Originally Posted by
mickeycrimm
Originally Posted by
redietz
In fact, one of the points I made quite a few times was that a "Singer" type profile (impulsive, martingale, big bankroll, erratic play volume) would benefit people with comps and free play. "Singer," however, berated people for counting such things formally in their analyses of what to play where. I halfway agreed with him since free play and comps could be pulled out from under a player at any time. Sports book players, for example, sometimes had their banked comps radically reduced or zeroed out after ownership changes.
I have debunked "Singer" a long time and do not recall him ever mentioning comps or free play as part of any equation to turn a negative game positive. I honestly don't remember him posting anything like that even once.
But mickey has had private conversations with "Singer," so perhaps "Singer" said things to mickey that contradict the posts or the videos.
And now for the third of The Three Stooges. I already took care of KJocchio and maxpen the poser pro. You have selective memory, comrade. Singer wrote many a story of taking comps/cashback/bounceback/freeplay over the years. Sure he denounced it but he didn't pass it up. He made a lot of brags about casinos sending him a shit ton of freeplay and room comp. You idiot Three Stooges even bashed him for frequently "dragging his wife" to those free casino vacations.
The only thing you have debunked is your knowledge on the subject.
All opinions on any subject should be unbiased. One must have a neutral perspective in evaluating anything. Its the only way to attain any kind of credibility. Not one of the Three Stooges can give an unbiased opinion on Singer.
You know, mickey, my post was gentle. Had not a single bad thing to say about you or "Singer." And this was your response.
"Singer" never used bounce back, comps, free vacations, or free play as part of any accounting to turn negative into positive games. He stated that he felt it was inappropriate, that it was sleazy, addiction-serving bookkeeping, and that people who did it were "weak" and looking for excuses. Why do you not take him at his word?
Why do you feel it appropriate to do something "Singer" publicly said was NOT appropriate in determining wins/losses?
What you are doing is publicly cherry-picking "Singer's" own words and his own strategies and using your knowledge and YOUR accounting (not "Singer's") to do accounting for him. Why didn't you include "Singer's" own quotes or own words as a basis for your argument?
Do you think "Singer" needs your accounting help? Why do you think that?
I just don't get it. For 20 years, "Singer" lambasted video poker players for slowly changing their accounting practices from straight wins/losses to including free play to including comps to including when they sold gifts and Tupperware they received from casinos.
I am biased here. I applauded "Singer" on many occasions -- a rarity -- for taking this stand. I thought "Singer's" "don't-count-junk" bookkeeping was a good idea. It didn't muddy waters because bounce-back could be cut any time, even after play losses, and comps/free play have never been locked up as if in a bank. And the Tupperware is crap.
Your taking this position says that you get to decide what should count as profit from "Singer's" play even though he expressly posted on dozens, if not hundreds, of occasions that he considered what you are doing wrong.
You are basically DEFENDING SINGER FROM HIMSELF.
I don't get it. Well, maybe I do, if you rely on this kind of bookkeeping yourself to sustain the narrative that you are profitable. Or if you are dead set to define "Singer" as an "AP" because that makes everything with him fine and dandy.
Just realize that you are expressly defending "Singer" by doing something he said was WRONG dozens if not hundreds of times. Why do that?
I don't understand why you think your accounting practices should override "Singer's" accounting practices. I'm reasonably certain "Singer" didn't keep tabs on free rooms and meal values to arrive at his bottom line. Why do you value your accounting over his?
Ignoring someone's own words to decide how they should do their bookkeeping is the very soul of bias. You value your opinion over his.
P.S. For the record, when I do my own video poker accounting, I add in free play value after the fact of having played it so I have an objective, not a theo, number. I count nothing else into my formal bookkeeping. I never count room or food values for anything. When I was betting sports in LV more than offshore, I received 20-some nights comped a year. That's down to about a dozen now. I am a very small, modest vp player. I play maybe 50 hours a year. I'm ahead roughly 6K lifetime.
Reply With Quote