Originally Posted by
Alan Mendelson
Arc's tax returns only showed wins from W2Gs playing his $1 game. He said that here, on the forum. So, we don't really know if he actually had greater winnings. We do know that he showed a profit. It's possible that his profits were even greater, or they might not have. We'll never know. But we do know he showed a profit.
There are many other gamblers who would be happy showing any kind of a profit. I am one of them. I admit to not having a profit despite two $100K royals in two years. However, I do have a profit at video poker -- and it's because of craps that I have an annual loss.
About Bob Dancer: I think he very well could have profits of six figures or more each year without the casinos banning him. And there are several reasons why:
1. If his profits come from multiple casinos, he will not show up on the radar at any one casino for being a huge winner. Dancer's profits could conceivably be something like $50,000 per casino and no casino would care about that.
2. Would any casino want to take a black eye for banning Dancer if he won less than $100K in a year? I don't think so.
3. Frankly for a casino to bar any gambler there has to be something "else." Card counters in blackjack are an exception, I think if you successfully count cards you're not going to be welcomed anywhere except if you are a very small player. One of my TV buddies is a card counter but goes to Vegas maybe once a month and plays just enough at low denominations to win a couple of thousand at different casinos. No one bothers him. Winning one or two thousand dollars at big casinos allows him to fly under the radar.
In summary: casinos need winners. If no one won, no one would play. It might as well be Dancer.
Reply With Quote
