Short term vs long term and quitting while ahead (continued)

[mickeycrimm]

Jdaewoo let me be blunt: you live in the AP fantasy world.

Until the casinos got hip a lot of money was made setting the casinos up to deliver copious amounts of freeplay. It was a play that was put down in casinos across the country.

1. You go in and sign up for the players club. You are a new player. Sit down on a $5 video poker game in the 98% range. You want to make yourself look like a total sucker. Run 50 to 100K in action. Theoretical loss = 2 to 4K.

2. Then it was a matter of waiting on the mail, usually a month or so. The amount of freeplay varied from casino to casino but you'd usually get 1 to 2K a week for up to six months in freeplay.

3.. Do this at multiple casinos that are unaffiliated.

4. Run a route to each casino running off the freeplay then leaving.

I have one friend that was making 150K a year pulling off this play just in California.

If you'll remember, several years ago the casinos severely cut back freeplay offers and amounts. The reason was the casinos got hurt by wiseguys pulling this play on them.

[accountinquestion]

pa·lav·er
/pəˈlavər,pəˈlävər/
Learn to pronounce
INFORMAL
noun
1.
unnecessarily elaborate or complex procedure.
"there's a lot of palaver involved"
2.
HISTORICAL
an improvised conference between two groups, typically those without a shared language or culture.
verb
talk unproductively and at length.
"it's too hot for palavering"

Remember who your audience is here Red-LOL

Regnis, "palaver" was not uncommon in old episodes of Wagon Train and Gunsmoke. Not only do I need to evaluate the audience, I need to be aware of my age!

My dad supposedly looks like Festus but I can't speak directly to this matter.

Pavaler? lol new one to me.

[Alan Mendelson]

Jdaewoo let me be blunt: you live in the AP fantasy world.

Until the casinos got hip a lot of money was made setting the casinos up to deliver copious amounts of freeplay. It was a play that was put down in casinos across the country.

1. You go in and sign up for the players club. You are a new player. Sit down on a $5 video poker game in the 98% range. You want to make yourself look like a total sucker. Run 50 to 100K in action. Theoretical loss = 2 to 4K.

2. Then it was a matter of waiting on the mail, usually a month or so. The amount of freeplay varied from casino to casino but you'd usually get 1 to 2K a week for up to six months in freeplay.

3.. Do this at multiple casinos that are unaffiliated.

4. Run a route to each casino running off the freeplay then leaving.

I have one friend that was making 150K a year pulling off this play just in California.

If you'll remember, several years ago the casinos severely cut back freeplay offers and amounts. The reason was the casinos got hurt by wiseguys pulling this play on them.

Until the casinos got hip...

Several years ago...

It's the national anthem of today's APs... talking about the past.

Come on Mickey. You're better than this.

[jdaewoo]

Until the casinos got hip...

Several years ago...

It's the national anthem of today's APs... talking about the past.

Come on Mickey. You're better than this.

Thick as a plank

[redietz]

Jdaewoo let me be blunt: you live in the AP fantasy world.

Until the casinos got hip a lot of money was made setting the casinos up to deliver copious amounts of freeplay. It was a play that was put down in casinos across the country.

1. You go in and sign up for the players club. You are a new player. Sit down on a $5 video poker game in the 98% range. You want to make yourself look like a total sucker. Run 50 to 100K in action. Theoretical loss = 2 to 4K.

2. Then it was a matter of waiting on the mail, usually a month or so. The amount of freeplay varied from casino to casino but you'd usually get 1 to 2K a week for up to six months in freeplay.

3.. Do this at multiple casinos that are unaffiliated.

4. Run a route to each casino running off the freeplay then leaving.

I have one friend that was making 150K a year pulling off this play just in California.

If you'll remember, several years ago the casinos severely cut back freeplay offers and amounts. The reason was the casinos got hurt by wiseguys pulling this play on them.

Until the casinos got hip...

Several years ago...

It's the national anthem of today's APs... talking about the past.

Come on Mickey. You're better than this.

Sounds a bit like "aging out," Alan. One would surmise you might have some sympathy.

Meanwhile, for those who consider sports betting a form of AP, it appears to me that for the most part, things are getting much easier, both in actually winning money via betting and in getting thousands in free wagers for signing up with the casino books.

The days of discretionary sports comps died about 20 years ago, but now you have front-loaded bonuses that were heretofore not offered. I have to think mailers and offers calibrated to sports accounts will become the new thing. I'm holding out on formal sign-ups in my name because I think bigger bettors will eventually be able to negotiate better sign up bonuses.

[smurgerburger]

I'll never stop being fascinated by the AP denialism of people like Alan. It's either APs don't exist, or they do exist but don't make any real money, or he feels sorry for them because they don't experience the "fun" of -EV gambling.

I think Alan is one of a particular sort of people that think of themselves as savvy gamblers. Alan knows the rules of craps and some betting system mumbo jumbo and wants to believe that makes him a sharp guy compared to all the sucker regular bettors. Of course he is exactly the same as all the other suckers, he just can't allow himself to believe that.

