Big Casino Wins and Jackpots

[RS__]

Alan, casinos do ban winners of any amounts who they determine they can't make a profit off of. I play -EV games with 2 winning trips to SP--profit of only $26,700--and they decided I'm not worth their time any longer. I've won even less at Silverton and much less at Tropicana Laughlin and all on those terrible negative games, and they don't accept me under most circumstances. Casinos also have been said to ban AP's who only play in certain "advantageous" ways, whether they win or lose. That's Dancer to a tee.

Care to post up the proof you're banned from Silverton, South Point, or Tropicana Express?



I don't know why casinos allow Bob to play at their properties. My opinion is because casinos like South Point -- he has classes (which generally brings in unskilled players who think they have an edge), has a relationship with the owner, advertises for them, and overall has very little +EV when playing there.

Casinos like Silverton and others, he's getting very small advantages, typically less than 0.5%. With such a small advantage and with such high variance, it's difficult for a casino to determine whether a player is actually playing with an advantage or a disadvantage.

Plus, Bob is usually not playing on actual good high advantage plays. He's playing shit with less than a 1% edge.

[Alan Mendelson]

Frankly I don't see why any casino would block someone who won $25,000 playing video poker. The reality is -- you can't INFLUENCE the game of video poker unless you are cheating. Unlike craps there are no "play rules" to follow such as hitting the back wall with both dice. You can't "count cards" in video poker unlike blackjack.

So when I hear someone has been banned or restricted from playing video poker I think there must be another problem. Perhaps the player was abusive to floor people? Perhaps the player was drunk? Perhaps the player was loud and obnoxious and caused a disturbance?

I can understand how a casino might "no mail" a big player because that player might not need any additional incentives to play. Of course if you are "no mailed" you can give whatever reason you want to as an explanation, including, "I'm just too good."

[Dan Druff]

VP bans are not very common (it's not like blackjack), but they happen because the player is perceived to have an edge via comps/promotions, and the casino realizes that they are going to lose money on such a player on average.

However, as the edge is typically small and the expected gains minimal, most casinos tend to let this slide, and file it under "cost of doing business", rather than bar the player. (However, as you said, they can get no-mailed).

One of the more well known VP bans occurred to someone who wasn't even an AP. Richard "The Quiet Lion" Brodie, who was mostly a recreational VP and poker player, was among several players banned by Caesars in 2007 for simply playing high stakes VP and getting lucky.

Richard, who was Microsoft employee #55 and was credited as the creator of Microsoft Word, had a lot of money, and enjoyed playing high stakes VP at Caesars. He hit four very large royals in 2007. While the casino admitted that this was simply a function of luck, he was among several banned for playing too close to 0 EV -- basically the casino felt they couldn't make a reliable profit off players like him, so several such players were sent letters notifying them of being 86ed in May 2007.

Richard was particularly upset about this because he could no longer play at the World Series of Poker. He made enough noise in the poker community to cause several players to rally to his defense, and Caesars backed down, ultimately agreeing to let him play the WSOP provided he stayed away from video poker.

[mickeycrimm]

VP bans are not very common (it's not like blackjack), but they happen because the player is perceived to have an edge via comps/promotions, and the casino realizes that they are going to lose money on such a player on average.

However, as the edge is typically small and the expected gains minimal, most casinos tend to let this slide, and file it under "cost of doing business", rather than bar the player. (However, as you said, they can get no-mailed).

One of the more well known VP bans occurred to someone who wasn't even an AP. Richard "The Quiet Lion" Brodie, who was mostly a recreational VP and poker player, was among several players banned by Caesars in 2007 for simply playing high stakes VP and getting lucky.

Richard, who was Microsoft employee #55 and was credited as the creator of Microsoft Word, had a lot of money, and enjoyed playing high stakes VP at Caesars. He hit four very large royals in 2007. While the casino admitted that this was simply a function of luck, he was among several banned for playing too close to 0 EV -- basically the casino felt they couldn't make a reliable profit off players like him, so several such players were sent letters notifying them of being 86ed in May 2007.

Richard was particularly upset about this because he could no longer play at the World Series of Poker. He made enough noise in the poker community to cause several players to rally to his defense, and Caesars backed down, ultimately agreeing to let him play the WSOP provided he stayed away from video poker.

Richard requested they put in a 3-coin $100 machine. They granted his wish. Then he requested they put Deuces Wild on the machine. He didn't say "put full pay deuces wild on the machine." But that's what they did. The slot techs put the 100.76% version up. He hit his last two royals on that game. That's when the shit hit the fan for him.

[mickeycrimm]

So the 8/5's may have been only marginally profitable at best for the casino. That was an era of very limited public information about video poker. Did the AP/hustler community generally have accurate playing strategies?

Winpoker didn't have a strategy generating component. All you could do was practice the with it. But Tom Ski's Strategy Master did create strategies and that's the one we used. So yes, we played with accurate strategies. Besides, I can write video poker strategy with just a calculator and scratch paper.

