Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 83

Thread: Losing $1 billion playing VP?

  1. #1

  2. #2
    When I was just starting out and was low man on the totem poll in the office, I had to do income tax returns. I had 1 famous politician who went to jail (like most politicians in Illinois) for whom I prepared her income tax returns, and she always had several million in "signers" from slots every year yet was a big loser.

  3. #3
    Almost everyone who regularly plays vp loses much more than they win. Why do you think players adore and are addicted to their slot club cards so much--it is their ace-in-the-hole that allows them to justify more play, as they can now "create" a scenario where they can self-value the "freebies" thereby turning it into that they've really "won", as all AP's regularly do, or they can use it as a means to a losing end, whereby that road to losing has a few of the bumps smoothed out for them.

    Take a look at this pathetic feeble old lady. See anything familiar? Just another fatass and now, white trash video poker player who sat far too long at the vp machines wasting her life...and, arci take note, health...away when life offers so much more. And it's no real surprise she lost everything she won in seven figures and more. The richer they are, the more they'll lose. But (and Alan, please take note this time) can you just IMAGINE how so very very special she felt and how anxious she was as she ran to her mail box each day to view her offers! That slot club card really defined her, dontcha think!?

  4. #4
    Unfortunately, this was a case of "poor reporting." I would think that most reporters who never set foot in a casino themselves have no idea about "coin in" nor any idea of the concept that you have to lose money to win money and when you won money you also lost money.

    I am sure that if all of us ever totaled up all of our winning hands, and winning spins, we all had millions of dollars of wins over a lifetime which doesn't mean we lost millions of dollars -- it means we cycled through or re-bet the same few hundred dollars per trip over and over again.

    I was in the car and heard the "breaking news" about this the other day on the radio and when I heard the newscaster mention "lost a billion dollars" I said to myself "no one in history has ever lost a billion dollars in a casino, what are they talking about?"

    It's bad news reporting and it's prejudicial reporting.

  5. #5
    I think it's more prejudicial and purposeful than plain bad. Why would a reporter take this assignment when he/she knows nothing about gambling? Because somebody made him.

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    I think it's more prejudicial and purposeful than plain bad. Why would a reporter take this assignment when he/she knows nothing about gambling? Because somebody made him.
    Some reporters are general assignment reporters and take their marching orders from the assignment desk or assignment editor... and then there are beat reporters who might cover the courts or city hall and aren't experts on everything that comes up in their "beat."

    I have an idea that some reporter saw in a press release the comment about lifetime wins, or total of W2Gs, and quoted it without understanding the concept of cycled-through money. The bottom line that she lost $13-million while still dramatic, isn't as good a headline as she lost one-billion dollars.

    It is also unfortunate that editors and supervisors don't know the difference either.

  7. #7
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Unfortunately, this was a case of "poor reporting." I would think that most reporters who never set foot in a casino themselves have no idea about "coin in" nor any idea of the concept that you have to lose money to win money and when you won money you also lost money.

    I am sure that if all of us ever totaled up all of our winning hands, and winning spins, we all had millions of dollars of wins over a lifetime which doesn't mean we lost millions of dollars -- it means we cycled through or re-bet the same few hundred dollars per trip over and over again.

    I was in the car and heard the "breaking news" about this the other day on the radio and when I heard the newscaster mention "lost a billion dollars" I said to myself "no one in history has ever lost a billion dollars in a casino, what are they talking about?"

    It's bad news reporting and it's prejudicial reporting.
    So true. Since I know how many hands I play every year I know I regularly lose over a million dollars every year. Of course, I also win even more and the only thing that matters is the net. In her case that was losing $13 million.

    I find it telling that Singer tries to turn this into a tirade against APers. Nothing in this article gave any indication that she knew anything at all about playing with an advantage. As usual all we get from Singer is lies.

  8. #8
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Unfortunately, this was a case of "poor reporting." I would think that most reporters who never set foot in a casino themselves have no idea about "coin in" nor any idea of the concept that you have to lose money to win money and when you won money you also lost money.

    I am sure that if all of us ever totaled up all of our winning hands, and winning spins, we all had millions of dollars of wins over a lifetime which doesn't mean we lost millions of dollars -- it means we cycled through or re-bet the same few hundred dollars per trip over and over again.

    I was in the car and heard the "breaking news" about this the other day on the radio and when I heard the newscaster mention "lost a billion dollars" I said to myself "no one in history has ever lost a billion dollars in a casino, what are they talking about?"

