She is uniquely privileged to live in an area with a lot of daily tournaments running so she wouldn't incur all the travel expenses that a typical grinder has to deal with. Since her bingo scam dried up and she needs money...
She is uniquely privileged to live in an area with a lot of daily tournaments running so she wouldn't incur all the travel expenses that a typical grinder has to deal with. Since her bingo scam dried up and she needs money...
Not in a million years. The Tasha we see now is the Tasha to be seen in death, except that she will be alone pushing a shopping cart.
It is VERY difficult to turn a losing degenerate type gambler into a winning type player or advantage player. It is a "mind set" that is engrained in them that has to be deleted and re-programmed. Very few succeed.
I had some experience with this with my late partner. he was your average degen video poker player when I met him back in Phila. When he followed me to Las Vegas, I taught him what I wanted him to do, playing video poker with an advantage, using the bonus mailer as the +EV tool and he managed to do pretty well. But comparing actual results to what I calculated was expectation, I KNOW there were leaks in his game. leaks back to that degen mindset. I never said too much because we were making money and it was a supplemental thing for me.
There was a guy on another forum, a blackjack forum that was a lifelong degen gambler, everything from craps, roulette to horseracing. He took up card counting upon retiring early in his 50's and made some money, but all accounts were that any money he made from card counting AP play, he fed back into other forms of degen gambling which he could never shake. That degen gambling is a hard demon to exercise from those bitten my it. And from everything I read....THAT is Tasha. Sorry to say.
All good points, but there are a lot of degens and fish in that poker market, which makes me wonder if just a basic level of coaching in NLHE would make her +EV in tournaments. Not talking about studying solver outputs, just basics to beat loose degens and OMCs. In cash games I think it would be too hard to beat the rake.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
This sand maggot`s KJ alarm went offQuote:
Originally Posted by MDawgQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I recently put both Dawg and Singer on ignore. So I am not seeing most of what he writes unless someone quotes. And since I am his target audience, he is literally talking to himself. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Keystone
Here in Las Vegas, as well as other major cities, we encounter crazy-ass street type people talking to themselves every day. What do we do with them? Ignore them. We certainly don't engage with them which is what they desire. THAT is all this Mdawg is now. A crazy nut job talking to himself...literally!
The problem with this forum is you start placing the members that show this tendency on ignore and there are very few people left. :rolleyes: This is a forum dominated by crazy troll people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I wouldn't waste my time on her if she can't figure out the game by now.
This is a valid question and take.Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
I would be very surprised. If and only if she had a dedicated coach she might be able to beat the dailies at a casino?
We just need her on PokerStars play money.. let's do some hand reviewing and find out
I actually think most people on here are pretty normal and having some fun, except the smelly Haji Mdog and jock sniffer belly. Both are whack jobs that shouldnt be allowed within 25 miles of any elementary schoolQuote:
Originally Posted by kewlJI recently put both Dawg and Singer on ignore. So I am not seeing most of what he writes unless someone quotes. And since I am his target audience, he is literally talking to himself. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Keystone
Here in Las Vegas, as well as other major cities, we encounter crazy-ass street type people talking to themselves every day. What do we do with them? Ignore them. We certainly don't engage with them which is what they desire. THAT is all this Mdawg is now. A crazy nut job talking to himself...literally!
The problem with this forum is you start placing the members that show this tendency on ignore and there are very few people left. :rolleyes: This is a forum dominated by crazy troll people.
I now wonder if is NLHE so saturated with halfway decent players that it wouldn't be worth it on that particular game, but maybe Omaha and all its variants could be her game, with coaching obv. The trouble is most of the O tournaments (according to Poker Atlas) are at Seminole properties, from which she is currently banned. LOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by accountinquestionThis is a valid question and take.Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
I would be very surprised. If and only if she had a dedicated coach she might be able to beat the dailies at a casino?
We just need her on PokerStars play money.. let's do some hand reviewing and find out
I have actually tried Video Poker, just not traditional Poker. :)
Do you have any interest in trying real poker?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tasha
I think it is a horrible match or suggestion that she play poker. And I think you know it!Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballsDo you have any interest in trying real poker?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tasha
The only thing Tasha has demonstrated at all involving advantage play is some scammy re-using of bingo cards. (more of a scam than advantage play, IMO).
Poker, which admittedly I don't play and have little knowledge of, is different in that you are playing against other players, rather than the casino or "house". Tasha would get her clock cleaned. She would be the "fish" that you poker players are always looking for. Why do you want to put her through that?
If she had a real desire to do it, then sure, why not?
But absent a strong desire, no.
Doesn’t strike me as the type of person that would want to do it.
Even Quadriga who has stood up for me multiple times said what I did was by reusing old Bingo cards that already previously lost and using them to win again was cheating and not an AP move and basically I deserved to be banned from Bingo and Quadriga would have banned me too. I was stunned that Quadriga told me off on that since Quadriga usually stands up for me. :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJI think it is a horrible match or suggestion that she play poker. And I think you know it!Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballsDo you have any interest in trying real poker?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tasha
The only thing Tasha has demonstrated at all involving advantage play is some scammy re-using of bingo cards. (more of a scam than advantage play, IMO).