Then Frugal Video Poker, developed by Jim Wolf, came out and it has a strategy generating component. Bob Dancer eventually parted ways with Dean Zamzow because Zamzow wouldn't create a strategy generating component for Winpoker. Jim Wolf developed a newer version of FVP and called it Wolf Video Poker. My opinion is it's the best software out there today.

If you don't have any video poker software you can go to wolfvideopoker.com and download Frugal Video Poker for free. Wolf let's you have it for free in the hopes you will upgrade to WVP.

[bocce ball]

However, as the edge is typically small and the expected gains minimal, most casinos tend to let this slide, and file it under "cost of doing business", rather than bar the player. (However, as you said, they can get no-mailed).

Barring a vp player is usually excessive because of the incremental restrictions available, and I doubt most casinos have the expertise to pinpoint players that pose a threat. Blackjack APs are identifiable because they vary their bets with the count. But there's no equivalent in vp. The highest vp skill level is basic strategy.

Are casinos known to use surveillance for evaluation of vp players?

[bocce ball]

Winpoker didn't have a strategy generating component. All you could do was practice the with it. But Tom Ski's Strategy Master did create strategies and that's the one we used. So yes, we played with accurate strategies. Besides, I can write video poker strategy with just a calculator and scratch paper.

I have some old software on my computer. My VP Strategy Master version 2 is dated 1999. Not sure when the original was released, but it probably couldn't have been much before 1998.

Winpoker is definitely older. Winpoker could calculate the optimal return of most vp games, although on the old computers, the calculation probably needed a few minutes to run.

[Rob.Singer]

Winpoker didn't have a strategy generating component. All you could do was practice the with it. But Tom Ski's Strategy Master did create strategies and that's the one we used. So yes, we played with accurate strategies. Besides, I can write video poker strategy with just a calculator and scratch paper.

Then Frugal Video Poker, developed by Jim Wolf, came out and it has a strategy generating component. Bob Dancer eventually parted ways with Dean Zamzow because Zamzow wouldn't create a strategy generating component for Winpoker. Jim Wolf developed a newer version of FVP and called it Wolf Video Poker. My opinion is it's the best software out there today.

If you don't have any video poker software you can go to wolfvideopoker.com and download Frugal Video Poker for free. Wolf let's you have it for free in the hopes you will upgrade to WVP.

Once again mickey proves how to get caught in the "pretend it to be real" game.

Dancer & Dean Zamzow did not part ways because of some programming "disagreement". Dancer did what any losing public vp figure would do--he DEMANDED more money from the partnership, so Zamzow did the smart thing and told him to go to hell.

Dean lived nearby us in Fountain Hills, Az. at the time and we discussed this several times. Turns out he would have had to dump Dancer anyway, as his wife had a horrible car accident in Phx. and they decided to move to Texas to be with relatives who could care for her, and he was no longer in any mood to put up with Dancer's self-centered, greedy antics....brought on by you guessed it--his massive addiction to video poker and its associated array of resulting problems.

[mickeycrimm]

So the 8/5's may have been only marginally profitable at best for the casino.

In order to end the controversy of AP's sitting there waiting for the ploppies to trigger flush attack mode, the Pioneer in Laughlin unlinked their Flush Attack's in late 1999. This proposed a new opportunity for AP's. They were 8/5 Flush Attacks with a return of 101.8% with optimal strategy. The Pioneer had a promotion everyday, usually a card of the day or double cashback.

The action on the bank was a mixture of ploppies and AP's. The ploppies didn't give proper weight to flush cards. The AP's did. With Flush 50 strategy three-card flushes play over all the two-card royals....and the four-flush plays over the three-card royal.

Flush Attacks had a history of breaking down. Mechanics were continually working on them. When they did they would go through the screens that only mechanics were privy too. But a bystander could see those screens when the mechanics brought them up. One of those screens was the coin-in/coin out screen that showed the actual payback of the game....expressed in percent.

Every machine on the back, except one, showed an actual payback between 100% and 101%. The one exception showed a payback of 99.9%. Since the action on the bank was a mixture of ploppie and AP action I figure this was about right.

Surprisingly, the Pioneer left this game in for over two years. But in May of 2002 they cut the game to 8/6/20. The regular flush payed 6 for 1, the bonus flush payed 20 for 1. This brought the game down to 100.9% with optimal strategy. This pretty much ended AP action on the bank as there were other better games around to play. It even caused sweeping them to not be worth much.

[mickeycrimm]

Once again mickey proves how to get caught in the "pretend it to be real" game.

Dancer & Dean Zamzow did not part ways because of some programming "disagreement". Dancer did what any losing public vp figure would do--he DEMANDED more money from the partnership, so Zamzow did the smart thing and told him to go to hell.

Dean lived nearby us in Fountain Hills, Az. at the time and we discussed this several times. Turns out he would have had to dump Dancer anyway, as his wife had a horrible car accident in Phx. and they decided to move to Texas to be with relatives who could care for her, and he was no longer in any mood to put up with Dancer's self-centered, greedy antics....brought on by you guessed it--his massive addiction to video poker and its associated array of resulting problems.