    It's bad news reporting and it's prejudicial reporting.
    http://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/bob_dancer/2013/0219.cfm

  9. #9
    That was a poor article by Dancer. First, it's rather obvious the lady didn't "lose" a billion dollars, in much the same way as casinos who boast about "our machines paid out $100million last month" really didn't lose a thing. Then, in typical Dancer fashion, he couldn't help but toot his own horn and try to make this all about him. But he stumbled badly. Notice where he claims to be "ahead" of MGM $250k, yet he says the casino records show him LOSING .$400ktotal. OK, but then he goes on to say he is not welcome to play vp there any longer. Oh really? Someone whom the casino has records of losing six figures is banned from playing?

    I smell another dancing rat.

  10. #10
    Another jealous rant by Singer. I wonder if he has little pictures of Dancer around to throw darts at?

  11. #11
    I think Dancer's article was okay but I think he threw in too many facts and didn't highlight the main point. I also read with interest the article in the San Diego paper that Dancer linked to. It used the "billion dollar loss" as a "peg" to write a broader article that really was about gambling addiction.

    The real problem was with the original reporting -- all those headlines about losing a billion dollars. Dancer's article and the San Diego columnist just tried to pick up the pieces of the initial bad reporting.

    Frankly, I think members of the general public are still walking around thinking this woman lost a billion dollars and they still don't understand that she didn't. But to most people on the street, thirteen million is the same as a billion dollars. In practical terms just one million is the same as a billion to me.

  12. #12
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    Frankly, I think members of the general public are still walking around thinking this woman lost a billion dollars and they still don't understand that she didn't. But to most people on the street, thirteen million is the same as a billion dollars. In practical terms just one million is the same as a billion to me.
    Oh, I think you'd know the difference. I know I do.

  13. #13
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    I think Dancer's article was okay but I think he threw in too many facts and didn't highlight the main point. I also read with interest the article in the San Diego paper that Dancer linked to. It used the "billion dollar loss" as a "peg" to write a broader article that really was about gambling addiction.

    The real problem was with the original reporting -- all those headlines about losing a billion dollars. Dancer's article and the San Diego columnist just tried to pick up the pieces of the initial bad reporting.

    Frankly, I think members of the general public are still walking around thinking this woman lost a billion dollars and they still don't understand that she didn't. But to most people on the street, thirteen million is the same as a billion dollars. In practical terms just one million is the same as a billion to me.
    The whole thing's blown way out of proportion, and Dancer didn't help with such a weak article. Then he followed up my questions on vpFree with confusing responses, and even another of his lies. In fact, SIX members sent me e-mails saying "wait a minute!...Dancer's not telling the truth!"

    And sure enough, they are right. But first, when he tried to reply to my question on, if the Wizard was the vp "expert" consulted for the reporter's article on the lady, why did he not clarify that a billion dollars was not really "lost"? Dancer's answer: Something about timing and confusion. It was clear he didn't want to further damage his relationship with the guy who recently quit the radio show as co-host after they got killed at the Riviera promotion Dancer roped him into. In other words, there was no definitive answer.

    Then, he turned to lying in front of 10,000+ members and probably, like arci always does, tells himself NO ONE IS WATCHING. When I asked Dancer how he could get banned from playing at the MGM if, as he stated, their records show him losing $400,000 when he claims he won $250,000 during the same period, he then did what any liar would do when confronted: he said that loss must have been from "earlier play the year prior". HOWEVER, in his Casinogaming.com column just after the day he hit the $100k & $400k royals there, he clearly stated that this was THE VERY FIRST TIME EVER HE PLAYED VP AT THE MGM, because their paytables were bad and he only plays with a certain edge. Then, even his groupies got in on the act. One or two claimed he was "pulling his card" on winners so he'd look like a loser (funny, huh?). First, I've played all denominations in the high limit room there at the same time he did this. Anyone who played $25 or $100 was closely watched, presumably for good "customer service". No one would get away with such a stupid tactic. Remember when arci tried to claim he's been outsmarting the Indians for a dozen years, every single week, at that silly place he plays by doing the same thing? Not only doesn't it happen, it DOESN'T WORK, because since 2000or 2001 the slot card systems will record everything in a hand from start to finish if the card is inserted while the max bet or deal button is pushed, even if the card is removed, the card reader craps out, the power goes out, or if God himself made your card fall out somehow. AP's will go to ANY length to push their agenda. Just one look at how arci made a fool out of himself then fell on his face as he tried to SAVE face, after Alan verified where we are confirms that rather nicely.

