Question for APs

[Bill Yung]

What you really need is some high-priced psycho-babble to get Singer (and gambling) out of your head. Chip in with the other AP's, and, maybe, start with Shackleford, and, have that guy pass it along one AP at a time.

[MaxPen]

Don't worry Mick, Alan has found someone to support his habit again. The next Ex Wife will sadly end up broke with only empty dreams of the $100,000 Royal's Alan told her just a few hands away.

Hopefully his son cares enough to warn her. We know Robbo sure won't. He probably thinks she deserves it.

Yeah, I think he was trying to hit up on 2 old ladies that looked like they might have some pension money at Red Rock yesterday. He looked like a dufus with his black shirt and silver horizontal stripes. Only included the shirt description so Alan would know I actually saw him. The shirt had nothing to do with him looking like a dufus. He had that look of a gambler ready to go on a bender and coming off of one at the same time. ;-)

[kewlJ]

Careful MaxPen. Alan is liable to call the FBI on you as he claims he did with me. I think he has them on speed dial.

[The Boz]

All Alan has to do is pull that Hebrew Hammer out of his pants and the old ladies throw their pension checks his way. And like magic, he makes the money disappear and then he does. Left only with the memories of a cheap buffet and bad VP Strategy.

[Bill Yung]

Get up, eat, shit, go to the casino; eat and shit some more, come home, and, then go to bed (to dream of Alan and Singer). A short long life.

[MisterV]

Get up, eat, shit, go to the casino; eat and shit some more, come home, and, then go to bed (to dream of Alan and Singer). A short long life.

An existential quandary: all this time and how to fill it, when nothing really matters?

Default to "casino."

[Moses]

Get up, eat, shit, go to the casino; eat and shit some more, come home, and, then go to bed (to dream of Alan and Singer). A short long life.

Im curious. What is it you're doing that is setting the world on fire? I mean besides sitting on your throne in judgement of others.

[Mission146]

I remember the first time this term started being used.
I never considered myself an advantage player.
APs or myself are Scamblers.
APs will tell you they are only playing legal advantages and they have the right to do so and that it is an honest trade.
It is a farce. The Casino is doing everything it can to get an edge in every way.
Advantage Players are doing the same thing. Gaining an edge anyway possible and I mean anyway possible.
I know I do it all the time.
I still find machines with over 100 dollars of credits on them many times and I cash them out.
I also cash out the 74 cent ones as well.

Read this article and laugh about how they think Credit Hustlers are different compared to Vultures.
They are not. Same thing with a different method.
They also think that a Creator is different from a Vulture.
No difference in reality but they have to tell themselves this so they can live with what they do and feel they are right and someone else is wrong.

This reminds me of The Professional.
No Women. No Children.
These are the only rules.
However, when you are a Hit Man, can you really justify rules?

https://wizardofvegas.com/articles/t...ures-are-dead/

What difference does the terminology make? I’m using a term that has come to have a generally accepted meaning in gambling circles in a writing piece. I could say, “Scambler,” but then nobody would have any idea what I was talking about.

As to your other points:

1.) I don’t know where I called AP a, “Trade.” It’s not pipe-fitting. It’s not being an electrician. They don’t have any AP Trade schools with recognized certificate that are a barrier to job entry and certified instructors that I’m aware of.

2.) I’m not saying I’ve never taken a slot ticket in my life. I’m saying that I don’t go around doing it and I’m not going to go around cashing out credits when I know who they belong to, especially not in a jurisdiction in which it is, in fact, illegal.

The thing that I wonder about you is why it’s so difficult to think that another person might have compunctions that you don’t have. I must have missed the part where I claimed to be a saint, but I will admit there are presently things that I won’t do. Were I in a desperate situation, that might change.

3.) In the article, I said that there’s crossover between credit hustlers and vultures. I even went as far as to say I was referring to credit hustlers who do that pretty exclusively.

4.) I don’t need to be able to, “Live with what I do,” because I don’t think there’s anything wrong with what I do. Creators encourage people to gamble badly so they can financially benefit. I don’t attempt to steer anyone in the casino to gamble one way or another.

Again, it’s fine if you don’t think there is a difference between a creator and a vulture. That doesn’t mean that nobody else is allowed to believe there is a difference.

[mickeycrimm]

Moses, do you play in this game?

[mickeycrimm]

Thank you for reporting your $29,000 loss. I think you're the first AP ever on this forum to report a loss. Everybody else just wins, wins, wins.

I have losing sessions but my winning sessions out run the losers. This is how I started out the new month. The stats are through my last session last night.

1. -603
2. -110
3. +30
4. +476
5. +696
6. +386
7. +104
8. +234

So far a net of $1213 for the month. But look at those first two sessions, Alan. I lost over $700. The sky is falling. The sky is falling. I should have given up gambling for good, right? Just can't win.

So there you have it. I have losing sessions too. I work big edges but I still get my butt kicked here and there. Just because you have a big edge doesn't mean you win every session. But on a monthly basis my losing sessions never outrun my winning sessions.

[tableplay]

The only problem I have with Bill is that when he actually tries to say something concrete, it's clear he doesn't know much regarding whatever he's talking about. So it's all just factless jibber jabber, not that there's anything wrong with that. The issue is that he doesn't provide an asterisk at the bottom stating, "This is all just factless jibber jabber."


No law against spouting about things you know nothing about.

His cosmology and physics ramblings are particularly non-informative and revealing about his knowledge on these subjects.