So when he finds out there are people that actually make money gambling his self-image as a sharp who looks down on the suckers that don't have systems is threatened. And so the endless exchanges where he flails about trying to satisfy himself that he's not just another degenerate.

[Alan Mendelson]

I'll never stop being fascinated by the AP denialism of people like Alan. It's either APs don't exist, or they do exist but don't make any real money, or he feels sorry for them because they don't experience the "fun" of -EV gambling.

I think Alan is one of a particular sort of people that think of themselves as savvy gamblers. Alan knows the rules of craps and some betting system mumbo jumbo and wants to believe that makes him a sharp guy compared to all the sucker regular bettors. Of course he is exactly the same as all the other suckers, he just can't allow himself to believe that.

So when he finds out there are people that actually make money gambling his self-image as a sharp who looks down on the suckers that don't have systems is threatened. And so the endless exchanges where he flails about trying to satisfy himself that he's not just another degenerate.

Wrong.

The correct comment would be: Alan isnt falling for any doubletalk or BS.

And insults aren't going to shake me either.

Sorry. You don't make the 6 o'clock news.

[smurgerburger]

No BS for the straight shooter with the craps system and the 18 yos and the sock puppet "paralegal".

[Alan Mendelson]

I have no craps system. I dont care if you dont believe the 18 yos because I never said I won a dime off of it and neither did anyone else. I dont use sock puppets.

And I dont post under a made up, infantile name.

[MisterV]

I dont use sock puppets. And I dont post under a made up, infantile name.

I've no dog in this particular fight but in the interest of truth, justice and the American way please let me say two words...."Andrew G."

[jbjb]

I dont use sock puppets. And I dont post under a made up, infantile name.

I've no dog in this particular fight but in the interest of truth, justice and the American way please let me say two words...."Andrew G."

And again, it's an insult to famous Super Mario Bros speed runner Andrew G.

[jbjb]

I'm fairly certain that if Alan walked into a casino, made one $5000 bet, won it, then left, he'd still behind and NOT ahead LIFETIME.

[mickeycrimm]

Jdaewoo let me be blunt: you live in the AP fantasy world.

Until the casinos got hip a lot of money was made setting the casinos up to deliver copious amounts of freeplay. It was a play that was put down in casinos across the country.

1. You go in and sign up for the players club. You are a new player. Sit down on a $5 video poker game in the 98% range. You want to make yourself look like a total sucker. Run 50 to 100K in action. Theoretical loss = 2 to 4K.

2. Then it was a matter of waiting on the mail, usually a month or so. The amount of freeplay varied from casino to casino but you'd usually get 1 to 2K a week for up to six months in freeplay.

3.. Do this at multiple casinos that are unaffiliated.

4. Run a route to each casino running off the freeplay then leaving.

I have one friend that was making 150K a year pulling off this play just in California.

If you'll remember, several years ago the casinos severely cut back freeplay offers and amounts. The reason was the casinos got hurt by wiseguys pulling this play on them.

Until the casinos got hip...

Several years ago...

It's the national anthem of today's APs... talking about the past.

Come on Mickey. You're better than this.

You went a long ways out of your way to come up with something negative to say here, Alan. My opinion of you is you are not that bad of a person but you are an addicted gambler with irrational beliefs. YOU are the one in the fantasy world. You are one of the stupidest gamblers that has ever been on the internet.

[Alan Mendelson]

I'm fairly certain that if Alan walked into a casino, made one $5000 bet, won it, then left, he'd still behind and NOT ahead LIFETIME.

And I think that any one year of my income probably exceeded your total income from from all of your so called AP play and hole carding and vulturing.
I bet your aces I'm right.

And for the rest of you step back for a moment and answer this one question:

Why do Mdawg and Rob Singer get challenged freely for their reports but I'm expected to accept claims such as:

My team took $25 million from the casinos

My free play system wins $20,000 a week

For only $25 coin in I get $125 per day of free play for 7 days straight.

Tell me why the AP plays should not be questioned and I'll never question an AP play/claim again.

Promise.

I'll even concede that Kewlj can count two tables successfully.

Give me your reason. But make it good.

And micjeycrimm the addicts say they have no reason to quit because they believe they have the ability to beat the casino. When you have a stop loss you quit. You're not an addict when you know when to quit.

You used to be reasonable Mickey. I'm sorry.

[redietz]

I'm fairly certain that if Alan walked into a casino, made one $5000 bet, won it, then left, he'd still behind and NOT ahead LIFETIME.

And I think that any one year of my income probably exceeded your total income from from all of your so called AP play and hole carding and vulturing.
I bet your aces I'm right.

And for the rest of you step back for a moment and answer this one question:

Why do Mdawg and Rob Singer get challenged freely for their reports but I'm expected to accept claims such as:

My team took $25 million from the casinos

My free play system wins $20,000 a week

For only $25 coin in I get $125 per day of free play for 7 days straight.

Tell me why the AP plays should not be questioned and I'll never question an AP play/claim again.

Promise.

I'll even concede that Kewlj can count two tables successfully.

Give me your reason. But make it good.

And micjeycrimm the addicts say they have no reason to quit because they believe they have the ability to beat the casino. When you have a stop loss you quit. You're not an addict when you know when to quit.

