Video Poker Note

[Rob.Singer]

He doesn't know anyone. Same BS he spouted about asking pit supervisors about the 86ing of blackjack players. Even if he did ask, these management people will not tell you the truth.

It's a favorite line of all "AP's": "It's a well-known fact that players have been 86ed from X casino". BS--prove it. I listed my sources in my Gaming Today article about Anthony C. & Stanford Wong, and neither was able to provide written proof to the contrary. Now we have a handful of Internet bravados claiming they "know people who've been" or "have been" 86ed because they're AP's. Yet when you ask for proof all they can spew is "why....we're AP's of course, and the casinos don't like us because we win!" Never any proof of any sort. And what I said about the Suncoast is accurate. AP's have been banned from the place just like they've been banned from South Point, Palms, thrown out of the Revel promo and most other places. But the only ones who get tossed are those breaking the rules or who lie on video or are rude to employees--and NOT because of some crazy vp prowess. No casino would be nuts enough to get rid of their golden geese. Obviously.

mickey lives a fantasy life wishing he were able to afford to go to and play in Nevada because it once broke him, so he makes up AP storylines. Oh wait!.....he has written proof of these bannings at the bottom of his bottle.

[Rob.Singer]

To get $40 of free play I need to go to a bank for $400 of coin. Do I have to drive to the bank and how close is it? Am I a customer of that bank and is boxed coin for $400 available? Is there a fee? Do I have to tip the valet? Am I getting $400 cash plus $40 in free play or is it all free play?

Too many questions. And this question: is it worth the trouble?

I wouldn't even drive up to a casino for $40 of free play and I'm certainly not going to jump thru those hoops to get it.

I think you got your answer above: "It's a legitimate advantage play". These guys talk a big game yet expose themselves when something as ridiculous as this comes along. We've seen arci get all excited about telling us what a great consistent "AP winner" he's been over the years, but when the rubber hit the road he ended up embarrassed. Now these guys are trying justify & hold back their giddiness over a stupid and meaningless promotion at a dump like Ellis Island--a place that people with real money would never step into after a first look--and all they're doing is exposing what losers they are instead.

[jbjb]

I don't care how much money I have. If it's easily accessible, I'll take a free $40 all day long.

Alan won't drive to get $40 free money but he'll drive to lose his $5000 credit line. Makes sense...

[Alan Mendelson]

I don't care how much money I have. If it's easily accessible, I'll take a free $40 all day long.

Alan won't drive to get $40 free money but he'll drive to lose his $5000 credit line. Makes sense...

Well... in a good week I do make $50k.

[redietz]

I've seen your show, Alan. It's a good show -- well done.

Having said that, I don't think losing trumps winning, no matter your income. Unless you're looking to be James Bond and pick up chicks. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[slobdinger]

Well... in a good week I do make $50k.

Wrong post.

[Alan Mendelson]

I've seen your show, Alan. It's a good show -- well done.

Having said that, I don't think losing trumps winning, no matter your income. Unless you're looking to be James Bond and pick up chicks. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Redietz I'm proud that the Augustus Tower was named after me. My real name is Augustus Mendelson -- but Augustus wouldn't work on TV.

[slobdinger]

It's a favorite line of all "AP's": "It's a well-known fact that players have been 86ed from X casino". BS--prove it. I listed my sources in my Gaming Today article about Anthony C. & Stanford Wong, and neither was able to provide written proof to the contrary. Now we have a handful of Internet bravados claiming they "know people who've been" or "have been" 86ed because they're AP's. Yet when you ask for proof all they can spew is "why....we're AP's of course, and the casinos don't like us because we win!" Never any proof of any sort. And what I said about the Suncoast is accurate. AP's have been banned from the place just like they've been banned from South Point, Palms, thrown out of the Revel promo and most other places. But the only ones who get tossed are those breaking the rules or who lie on video or are rude to employees--and NOT because of some crazy vp prowess. No casino would be nuts enough to get rid of their golden geese. Obviously.

mickey lives a fantasy life wishing he were able to afford to go to and play in Nevada because it once broke him, so he makes up AP storylines. Oh wait!.....he has written proof of these bannings at the bottom of his bottle.

You ignored my $10,000 challenge because you are to chickenshit. You ran away and hid. Then you stuck your ugly mug up from under the rock to see if the coast was clear so you could spout some more ignorant blather, Mr. "I'm gonna prove my winnings with my tax returns." No, wait! You chickenshitted out on that too.

[quahaug]

Just took a look at EI website. Didn't see anything about spare change but they do have $125 in chips for $100 buy in. That's cool. You can do it two times per visit.

[Alan Mendelson]

Just took a look at EI website. Didn't see anything about spare change but they do have $125 in chips for $100 buy in. That's cool. You can do it two times per visit.

That's a worthwhile offer if it also applies to chips for craps that can be used for any bet and are not limited to even money pays. Also if the bonus is in small denominations. I'd hate to make a $100 buy and then find out my bonus comes in one chip.

[Rob.Singer]

I wouldn't be trusting anything glitzy in the form of promos advertised by Ellis Island because of their history of reniging, any more than I'd trust that mickeycrimm knows anything about anything other than his daddy's underwear size.

