Dan to persist in this fantasy world of being overcomped, it seems all too normal and it won't change. When someone lives a life totally based on conflict, you're gonna be fed a constant flow of this type of goofy stuff.

---

Rob, how were you a Vegas columnist for so many years?

You know very well that casinos simply 86 problem customers, and that's that.

If I were someone who repeatedly caused trouble there, they would have kicked me from all CET properties by now.

I don't cause trouble, except when something directly affecting me is screwed up. And again, it's almost always something on the hotel side, NOT the casino side, and those two departments are totally separate, using different note systems.

It's nothing personal with CET not giving me many offers. The computer has determined I'm overcomped (which is correct), and therefore offers me little.

I am still happy because my GUARANTEED benefits with the Seven Stars program is all I really need.

Why are you having such a hard time understanding this?

I know this is a gambling site with gambling discussions. But why is everyone here, and why would anyone care one way or the other about Dan and his comps?

Just about everything said on gambling forums are never proved with confirmed fact, so why 4 pages on this topic.

I understand most of you here are big shots with big time comps, (7 stars etc.) but, do you really care about Dan or is this just another way of blowing smoke up your own heavy hitting play butts and giving readers the opportunity to admire your own action in envy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackhole

I know this is a gambling site with gambling discussions. But why is everyone here, and why would anyone care one way or the other about Dan and his comps?

Just about everything said on gambling forums are never proved with confirmed fact, so why 4 pages on this topic.

I understand most of you here are big shots with big time comps, (7 stars etc.) but, do you really care about Dan or is this just another way of blowing smoke up your own heavy hitting play butts and giving readers the opportunity to admire your own action in envy?

---

Well said.

To me it seems like rationalization.

The people attacking my (true and verifiable) "overcomped" claims are the ones who engage in a much more typical gambling pattern -- a pattern that casinos love.

Nobody likes to feel that they're "doing it wrong". When you're paying more or getting worse value than your neighbor, you always want to rationalize that he's suffering certain negative consequences from it which still give your method the upper hand.

In this case, there seem to be plenty of people with the attitude of, "You're not getting over on the casino, they've just no-mailed you because you stopped playing!"

They want to believe this because they also realize that THEY aren't getting over on the casino, so they don't like the idea that anyone else is, either.

They are trying to make the case that little play = little comps, big play = big comps, and neither is particularly advantageous over the other.

I am stating that there is a very clear law of diminishing returns, and that I am straddling that line in a +EV fashion.

I understand if my style of playing the comp game isn't appealing to them, but the least they can do is acknowledge the fact that I'm extracting a lot of value in comparison to what I put in.

Question about RCs and earning tier points. Dan:

When you earn 5,000 tier points on your way to earn 7 Stars you also get 5,000 reward credits.

5,000 reward credits is worth $50 and not $500 as you wrote above.

Regarding being overcomped the real question is this:

Do you have a profit playing casino games? If you do you can be overcomped. If you lose money in the casino then only a true and honest accounting will determine if all those comps erase what you lost.

Being overcomped by $5,000 worth of comps is meaningless if you lost $5,001 of real money.

That's really the bottom line for everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackhole

I know this is a gambling site with gambling discussions. But why is everyone here, and why would anyone care one way or the other about Dan and his comps?

Just about everything said on gambling forums are never proved with confirmed fact, so why 4 pages on this topic.

I understand most of you here are big shots with big time comps, (7 stars etc.) but, do you really care about Dan or is this just another way of blowing smoke up your own heavy hitting play butts and giving readers the opportunity to admire your own action in envy?

---

I don't know of anyone besides Dan who says he is overcomped or talks about a plan to beat the casinos.

I'm not overcomped and I admit to losing every year.
The question really is about Dan's claims. If he's really beating the system with comps and a casino profit a lot of people would like to know how it's done.

Forgive the analogy but Dan is to comps what Rob Singer is to video poker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

When you earn 5,000 tier points on your way to earn 7 Stars you also get 5,000 reward credits.

5,000 reward credits is worth $50 and not $500 as you wrote above.

---

My understanding is that when you play a 5000 tier credit gaming day, you receive a 10000 TC bonus.

If you do that 10 times, you have reached 150000 TCs and 50000 RCs,
or as Dan wrote above....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I also earn $500 worth for my play through the base tier credits I run each time I earn Seven Stars.

---

Is this correct, Dan?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I don't know of anyone besides Dan who says he is overcomped or talks about a plan to beat the casinos.

If he's really beating the system with comps and a casino profit a lot of people would like to know how it's done.

---

I can't speak for a lot of people, but I would sure like to know how it's done,
and I believe that Dan has explained much of how it's done.

Dan...what denomination do you play, and how many hours does it take to reach 5000 TCs?

Also, what daily bankroll is typically required to play and reach 5000 TCs?

Not looking so much for a theoretical WOV type of answer, what kind of swings have you experienced in your actual play?