Poker, which admittedly I don't play and have little knowledge of, is different in that you are playing against other players, rather than the casino or "house". Tasha would get her clock cleaned. She would be the "fish" that you poker players are always looking for. Why do you want to put her through that?
I don't know if I'll ever try real Poker as I am not into Casino games where you play against other people. :/ The Casino games I play are solo games like Slots, electronic blackjack, electronic baccarat, electronic roulette , and electronic craps. :)
She only needs to find low buy-in tournaments that have worse fish than herself. I believe they call it "bum hunting." I agree with DGenBen there isn't much enthusiasm on her part, so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJI think it is a horrible match or suggestion that she play poker. And I think you know it!Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballsDo you have any interest in trying real poker?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tasha
The only thing Tasha has demonstrated at all involving advantage play is some scammy re-using of bingo cards. (more of a scam than advantage play, IMO).
Poker, which admittedly I don't play and have little knowledge of, is different in that you are playing against other players, rather than the casino or "house". Tasha would get her clock cleaned. She would be the "fish" that you poker players are always looking for. Why do you want to put her through that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
This is news to me that daily tournaments are beatable. What's the typical rake on a beatable tournament?Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
Needs to stop all forms for gambling. Spend the next twenty years saving up, say, at least $200,000, to be able to ride out the usual pitfalls of retirement.
The way she exists now, anything such as simple inflation will wipe her out.
You need a tv deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don PerignomQuote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
This is news to me that daily tournaments are beatable. What's the typical rake on a beatable tournament?Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
TWO PLAYERS REMAINING, COMPETING FOR A $500 FIRST PLACE PRIZE!Quote:
Originally Posted by MHF
AND THEY CHOP. BINGO BANGO BONGO!!
The dailies' rakes are taken out of the initial buy-ins. They could be beatable depending on the demographics and Tasha's skill level relative to that demographic. I think low buy-in tourneys are safer for Tasha than raked cash games, especially private games, not that she would have the connections to find that kind of private action. It's all moot if she has no interest, but I will note that autists and over-represented among poker regs, and Tasha being autistic might have some hidden aptitude for this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don PerignomQuote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
This is news to me that daily tournaments are beatable. What's the typical rake on a beatable tournament?Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
Poker is a game of skill, you need skill to beat the variance long term. As long as she plays against recs and not solver fags, there is a chance she could do well enough at the low levels to make bingo scamming less appealing. She has certain traits that would put some players on tilt, confound others. But she would very much need to learn self-control first.Quote:
Originally Posted by MHF
Well, I've said my piece. Agree or disagree.
Are you fucking kidding?Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
Tasha playing poker?
Bwa ha ha ha
The only way she'd EVER make money at a card game is by approaching the players and offering a discount to "poke her," but as an avowed asexual that door is shut.
But hey girl: go find some hot bloods in the 'hood to show you how the ho's do it and learn mad skills: good way to get that all important gamblin' money.
Hell, just ask Mammie.
If you live in Vegas and make a living as a professional gambler, why wouldn't you sometimes play against tourists looking to blow off money at a poker table? Is it that there are just too many regs hanging around all looking for the same fish? Genuinely curious.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJI think it is a horrible match or suggestion that she play poker. And I think you know it!Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballsDo you have any interest in trying real poker?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tasha
The only thing Tasha has demonstrated at all involving advantage play is some scammy re-using of bingo cards. (more of a scam than advantage play, IMO).
Poker, which admittedly I don't play and have little knowledge of, is different in that you are playing against other players, rather than the casino or "house". Tasha would get her clock cleaned. She would be the "fish" that you poker players are always looking for. Why do you want to put her through that?
It is because I don't play poker. I play blackjack for a living, not poker. I venture into a little bit of other advantage play stuff, but all of it very basic.Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
Also, I like beating the casinos. I have a genuine dislike of casinos. I don't think I would enjoy beating other players as much. What happens when you see some little old guy at the table that looks like he has no money and is spending his SS money and you take it from him? What happens when you see some 22 year old that looks disheveled and his cloths are kind or worn and dirty and you figure he is sleeping in his car and you take money from him. I wouldn't feel nearly as good as I do taking money from the stinking casinos. :)
For my money, my skill advantage must comfortably exceed the rake disadvantage.Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
Let's see, I think I saw some rake data earlier in the thread. Oh yes:
Well, good luck at the tables!Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchingyourballs
They rake like 25% in the dailies. No one is going to beat the juice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDawg
Why isn't this retard pretending to be a high roller?
Maybe she could write a book on poker.
Or another short story.Quote:
Originally Posted by unowme
This time instead of having a gay Axel Rose travelling through time have a bevy of left-handed lisping Lakota lesbians begging their "casino friends" to be staked; of course they'll blush then shake hands and thank their benefacrors.