[slobdinger]

Total BS mickey. I know someone in middle mgmt. at Suncoast and asked about these "86ing" claims by none other than various "big deal AP's" on vpfree about four months ago. The response was, verbatim: "No video poker players at Suncoast EVER are banned from playing unless they break the rules, are rude to our employees, or our cameras can prove they're lying to us when we question why they're doing something questionable at the machines.....and I dare you to produce one piece of written or electronic evidence that rufutes this." (which, of course, no AP has ever done) Further, "Only inexperienced managers would even think about removing any of these well-heeled and/or regular players from their customer base".

Nice quote from your source, Rob. You've been telling us for years that Dancer was a fraud but you've never put up any evidence. But guess what,Rob. Here's your big opportunity. Dancer wrote two articles in his Las Vegas Adviser column, dated Oct 29 and Nov 5, 2013 on being banned from playing video poker at Suncoast. Anyone can go there to his archives and read the articles. He said he was banned for simply playing 9/6 BPD on multiplier days where he was getting .7% to 1% cash back. And he said he knew lots of players who were banned for the same thing.

Of course, you say it is a pack of lies. Rob, this is a golden opportunity for you to finally prove Dancer a liar and a fraud. Since you have a contact at Suncoast you can get them to read the articles....and then you can get them to make a public statement refuting the articles. That would expose Dancer good.

Think of the PR. Suncoast could then invite all the loser AP's, who have been avoiding the place since Dancer's articles came out, back in to fleece them.

And think of the big feather it would put in your hat for Suncoast putting up all this undeniable evidence that Dancer is a fraud. You should get right on it, Rob. Keep us posted on your progress.

[alpax]

Great challenge slobdinger, it would be a big step towards gaining any credibility if there proof can be provided; would spread like wildfire. I do believe in the $5 Bonus Poker Deluxe story. The Gold Coast has a ton of good VP games, but the Bonus Poker Deluxe offering is specifically set to 7/5 (96.25% optimal play, would be crazy to play that) in between those full pay schedulers.

Aside from the Bonus Poker Deluxe trap, I also heard entire video poker progressive teams got 86'ed from Suncoast for even trying to sit down on a high progressive bank.

Best place to play 9/6 Bonus Poker Deluxe in the Vegas area without controversy is at the SouthPoint at $2 denomination or 10-play $1 denomination provided you do not play on just the double point days.

[Rob.Singer]

Mickey you're not only in love with Dancer....you've been away from civilization too long by the looks of your rant.

When some self-promoting proven liar like Dancer claims "I've been 86ed because I'm an AP and I know a lot of other players who have been also" it's up to the person who's saying the BS to provide support for their assertions if they want intelligent people to believe them. And no current employee would ever publicly divulge any info of that type. Dancer makes more things up than the # of times Hillary uses her vibrator in a week.

Have you no knowledge of how the business world works? (Dumb question--how could white trash possibly know anything outside of the operating hours for the bar next door....). You're the classic example of a paranoid loser. If the story fits your narrative you go with it. If not, you cry foul because it just can't be.

Maybe that's why you escaped from the world down here that wasn't treating you so well.

[slobdinger]

Say it ain't so, Rob. Suncoast is your golden opportunity to expose Dancer. You're just gonna let this opportunity slip by? I'm disappointed in you, Rob. Here you have the quote from your inside source and everthing. I can't believe you are not going to act on this. Oh, I know. You have a secret crush on Dancer, don't you? Well, being that you are a member of NAMBLA I guess it makes sense. But isn't Dancer a little old for you?

[Alan Mendelson]

I have sources at various Vegas casinos whose names I wouldn't reveal. Not only that, but I've done work for some of the Vegas companies. It is not unusual for those in the media to protect their sources and to keep names private. Heck, I wouldn't even reveal my host's name here without my host's permission. I am certainly not going to reveal the name of any manager or casino executive without their permission.

Rob did write for Gaming Today. It is completely understandable that he can't reveal anyone's name without their permission. And it would not be unreasonable for any casino manager to ask that their name not be revealed.

Let's move on.

[redietz]

Didn't Rob just publicly refute somebody with hundreds of published articles? I'm no Dancer fan, but if someone said key elements of a number of public articles I had written were lies, and since Rob is reporting Dancer's "lies" with an undeniable history of malice (so there's no doubt he's aware that he's damaging Dancer and that he intends to do so), that is a problem.

That would explain Alan's wish to move on and not get embroiled in some legal wrangling.

I'd be curious to see Dancer's reaction to this kind of thing. In a way, if he were to do nothing, it would put Rob in a favorable light on this. On the other hand, if he sued Rob, that would suggest Rob may be incorrect.

Alan, you undoubtedly know the legal end of this. If Rob were to make these assertions regarding you (that a number of your published articles contained self-serving lies), what would your legal options be, if any?

[Alan Mendelson]

Alan, you undoubtedly know the legal end of this. If Rob were to make these assertions regarding you (that a number of your published articles contained self-serving lies), what would your legal options be, if any?

If Rob found a lie and was able to prove it, no one could sue him and win.

When I said I wanted to move on it was in reaction to those who asked Rob to reveal his sources. I can understand why Rob would not reveal his sources. That's the only reason I said "move on."

The other issues are open to discussion. Even the "sources" question is subject to discussion but I think I answered it from the point of view of both Rob and his sources.

[RS__]

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?

[Alan Mendelson]

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?

Sources have lied to journalists before.