Video Poker Note

[redietz]

I find Rob's response above both interesting and very suspect. I'm looking at it as a journalist. Alan, how do you feel about the following?

First, Rob says he asked someone in middle management at Suncoast. He doesn't say when -- could have been at the time in question with Dancer. It could have been yesterday. Why wouldn't he mention the when of it?

Second, he then gives a verbatim quote. That's highly unusual, considering if the quote was from the time of Dancer's articles, Rob would have had to have a tape of the conversation or a copy of the article in which they are printed (his GT articles) to provide that. If the information was recent, as in yesterday, I'll buy that Rob remembered a verbatim quote. But if it was from yesterday, how do we know the source was working during the time Dancer said he was banned? No mention is made of Dancer in the source quotes. If Rob wasn't quoting from a tape or a print article, unless he has an eidetic memory, he has no business providing a "verbatim quote."

Third, by providing a "verbatim quote" Rob provides a level of insulation against legal consequences. Rob hasn't, in the posts, said "Dancer is lying." He hemmed and hawed his way around it, using a "verbatim quote" as the most damning piece of evidence against Dancer. I think Rob is smart enough to be extremely careful in what he actually says directly about Dancer. Instead he says "APs" or something general to maneuver past slander issues.

I think inserting a "verbatim quote" in the post above stands out like the proverbial sore thumb. It's a hard thing to buy at face value from a journalistic perspective.

Of course, one can make up anything one wants as a pseudonym. Or can one? Alan, do dueling pseudonyms have the same legal status and consequences as people?

[slobdinger]

Alan, Rob's Suncoast source openly challenged anyone to provide written proof that they banned Knowledgeable players. I just provided 2 articles by the most well known video poker writer in the world stating that Suncoast routinely makes these bannings. Shouldn't Suncoast execs be interested in this. Wouldn't they like to respond if Dancer is lying? Don't they want to clear their name? Rob should make these articles known to them. That is, if they don't already know about them. Dancer called the articles "Players Getting Booted The Suncoast Way." Suncoast should have the opportunity to respond.

Or are we just dealing with more Singer lies?

[redietz]

I don't want to make it sound as if I did some great job reading between Rob's lines in the post above. I'm sure Alan immediately oriented to the same questions and issues faster than me. It would be basic and obvious to notice the presentation of the information.

One quick shortcut to the truth is to ask Rob directly, "So, are you saying Dancer lied in his articles?" If Rob skirts the question, or simply references his "source," then we know Rob is being exceedingly careful and isn't willing to state straight out anything much.

[jbjb]

Whether he's telling the truth or not, one thing is 100% certain. Casino management will not, especially when it comes to why it kicks out or excludes players.

[Alan Mendelson]

Whether he's telling the truth or not, one thing is 100% certain. Casino management will not, especially when it comes to why it kicks out or excludes players.

This is correct. Redietz perhaps you should call the Suncoast yourself and tell us what they tell you.

[Rob.Singer]

So no manager would reveal "information of that type", yet he revealed that info to you. You ever think your "friend" (let's just assume that this guy exists, even though he most likely doesn't) may have been lying to you? or does Rob only believe things that fit his agenda?

Interesting. You didn't read the post again. By telling me what I already strongly suspected to be the truth, my source was not saying anything publicly. My promise was not to ever reveal a name without permission (like I did with the BJ claims article and in the Wynn +EV games articles when I was allowed to reveal sources) which is what I did as a GT columnist. I have no doubt my source (not friend) was truthful because there's nothing unusual about this. Everyone already knows Dancer is full of it and himself, He makes a living by building up his reputation so he can get as many sales and consulting jobs as possible, so claiming something as dumb as "I've been 86ed from the Suncoast (among others) because of my vp prowess" and then getting a couple others to agree with him on vpfree and that hack site videopoker.com does indeed do the job.

I suggest everyone go ask him for proof and see what he says. Then ask mickey to splain why there is no written proof. Oh, and it'll also be fun to see what HE says.

[Alan Mendelson]

I would think that if a blackjack player is trespassed at a casino, and asked to sign a consent form in exchange to get their chips cashed (which I think is the normal procedure) that the blackjack player would be given a copy of the consent agreement.

I was never trespassed but NYNY took the dice away from me; MGM said I couldn't shoot; and Bellagio -- well that's a whole other story that seems to have been forgotten because I have no trouble playing craps at Bellagio now.

[jbjb]

There's a difference between backoffs and 86'ings.

And for the record, never sign anything. Just take your chips and leave!! Cash them later or have someone else do it if you can.

[redietz]

Rob, you still didn't explicitly state, "Bob Dancer is lying about being banned from Suncoast for vp play."

So I'll ask you -- Are you saying Bob Dancer lied in his LVA articles regarding being banned from Suncoast for vp play? Or what exactly are you saying/

[slobdinger]

Interesting. You didn't read the post again. By telling me what I already strongly suspected to be the truth, my source was not saying anything publicly. My promise was not to ever reveal a name without permission.....

Smoke and mirrors. I did not, repeat, did not ask you to reveal any names. I simply asked you to take the Dancer articles to Suncoast execs to see if they will give a response. Quit dodging the issue.

