Don't talk about fight club or this...

[Garnabby]

If all else fails, rewrite the dictionary ...

Not such a bad idea when nothing else works, to redefine stuff so that it all works out, as a whole. To negotiate who, what, where, why, and how, one exists, if not to exist. I used to say that, "When the laws of physics, and math, fail, those of logic (philosophical consistency) still prevail." Instead of clarity, and precision.

A lot like a sequence of "socks" as alter egos, by which one may end where one started. The unenlightened, trivial case by "staying on the straight and narrow".

[accountinquestion]

Honestly the best part is how they all agree on referring to their gambling budget as their bankroll ...

oh well it is about having fun. I've put fun time gambling behind me. I have to gamble big enough to feel it and that is not good when you run bad.

[Don Perignom]

oh well it is about having fun. I've put fun time gambling behind me.

For many players, there's no clear delineation. They want to have fun, but they also believe their systems and techniques can cut into or beat the house edge.

Again from the same thread over there, this is a top administrator, afaik ranking just below Queen Sonya:

1. A lot of people only mention their wins and you don't hear about those other hours and dollars spent trying to get that big win.

2. Some people embellish their wins.

3. Some people fabricate the whole story. Outright lie would be the textbook definition.

4. A few people know when to walk away and lock in a win. "Cash out, go home."

5. And last, but not least, don't believe everything you read on the Internet.​

That's a low opinion of the other posters. If you pressed me, I would have to admit that a few message board denizens are habitual liars. But usually it's just a matter of selective presentation. There's peer pressure to keep it happy.

And I see yet another mention of quitting when ahead. But your timing must be precise. You have to quit correctly.

[jdog]

Of course Tree Shade might actually mean he’s just laying outside with a boner & his cock is providing him & / others the same amount of shade a tree would.

Baaawaaaaahaaha

Nice.

[Garnabby]

... ranking just below Queen Sonya.

I put about 40 posts over there, a long time ago. If you log in, my homepage will show.

https://www.vegasmessageboard.com/fo...arnabby.19124/

At the time, there really weren't many who talked specifically about gambling systems - not like at the Gamblers Glen. I got into a discussion with old Sonya, right off the bat, after my first post, which went to a moderation queue. She wrongly thought that I was trying to sell a gambling system to do with baccarat. She was pretty paranoid, I guess to try to keep the forum traffic up.

The systems players were always tweaking their systems, as an indirect admission that the systems never worked. Everything was experimental, which was okay. I always told people to perfect their systems before taking them out on the casinos, but, no one wanted to hear it. Anyway, it appears that they have mostly beaten a retreat from both the internet, and the casinos. Gotten on with their lives, family, friends, and work, I guess.

P.S. Back then, usually, there were about five hundred persons online, at any given time, which dwarfed the WoV at its peak, with about forty, but, now, I see that it's only about one hundred and fifty.

[Garnabby]

Of course Tree Shade might actually mean he’s just laying outside with a boner & his cock is providing him & / others the same amount of shade a tree would.

Baaawaaaaahaaha

Nice.

[Don Perignom]

Recapping. To win at gambling, you have to quit when ahead.

But to win at a professional level, you have to not care.

Professionals are not exempt. Even high-level ones, and even in games that are ostensibly beatable. See; e.g. TJ Cloutier, Gus Hansen, Erick Lindgren, and many others.

Arguably, not caring about money may be a necessary condition to become a poker champion.

[Don Perignom]

I think casinos should connect mail offers to performance incentives. Instead of a no-strings-attached $200, they could offer $1000 with a specified point requirement. This would protect them against no-play pickups, and should produce some good AP opportunities when Marketing screws up the calculations.

[DGenBen]

I think casinos should connect mail offers to performance incentives. Instead of a no-strings-attached $200, they could offer $1000 with a specified point requirement. This would protect them against no-play pickups, and should produce some good AP opportunities when Marketing screws up the calculations.

Good idea, but they want to make the offers as simple as possible for ploppies to understand. Although some casinos do have in their offer fine print “Offer subject to change if historical levels of play not maintained” It is rarely enforced although I know of at least one place that will enforce it.

[redietz]

Recapping. To win at gambling, you have to quit when ahead.

But to win at a professional level, you have to not care.

Professionals are not exempt. Even high-level ones, and even in games that are ostensibly beatable. See; e.g. TJ Cloutier, Gus Hansen, Erick Lindgren, and many others.

Arguably, not caring about money may be a necessary condition to become a poker champion.

For 40 years, I've argued that not being a capitalist can be an enormous advantage gambling even though most people perceive gambling as pure capitalism. I recommend dipping into much of the personality research that's been done and the established ideas of stress/performance curves and how they relate to everyday performance.

H.J. Eysenck is a good starting point; then research some of the stress/performance studies from the 70's and 80's. Even something as seemingly innocuous as caffeine can have significant effects. It all ties together with successful gambling (or any stress-inducing activity) being aided by physical training (to create a consistent baseline physiology that's less affected by stress) and a healthy disrespect for coin of the realm in all of its forms.

After my "Scientists, Gamblers, and Magicians" essay was published in The Humanist, I was contacted by a literary agent (Allen and Yarnow) about doing a self-help book from a "gamblers' perspective." My sample chapters covered quite a bit of this. Personality theories are a bit out of fashion these days, partly because there are few easy answers and manipulating people based on personality criteria has been overtaken by more obvious, direct means of behavior manipulation. But the studies were and are valid.