Rob, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that without a strategy generating component Winpoker would not be able to compete with the newer software that had strategy generating components.

[mickeycrimm]

Rob, Bob Dancer is willing to accept this challenge from any casino. I've already discussed it with him on vpFREE.

They give him $25 denom 9/6 Jacks with 1% cashback.
He will place his bankroll in the cage and play with vouchers everyday.
All money, including cashback to be placed back at the cage when each day's session has ended.
The challenge will last for 1,000,000 hands.
A surveillance camera will be placed on him while he is playing.

Rob, with your connections in the casino industry I'm sure you can arrange such a challenge. You can finally prove Dancer a fraud.

[redietz]

Of course Dancer would take this. Anyone should take this.

Is Rob's stance really that Dancer wouldn't win with these parameters? Of course he would.

[mickeycrimm]

Is Rob's stance really that Dancer wouldn't win with these parameters?.

Yes, it's Rob's position that no one can beat 9/6 Jacks with 1% cashback.

[mickeycrimm]

I don't know why casinos allow Bob to play at their properties. My opinion is because casinos like South Point -- he has classes (which generally brings in unskilled players who think they have an edge), has a relationship with the owner, advertises for them, and overall has very little +EV when playing there.

Casinos like Silverton and others, he's getting very small advantages, typically less than 0.5%. With such a small advantage and with such high variance, it's difficult for a casino to determine whether a player is actually playing with an advantage or a disadvantage.

Plus, Bob is usually not playing on actual good high advantage plays. He's playing shit with less than a 1% edge.

In his column, Dancer once wrote about playing 9/6 Jacks at the Golden Nugget where the cashback made it a 100.2% play. Thats as thin as it gets. He said they backed him off when he got into a good run.

[Alan Mendelson]

The challenge will last for 1,000,000 hands.

At 800 hands per hour, that's 1,250 hours or a little more than 52 days of non-stop play.

If someone were to play for 8 hours a day, it would now become a project that would take more than 150 days to complete.

I am not including "pauses" for royals, quads, straight flushes, which would lock up a $25 JOB game, nor am I including breaks for the restroom, water, food, stretching legs, or being distracted by skirts.

This was a real challenge?

[coach belly]

At 800 hands per hour, that's 1,250 hours or a little more than 52 days of non-stop play.

If someone were to play for 8 hours a day, it would now become a project that would take more than 150 days to complete.

I am not including "pauses" for royals, quads, straight flushes, which would lock up a $25 JOB game, nor am I including breaks for the restroom, water, food, stretching legs, or being distracted by skirts.

This was a real challenge?

Another phony challenge...so impractical that it will never be accepted.

Then the AP will proclaim that, since nobody accepts my challenge, then I've proved my claim.

A $10,000 bet on whether I can crank out 1000 HPH on a Montana machine.

Alan, you and I should play video poker next to each other eight hours a day for 30 days. We'll play the single line quarter games. We each play 6000 hands per day. We will start with $10,000 bankrolls each.

I would have no problem laying someone 100 to 1 that they won't be ahead on a 98% game after 1 million hands.

Hey mickey...I'm accepting your 100 to 1 bet. I'll send Alan my $10,000 to hold, you send him your million dollars, and then you can come watch me play a million hands on my favorite bar top machine...it's probably even worse than 98%.

It's no problem, so let me know when you are coming East. If you don't come through, then that proves that I would have been ahead after a million hands...right?

[mickeycrimm]

Another phony challenge...so impractical that it will never be accepted. Then the AP will proclaim that, since nobody accepts my challenge, then I've proved my claim.
Hey mickey...I'm accepting your 100 to 1 bet. I'll send Alan my $10,000 to hold, you send him your million dollars, and then you can come watch me play a million hands on my favorite bar top machine...it's probably even worse than 98%.

It's no problem, so let me know when you are coming East. If you don't come through, then that proves that I would have been ahead after a million hands...right?

I don't have one million dollars, coach. Sorry. Oh, and you don't get to make the rules on any bet with me . I make the rules. Take it or leave it. Sorry .

[mickeycrimm]

This was a real challenge?

Alan, a few years ago I posed this question to Dancer on vpFREE . If offered would he deposit $500,000 with a casino and play 9/6 Jacks with 1% cashback until he either lost the $500,000 or won $500,000 from the casino. He unhesitatingly said yes. I guaranatee you he will accept the million hand challenge too. But coach is right, the offer is unrealistic. But not for the reason he thinks. You have to give casino execs a little credit. They are not stupid enough to accept such a challenge.

[regnis]

For those of us deficient in math, what is Dancer's expected return on the million hand challenge? And what is the expected number of hands to be up or down $500,000. I assume the latter is astronomical.

[coach belly]

You have to give casino execs a little credit.

Why don't they let Richard Brodie keep playing? Let him play a -EV game.

The more he plays, the more likely he is to lose...right?

He may be ahead now, but in the long run he will lose...right?