[Alan Mendelson]

This is starting to get funny. Slobdinger, redietz why don't you email the article to media relations at Suncoast and ask them for a response? If anyone is going to respond the official "media handlers" will. Redietz what are the odds on what will happen?

[Rob.Singer]

Smoke and mirrors. I did not, repeat, did not ask you to reveal any names. I simply asked you to take the Dancer articles to Suncoast execs to see if they will give a response. Quit dodging the issue.

Duh....who do you think I told my contact it was that was claiming this?

Stay off the sauce mickey.

[slobdinger]

Duh....who do you think I told my contact it was that was claiming this?

Stay off the sauce mickey.

So are you saying Dancer lied about it?

[slobdinger]

We need someone with some kind of press credentials to contact Suncoast. They are not going to respond, at least not in an honest manner, to someone who is just a gambler.

[RS__]

I don't think they'll respond to someone honestly with press credentials either way (ie Alan). What does a casino have to gain by saying "We kick out winners" ?

What does Dancer have to gain by saying Suncoast 86'd him? If that was a lie, ya know, Suncoast probably couldn't gone after him, as (if that was a lie) that'd be damaging to their business and possibly borderline slander or what-have-you.

I'd bet if you asked a casino if they kicked out card counters, they'd give a similar response to what "Rob's friend at Suncoast said about 86'inf people", i.e.: they only kick out cheaters or liars but winners are just fine.

[Rob.Singer]

I don't think they'll respond to someone honestly with press credentials either way (ie Alan). What does a casino have to gain by saying "We kick out winners" ?
I'd bet if you asked a casino if they kicked out card counters, they'd give a similar response to what "Rob's friend at Suncoast said about 86'inf people", i.e.: they only kick out cheaters or liars but winners are just fine.

Ask yourself this: Dancer has been bragging about how he's been winning from the casinos in LV for years, year after year, and he usually identifies at least some of those casinos. So would you not think that his regular haunts, ie. Palms, M, South Point, Hard Rock, Gold Coast, Stations, Dotties etc. would be banning him from playing? The mere fact that they haven't should confirm to a sensible person that he's instead been LOSING at most or all of these places.

Dancer says a lot of made-up things in his articles, and he does that because he's understandably running out of material after so many years. He's also a self-admitted unethical, rule-bending/rule-breaking vp player, who will do anything to feel like he has some kind of edge over wherever he plays. His business income is his lifeblood in that it allows him to keep playing. So when he writes that he's been blocked from the machines at Suncoast or any other place, why would you think he does that? You act like he has no reason to do such a thing. Think about what his reputation and cred mean to his income. It's been my experience that if a casino bans someone from their property or their machines, they put it and the reason for it in writing. That's the main reason I published my Bellagio banning when it happened, because all we've ever had previously (and since) is some people making unsupported claims for their own selfish purposes.

Mickey, how about I challenge you to get your pal Dancer to publish his ban letter from Suncoast? Surely he must have one. Why would he ever write about it if he didn't? I could have been lied to or I could be lying, right?

[slobdinger]

Ask yourself this: Dancer has been bragging about how he's been winning from the casinos in LV for years, year after year, and he usually identifies at least some of those casinos. So would you not think that his regular haunts, ie. Palms, M, South Point, Hard Rock, Gold Coast, Stations, Dotties etc. would be banning him from playing? The mere fact that they haven't should confirm to a sensible person that he's instead been LOSING at most or all of these places.

Dancer says a lot of made-up things in his articles, and he does that because he's understandably running out of material after so many years. He's also a self-admitted unethical, rule-bending/rule-breaking vp player, who will do anything to feel like he has some kind of edge over wherever he plays. His business income is his lifeblood in that it allows him to keep playing. So when he writes that he's been blocked from the machines at Suncoast or any other place, why would you think he does that? You act like he has no reason to do such a thing. Think about what his reputation and cred mean to his income. It's been my experience that if a casino bans someone from their property or their machines, they put it and the reason for it in writing. That's the main reason I published my Bellagio banning when it happened, because all we've ever had previously (and since) is some people making unsupported claims for their own selfish purposes.

Mickey, how about I challenge you to get your pal Dancer to publish his ban letter from Suncoast? Surely he must have one. Why would he ever write about it if he didn't? I could have been lied to or I could be lying, right?

He wasn't tresspassed off the property just backed off from playing video poker. And you have no clue whether Dancer makes a profit or not. In your mind you cant stand winners so you write BS about them all being losers.

[Rob.Singer]

Then instead of peeling down the apologist onion even more, why not just get his "back-off, vp stud" letter from the Suncoast and provide it to us?

[slobdinger]

Then instead of peeling down the apologist onion even more, why not just get his "back-off, vp stud" letter from the Suncoast and provide it to us?

Speaking of written proof, what about those tax returns, big fella?

[slobdinger]

Rob, have you ever told Alan about when Dancer was partners with Jeffrey Compton in Compton Dancer Consulting, a casino consulting business. One day you walked into their office and asked them for a job. And how about that time a few years ago you contacted Dancer and told him the two of you should be friends in public. You goofball, did you really think Dancer would give you a job or be publicly friends with you after the way you smeared him in the gambling forums? In both cases he turned you down flat. Stings like a bitch, don't it?