[Bill Yung]

Hey, there, TP. Always nice to hear from you, too.

Did you have another losing day at the slots? Or, still, perhaps, it's that pressing overbearing "intellectual" issue with having spent too much time in the classroom when nothing came of it but more gambling charts, emotional and social issues, and idiotic conspiracy theories (and a vote for Donald Trump).

Canned answers are a dime a dozen. Remember what they first called Einstein's work? No, I'm not comparing myself to Einstein. I think that, in the end, he made too many mistakes, or, well, more accurately, his work wasn't crazy or new enough. He failed to see also himself, and then also his work, as just another part of the universe. He made too much of it.

[Bill Yung]

Get up, eat, shit, go to the casino; eat and shit some more, come home, and, then go to bed (to dream of Alan and Singer). A short long life.

Im curious. What is it you're doing that is setting the world on fire? I mean besides sitting on your throne in judgement of others.

It's telling that you think it's about "setting the world on fire". The best way to find oneself isn't to stand too far back or ahead in the crowd.

It's funny too, how you and Redietz see me as definitely "judging" every little thing to the extreme, some things to do with the actual math of gambling, but it's an entirely different thing when the "resident" AP's mercilessly, albeit idiotically, go after Alan's ethnicity, core values, and right to gamble as he chooses.

As far as yours and Redietz's vague attempt to say we are all the same insofar as we all gamble in one way or another, or all that other malarky about our meaningless existence, well, perhaps, the people who don't gamble are really just a balanced mixed of all the types that do.

[Moses]

Moses, do you play in this game?

No Mick. But most places around here require a players card in order to play. I couldn't quite make out the 21+3. But there is a game where if your 1st card is a 10 you can bet up to an additional 5 times of your original bet. However, there is a pause and one must decide before the dealer reveals their first card. House takes 20% off the top. I've never figure out if it's a worthwhile endeavor or not. But man, you talk about variance...KJ would LOVE it. lol

[kewlJ]

Question Mickey?

Does that casino with the "photo ID required Double deck" have other blackjack games, like 6 decks where they don't require Photo ID?

And people wonder why I often state that double deck blackjack is very often a "counter trap". This particular game looks like it is double deck dealt from a shoe, meaning cards are face up (no player touching). This is unusual for double deck (El Cortez style). When places are doing this is it usually because they want surveillance above to be able to clearly see all the cards to know if players are moving money with the count. Counter trap!

[coach belly]

I have losing sessions but my winning sessions out run the losers.

the strategy was specifically designed for losing sessions, large or not, to be obliterated by the larger and sometimes much larger winning sessions.

[Moses]

Get up, eat, shit, go to the casino; eat and shit some more, come home, and, then go to bed (to dream of Alan and Singer). A short long life.

Im curious. What is it you're doing that is setting the world on fire? I mean besides sitting on your throne in judgement of others.

It's telling that you think it's about "setting the world on fire". The best way to find oneself isn't to stand too far back or ahead in the crowd.

It's funny too, how you and Redietz see me as definitely "judging" every little thing to the extreme, some things to do with the actual math of gambling, but it's an entirely different thing when the "resident" AP's mercilessly, albeit idiotically, go after Alan's ethnicity, core values, and right to gamble as he chooses.

As far as yours and Redietz's vague attempt to say we are all the same insofar as we all gamble in one way or another, or all that other malarky about our meaningless existence, well, perhaps, the people who don't gamble are really just a balanced mixed of all the types that do.

I just remember going to my in-laws years ago. They were sitting in their recliners talking shit on everyone and then wondering why no one ever came to see them. You seem to have ALL the answers. Thought maybe you'd clue me in. I guess your life is REALLY exciting. NO?

[kewlJ]

I couldn't quite make out the 21+3.

The 21+3 side bet is a poker type variant side bet with a significant house edge (as most side bets are). I suppose there are extreme "specialty counts" that can identify the rare times a player might have an advantage, but that is far above my level. That is Grosjean type stuff. For me the only interest I have in such a side bet is if other players at the tale are playing it, I might want to avoid that game, because side bets in general slow the game to a crawl, greatly reducing your hourly win rate.

[Bill Yung]

Get up, eat, shit, go to the casino; eat and shit some more, come home, and, then go to bed (to dream of Alan and Singer). A short long life.

An existential quandary: all this time and how to fill it, when nothing really matters?

Default to "casino."

I guess that it's about staying relevant, not peaking too early/late in life, and finding a way to do what you truly enjoy life, even though that too is at best a struggle.

More to the point, it's only the universe that is truly optimized, however you want to define optimized. Another way to phrase one's optimal strategy is to say that it doesn't matter what one's opponent(s) does before or after one. Only at that point - not really a type or form of indifference - only then it doesn't matter to one.

But we only pretend to know and practice optimal strategy. There is a fundamental difference between us and the universe we inhabit. The latter has only itself to play.

Our mortal "optimal strategies" are much less confining, or, on the other hand, much less empowering. The human condition. The universe is life-centered rather than of the anthropic principle per se.

[Moses]

As far as yours and Redietz's vague attempt to say we are all the same insofar as we all gamble in one way or another, or all that other malarky about our meaningless existence, well, perhaps, the people who don't gamble are really just a balanced mixed of all the types that do.

Ironic, many of the people that sit in judgement of my life because I play some blackjack and bet a few games are the same damn ones who call me for money when they need a loan which is really a gift. Hmmm. Guess they weren't gambling. There is a different between gambling and knowing how to handle money.