Actually that staking gives me a good idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterVOr another short story.Quote:
Originally Posted by unowme
This time instead of having a gay Axel Rose travelling through time have a bevy of left-handed lisping Lakota lesbians begging their "casino friends" to be staked; of course they'll blush then shake hands and thank their benefacrors.
She could pull a scam like they did in the Producers & sell more than 100% of herself and then lose out of the money deliberately.
Speaking of The Producers Movie, I remember thinking,"What idiotic Producers wanted their play to be a FLOP? :confused: On another Website, other Posters questioned WHY did the Producers want their play to be a FLOP?" Other Posters replied something like,"The Producers didn't ACTUALLY have the money to pay their cast Members. A FLOP would mean that the Cast Members wouldn't be getting paid since the play was a FLOP and they would be fine with not being paid since the play LOST money and didn't earn enough money. A HIT means that the Cast Members would be expecting to be paid, which the Producers don't have the mobey to pay them. In real life The Producers would be facing Lawsuits for not paying their Cast Members when the play was a HIT." Makes sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by DGenBenActually that staking gives me a good idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterVOr another short story.Quote:
Originally Posted by unowme
This time instead of having a gay Axel Rose travelling through time have a bevy of left-handed lisping Lakota lesbians begging their "casino friends" to be staked; of course they'll blush then shake hands and thank their benefacrors.
She could pull a scam like they did in the Producers & sell more than 100% of herself and then lose out of the money deliberately.
Somebody once said something like “Close but no cigar”Quote:
Originally Posted by TashaSpeaking of The Producers Movie, I remember thinking,"What idiotic Producers wanted their play to be a FLOP? :confused: On another Website, other Posters questioned WHY did the Producers want their play to be a FLOP?" Other Posters replied something like,"The Producers didn't ACTUALLY have the money to pay their cast Members. A FLOP would mean that the Cast Members wouldn't be getting paid since the play was a FLOP and they would be fine with not being paid since the play LOST money and didn't earn enough money. A HIT means that the Cast Members would be expecting to be paid, which the Producers don't have the mobey to pay them. In real life The Producers would be facing Lawsuits for not paying their Cast Members when the play was a HIT." Makes sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by DGenBenActually that staking gives me a good idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterV
She could pull a scam like they did in the Producers & sell more than 100% of herself and then lose out of the money deliberately.
In the film the Producers, they didn’t make the money by saying something like “We won’t pay the cast members”
Instead they said something like “If we sell more than 100% of our play ‘something like 2000% of our play’ then our play flops we will make something like 20 times our money back which is something like a lot more than they could make for just a normal profitable play.”
So an example would be something like a normal play might cost something like $1 Million to produce & if it succeeds it might make something like $3 million in profit. And once they reimbursed their investors then their own profit would be something like a lot less than $3 Million.
But in the film they said something like “If we sold 2000% of the play that would be something like $20 Million of investor money & if it flops we don’t have to pay any of it back and that would be something like $19 million profit.”
That was the actual plot, or something like it.
Okay, that also makes sense. For some reason the Posters that answered had us thinking it was about The Producers not having money to pay the Cast Members.Quote:
Originally Posted by DGenBenSomebody once said something like “Close but no cigar”Quote:
Originally Posted by TashaSpeaking of The Producers Movie, I remember thinking,"What idiotic Producers wanted their play to be a FLOP? :confused: On another Website, other Posters questioned WHY did the Producers want their play to be a FLOP?" Other Posters replied something like,"The Producers didn't ACTUALLY have the money to pay their cast Members. A FLOP would mean that the Cast Members wouldn't be getting paid since the play was a FLOP and they would be fine with not being paid since the play LOST money and didn't earn enough money. A HIT means that the Cast Members would be expecting to be paid, which the Producers don't have the mobey to pay them. In real life The Producers would be facing Lawsuits for not paying their Cast Members when the play was a HIT." Makes sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by DGenBen
In the film the Producers, they didn’t make the money by saying something like “We won’t pay the cast members”
Instead they said something like “If we sell more than 100% of our play ‘something like 2000% of our play’ then our play flops we will make something like 20 times our money back which is something like a lot more than they could make for just a normal profitable play.”
So an example would be something like a normal play might cost something like $1 Million to produce & if it succeeds it might make something like $3 million in profit. And once they reimbursed their investors then their own profit would be something like a lot less than $3 Million.
But in the film they said something like “If we sold 2000% of the play that would be something like $20 Million of investor money & if it flops we don’t have to pay any of it back and that would be something like $19 million profit.”
That was the actual plot, or something like it.
I JUST went to Google and looked up," Why did The Producers want the play to flop?" And the answer was something like," They wanted the play to flop because Investors would want to be paid REALLY well for the play they invested in since it was a hit and made a lot of money. If the play is a flop, the Investors would be okay with not getting paid REALLY well because the show was a flop and lost money. I originally got,"Cast Members," confused with,"Investors."
Life imitates art...
"Springtime, for Tasha, and Miami..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovCf9VRLnDY