You used to be reasonable Mickey. I'm sorry.

Alan is a fine writer, so these kinds of posts are interesting. Let's examine the tenses in the first line. "Addicts say they have no reason to quit because they believe they have the ability to beat the casino." This is a fascinating line. Think about the options the writer had at his disposal and his choices for what to write.

First of all, it's present tense with "addicts say." It's also present tense with "they believe they have the ability to beat the casino."

Let's take a breath and figure out why would a writer use present tense here. Well, for one thing, it takes historical results out of the equation. Instead of referencing what occurred in the past by using past tense, which would provide argument for "addicts" having been successful, the past is edited out of the discussion by the use of present tense. Thus, no reference to what has occurred up to this point in time gambling. The very idea that people have won via "ability" is not recognized in these lines.

Second, we have the word "believe," which suggests, and I do not think I am stretching things here, that there is little to no real world evidence to the effect that the "addicts" win. "Believe" is also a word that suggests it's all in someone's head regarding whether they have won in the past or can win in the future. It sidesteps mentions of historical results, which would be a measure of likely effectiveness.

Also, similar to some other posters, there is zero mention of math in any way. Math is absent in the lines, and yet probability and expectation are the crux of the entire gambling milieu.

The writer concludes with a line intended to suggest that people who are capable of stopping because of losses are somehow less addicted than people who (1) have won but don't see reason to stop and (2) are projected to win and don't see reason to stop. This is also very interesting, as it defines addiction as having to do with stopping play after losing stretches as opposed to overall losing of resources to casinos. I submit that this line should be very popular with casino personnel and shareholders.

[Alan Mendelson]

Redietz you're a fine writer too. You stuff a lot of words into your posts. You also stuff a lot of advertisements and clippings into packages.

You're a stuffer.

Now read this. It has a term I never saw before.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/goodcas...ure-ahead/amp/

[jbjb]

I'll admit it, I'm addicted to what I do for a living. I enjoy it. But I do take time off and do other stuff as well.

[kewlJ]

I haven't joined in over the past few days because I have no desire to continue to pick on Alan, especially rehashing things that everyone knows.

But it should be clear to anyone who is mildly o0bjective that Alan is not mildly objective. Alan has a strong bias against players that play with an advantage and win at casinos.....ie, advantage players. I guess because he is not one. I think he understands some of the concepts behind at least some of the simpler AP plays, but he wants no part of them, nor accepting that others make money from implementing various advantage plays.

Mickeycrimm, just laid out the mailer advantage play, step by step. I played this mailer play for 8-9 years after I moved to Vegas, smaller scale than mickey's example, but otherwise exactly same, for an average of over 20k a year, supplementing my BJ play. I only became aware of it because another AP shared it with me, right after I moved to Vegas, telling me that not playing some VP for the mailers was leaving free money on the table. So if I played it, making decent money, anyone/everyone with half a brain played it.

I remember once I mentioned it in detail (not as detailed as mickey just did) and Axelwolf got mad at me for saying it on a public message board. Especially the part about using multiple cards.

I have known Alan was and is biased about APs ever since the initial counting two tables discussion, where he ran out and took intentional blurry pictures to make a false point that a player could not see the next table clearly. I mean who does that kind of thing? A guy who claims to be a journalist?

So it is, what it is. Alan is a -EV player, or you can call it a recreational player, or a "losing" player. He says he is happy with that status, but then he continually can't help but show his contempt for players that play with an advantage and win.

Now, I will say, Alan is hell bent on questioning/challenging DarkOz's claim. And that is ok. I always say, I don't challenge people's claims unless the claims defy math. Dark Oz's claims don't defy math (that I have seen), but ever since I read the first time, it hasn't made a lot of sense to me and certainly is nothing I am familiar with. He did that weird thing where he said $20k a week, but it turns out not every week.....not most weeks. Maybe an occasional situation. That seemed dishonest. But mostly I don't read and haven't read enough of DO's stuff. It just becomes another dude, I am not that interested in.

[Alan Mendelson]

Please Kewlj. You've said this too many times... that I'm biased against APs. That's bullshit.

I'm biased against unsubstantiated claims.

And with that I will add that yes, there are claims that my friend Rob Singer has not substantiated. So he is not without fault.

I cant substantiate my seeing a random shooter roll 18 yos in a row and I'll regret it the rest of my life.

But when I threw dice at Red Rock and twice they landed on top of each other not only did I take photos but I sent to the Wizard the photos, times, dates and the names of the boxmen to confirm. And when it happened a THIRD TIME with another shooter I did the same thing.

Curiously Wizard never followed through. Why? Because I had proof.

But where's the proof about beating casinos for $25 million? For turning $25 of coin in into 7 X $125 of free play? For winning $20,000 per week from free play on 20 cards?

If you came to ANY newsroom with those claims it would not get on TV.

We see claims like that every day.

Years ago I interviewed a California lottery winner who said he used a system. I asked him when he was going to win the lottery again. He didnt.

[jbjb]

I wouldn't doubt anyone saying that dice landed on top of each other. Probably saw that happen lots of times as a kid playing yahtzee.