    I'm not gonna embrrass him any further because if 6 people wrote me about it, you can be sure there are hundreds more who recognized it.

  14. #14
    I don't understand this "card pulling tactic" at all. The casino doesn't need a players card to determine who is winning. They can see the W2Gs especially a big one like a $400k royal or a $100k royal.

  15. #15
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    I don't understand this "card pulling tactic" at all. The casino doesn't need a players card to determine who is winning. They can see the W2Gs especially a big one like a $400k royal or a $100k royal.
    But the card tells them how much a player has also lost, thereby being able to come up with those year-end won/lost statements like the one Dancer says he got that he claims was wrong...or right...or maybe not his etc. etc. etc., depending on which agenda he's pushing at the moment.

  16. #16
    Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson View Post
    I don't understand this "card pulling tactic" at all. The casino doesn't need a players card to determine who is winning. They can see the W2Gs especially a big one like a $400k royal or a $100k royal.
    Alan, royals only account for 2% of the total payback. If you pull your card on quads which represent 5% playing JOB you can completely hide those wins.

    BTW, I believe Dancer is just another narcissist like Singer. Catching him in lies is probably just about as easy as catching Singer. I find it humorous that Singer thinks it's a big deal.

    As for slot systems they are all different. And, casinos don't replace old ones immediately. I can still trick the one where I play as definitively shown in my won/loss statements. While I was in Vegas they updated the ones used by Stations in 2007 or 2008. Sam's Town hadn't updated theirs on the old machines I played when they took them out in 2008.

    Believe nothing Singer says and you'll be miles ahead, folks.
    Last edited by arcimede$; 02-21-2013 at 07:40 AM.

  17. #17
    Alan, this is how dumb--and non-existent--it is to either pull your card or say you do it. These AP's claim they like to play very fast because it supposedly gets them "closer to expectation" sooner rather than later. So, let's assume you get dealt a royal. All machines self-hold--at least they have on every royal I've been dealt, which is 3. So the silly card-puller gets defeated there. Now let's look at arci's "theory" about card pulling being effective on quads. How often are quads dealt to YOU, because no AP is ever gonna pull his or her card when they're dealt trips! So it's all nothing but a sensationalized lie based on theory. Not surprising that someone with so little credibility would try to pull the wool over people's eyes as arci tries and tries.

    Use this as a barometer to gauge everything else he tries to sell you. That's why he disdains me so much. Exposing lies hurts.

  18. #18
    I've been dealt a royal twice -- once on a 50-play machine and once on a progressive at Rincon. And yes, the machines "locked up" both times so it would be impossible to pull the card.

    I've been dealt quads too many times to count over the years. I've also been dealt straight flushes.

    Several years ago I discussed "card pulling" with a host at Caesars who confirmed that there were players who did it to lower their "win totals." There have been several reports on this forum and others that pulling your card will not stop the software from recording a win -- but I never heard of that. And if that's the case, it wasn't what was available about five years ago when I discussed card pulling with that host at Caesars.

  19. #19
    Either way, the times you get dealt anything worthwhile for pulling the card are meaningless overall, esp. for the number of hands these obsessive AP's play. And the CERTAINLY aren't going to stop a game for dealt trips, inside SF draws, or any dealt smaller winners.

    Here's a way you can test what the system is the next time you play anywhere, and I'll do the same. If you're playing a $2 game that gives one point for every $10 bet for instance, keep an eye on the points accumulated. Then when you're dealt a winner--any winner--before drawing, pull your card, hit draw, see the win on your screen credits, then put your card back in and see if any points were added to your total. It may be different for different machines and/or casinos, but it would be interesting to find out. But as I said, either way it doesn't matter. All such a card-puller does it cut himself off at the knees because if it does work where they're playing, they're giving up the points also, and dealt big wins below the royal just don't happen enough to matter. I can just see someone like Jean Scott's false teeth come shooting out when she sees ZERO POINTS scored on a play!

  20. #20
    Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
    Here's a way you can test what the system is the next time you play anywhere, and I'll do the same. If you're playing a $2 game that gives one point for every $10 bet for instance, keep an eye on the points accumulated. Then when you're dealt a winner--any winner--before drawing, pull your card, hit draw, see the win on your screen credits, then put your card back in and see if any points were added to your total.
    this would be an interesting test except I have already observed that the points on the Rincon system are delayed by several hands and several minutes.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •