Originally Posted by
accountinquestion
Originally Posted by
Rob.Singer
I just skimmed through multiple kew postings above, and guess what? Instead of answering my Kane/Nestor challenge to his claim that most handpay jackpot vp hands are reviewed by surveillance, he goes off on some strange tangent about his obsession with me.
Looks like he's done this all day, with ungodly long rambling posts. But the one thing I noticed that truly verifies he's a lying fraud is he actually said "it's not about the money with AP's"!
Pussy prison wouldn't be safe enuf for him after such a stupid statement.
It is true but also wrong. Getting one over on a casino is a sweet feeling. I am basically a wanna-be AP but even finding little +EV spots isn't about the pittance of money I make doing it. I don't think this is true for most people. They see it completely and totally different.
One could say the exact same thing about any degenerate gambler. It isn't really about the money. It is true in the same fashion.
It is very, very rare to acquire the skill needed to win at gambling. Far less than 1% of the population acquires the skill to win at one subfield. I agree with kewlJ in that, from this perspective, theoretical blackjack may be the easiest subfield in which one can acquire basic expertise, but even then the actual in-the-field application and use is its own set of hard-to-acquire abilities.
So having the ability to win versus casinos places you in a very rare category, and people like knowing they are in the 1% skill and knowledge-wise.
Then, after acquiring subfield skill, one must be able to resist gambling at those subfields in which you do not have expertise. One must also have the discipline to shut it down when you cannot win at something. How many people, for example, would have the discipline to have great success betting college hoop totals for two years, then shut it down completely at the end of the second season when colleges instituted rule changes? You must be able to do that. So there is additional satisfaction in having the perspective to know one's limits and resist casino temptations for action in all of its forms. If Phil Ivey and Stu Ungar can crash and burn from craps and sports betting respectively, then who is safe, really? Having that discipline places you in the 1% of the less-than-1%. There is great self-satisfaction in being immune to the siren call of action.
Finally, one should have had the patience, discipline, and awareness to not gamble negatively up to the point you learn to win. That means you're not operating at a gambling deficit right out of the gate. This requires, in all likelihood, that one acquire winning skills and discipline at a very early age. Young savant-ism would, I think, be helpful in this regard.
All of this places you in a position to be self-sufficient, self-aware, and somewhat immune to calls for action, not only in casinos but in the world at large. Having these abilities is its own reward. It is not really about the money.