My bottom line is that to the degree that you perceive coin of the realm as a measure or reflection of yourself, the more pressure there is that can affect performance. Not caring at all could be a negative because you need to be sufficiently motivated to put in the hours and do the work, just as caring too much can be a negative if you fear certain outcomes.

[AxelWolf]

Recapping. To win at gambling, you have to quit when ahead.

But to win at a professional level, you have to not care.

Professionals are not exempt. Even high-level ones, and even in games that are ostensibly beatable. See; e.g. TJ Cloutier, Gus Hansen, Erick Lindgren, and many others.

Arguably, not caring about money may be a necessary condition to become a poker champion.

For 40 years, I've argued that not being a capitalist can be an enormous advantage gambling even though most people perceive gambling as pure capitalism. I recommend dipping into much of the personality research that's been done and the established ideas of stress/performance curves and how they relate to everyday performance.

H.J. Eysenck is a good starting point; then research some of the stress/performance studies from the 70's and 80's. Even something as seemingly innocuous as caffeine can have significant effects. It all ties together with successful gambling (or any stress-inducing activity) being aided by physical training (to create a consistent baseline physiology that's less affected by stress) and a healthy disrespect for coin of the realm in all of its forms.

After my "Scientists, Gamblers, and Magicians" essay was published in The Humanist, I was contacted by a literary agent (Allen and Yarnow) about doing a self-help book from a "gamblers' perspective." My sample chapters covered quite a bit of this. Personality theories are a bit out of fashion these days, partly because there are few easy answers and manipulating people based on personality criteria has been overtaken by more obvious, direct means of behavior manipulation. But the studies were and are valid.

Are we talking about Advantage/Pro (+EV) Gambling or just gambling?

[Don Perignom]

For 40 years, I've argued that not being a capitalist can be an enormous advantage gambling even though most people perceive gambling as pure capitalism.

I'll wait for the next idea, thanks.

[DGenBen]

]

For 40 years, I've argued that not being a capitalist can be an enormous advantage gambling even though most people perceive gambling as pure capitalism.

So if not a Capitalist then what? Communist, Socialist, Anarchist, Fascist?

[redietz]

]

For 40 years, I've argued that not being a capitalist can be an enormous advantage gambling even though most people perceive gambling as pure capitalism.

So if not a Capitalist then what? Communist, Socialist, Anarchist, Fascist?

You can try ascetic, monastic, Zen, and so on. Buddhism seems like a good fit.

My personal suggestion is anything that emphasizes non-material resources and attributes as opposed to material ones. But then you run into the issue with high profile situations like the WSOP where the non-material risks (reputation, perceived expertise, and so on) are hard to evade, so the stress can impact performance regardless of the material implications.

[redietz]

Recapping. To win at gambling, you have to quit when ahead.

But to win at a professional level, you have to not care.

For 40 years, I've argued that not being a capitalist can be an enormous advantage gambling even though most people perceive gambling as pure capitalism. I recommend dipping into much of the personality research that's been done and the established ideas of stress/performance curves and how they relate to everyday performance.

H.J. Eysenck is a good starting point; then research some of the stress/performance studies from the 70's and 80's. Even something as seemingly innocuous as caffeine can have significant effects. It all ties together with successful gambling (or any stress-inducing activity) being aided by physical training (to create a consistent baseline physiology that's less affected by stress) and a healthy disrespect for coin of the realm in all of its forms.

After my "Scientists, Gamblers, and Magicians" essay was published in The Humanist, I was contacted by a literary agent (Allen and Yarnow) about doing a self-help book from a "gamblers' perspective." My sample chapters covered quite a bit of this. Personality theories are a bit out of fashion these days, partly because there are few easy answers and manipulating people based on personality criteria has been overtaken by more obvious, direct means of behavior manipulation. But the studies were and are valid.

Are we talking about Advantage/Pro (+EV) Gambling or just gambling?

I thought we were talking about the WSOP and poker in general. Not sure how to categorize those. I've seen estimates of expert player versus the WSOP civilian player in the range of +200 to +400 advantage. But that's for a single tournament. Negreanu's comment about poker pros making a living playing tourneys as often as birds have teeth would suggest that there may not be a long-term advantage in the non-soft and/or non-NLH tournaments.

[MaxPen]

]

For 40 years, I've argued that not being a capitalist can be an enormous advantage gambling even though most people perceive gambling as pure capitalism.

So if not a Capitalist then what? Communist, Socialist, Anarchist, Fascist?

You can try ascetic, monastic, Zen, and so on. Buddhism seems like a good fit.

My personal suggestion is anything that emphasizes non-material resources and attributes as opposed to material ones. But then you run into the issue with high profile situations like the WSOP where the non-material risks (reputation, perceived expertise, and so on) are hard to evade, so the stress can impact performance regardless of the material implications.

I like when a brokey opposes materialism yet poses for pics with lambos. You can't make this shit up. Fuckin' clowns....RIP

[Garnabby]

For 40 years, I've argued that not being a capitalist can be an enormous advantage gambling even though most people perceive gambling as pure capitalism.

I'll wait for the next idea, thanks.

But the next idea won't wait on you. (---> "Two Out of Three Ain't Bad.")