Bob Dancer's LV Advisor Column - 9 JUL 2013
"Card Pulling at the Revel"
http://www.lasvegasadvisor.com/bob_dancer/2013/0709.cfm
*************************************************
This link is posted for informational purposes
and doesn't constitute an endorsement or approval
of the linked article's content by vpFREE. Any
discussion of the article must be done in
accordance with vpFREE's rules and policies.
*************************************************
Dancer writes in his column: "Whether you like it or not, the casino is
hyper-paranoid about players trying to cheat on their rebate offer. If you
give them no reason to suspect you are "cheating" (as defined by them),
you'll be fine."
And here we have an excellent example of why to treat anything Dancer says
with a huge grain of salt. He has no evidence to back this assertion.
Assuring players that they'll be fine as they consider risking $100k,
without solid reason to believe that assurance is valid, is highly
irresponsible.
I personally believe that the complaints on WoV, by posters claiming to be
innocent players, pass the sniff test. I don't believe the lack of more
widespread public comment proves anything, as my experience with lawyers is
that their first advice is always to shut up about the case.
It's not impossible that it's a well-constructed disinformation campaign,
but let's just say that I would cheerfully take vpplayer88's side of his
proposed bet.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
For those of you asking Bob Dancer to reveal who pays him, and why he writes what he does....
I think that is his own private business. He writes columns, he consults, he gambles, he earns a living some how. He writes his opinion. Believe him or not, your business. Whether someone is paying him to say stuff, who cares? That is irrelevant.
Make your own decisions whether to do a promotion or not. After all the hosts are paid by the casino and they sure do a LOT to get you to play there and participate in promos. Whether you do or not is up to you.
Stop asking Bob to "reveal" personal information. In my opinion it is just none of your business.
I doubt seriously many of the players here will come anywhere close to losing $100K anyway. Most have bankrolls, MUCH smaller than that and no promotion is good enough to risk everything. You have to live near Revel to take advantage of the rebate offer. Us west coast players... not worth while flying there nce a week to pck up the free play rebate.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, fivespot <fivespot55@...> wrote:
Dancer writes in his column: "Whether you like it or not, the casino is
hyper-paranoid about players trying to cheat on their rebate offer. If you
give them no reason to suspect you are "cheating" (as defined by them),
you'll be fine."And here we have an excellent example of why to treat anything Dancer says
with a huge grain of salt. He has no evidence to back this assertion.
Assuring players that they'll be fine as they consider risking $100k,
without solid reason to believe that assurance is valid, is highly
irresponsible.I personally believe that the complaints on WoV, by posters claiming to be
innocent players, pass the sniff test. I don't believe the lack of more
widespread public comment proves anything, as my experience with lawyers is
that their first advice is always to shut up about the case.It's not impossible that it's a well-constructed disinformation campaign,
but let's just say that I would cheerfully take vpplayer88's side of his
proposed bet.[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
In that case, he should stop trying to present himself as an advocate for players. And the alternative is . . . . presenting himself as a ??? for the casinos.
On 7/12/2013 10:54 AM, the7thwarrior wrote:
For those of you asking Bob Dancer to reveal who pays him, and why he writes what he does....
I think that is his own private business. He writes columns, he consults, he gambles, he earns a living some how. He writes his opinion. Believe him or not, your business. Whether someone is paying him to say stuff, who cares? That is irrelevant.Make your own decisions whether to do a promotion or not. After all the hosts are paid by the casino and they sure do a LOT to get you to play there and participate in promos. Whether you do or not is up to you.
Stop asking Bob to "reveal" personal information. In my opinion it is just none of your business.
MHS wrote:
In that case, he should stop trying to present himself as an advocate
for players. And the alternative is . . . . presenting himself as a
??? for the casinos.
I produce and sell information to players, casinos, manufacturers, and governmental agencies. I have never presented myself as an advocate for players. I do believe that players who take my classes and read the materials I produce will have better gambling results than players who don't. If you believe otherwise, don't read my stuff.
Some players have an "us against the casinos" view of the world and find it easier to understand if I'm always on one side or the other. That's not the way I operate. My view is that players and casinos both have to survive for this to work. If casinos take all the money from players, then casinos will go broke because there is nobody to support them. Likewise, if casinos lose too much money to players (as a whole), the casinos go broke and then the players will have nobody to win from.
There's a happy medium. Casinos can survive while offering decent games --- that the best players can exploit. I do what I can to support this "view of the world." If somebody else doesn't like it, so be it.
Would it bother you if a doctor or dentist had both players and casino executives for patients? Or a grocer sold food to both groups? I don't see it as a lot different than that to sell information to both groups.
Bob
__._,_.__I_
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I agree Well said
I produce and sell information to players, casinos, manufacturers, and governmental agencies. I have never presented myself as an advocate for players. I do believe that players who take my classes and read the materials I produce will have better gambling results than players who don't. If you believe otherwise, don't read my stuff.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
i am a retired political reporter for a daily newspaper. i agree completely with bob ... don't read his stuff ... when i'd catch grief about my stories i would tell them the same time
________________________________
From: lhbarber <kona623@aol.com>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 1:09 PM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: : Bob Dancer's LV Advisor Column - 9 JUL 2013
I agree Well said
I produce and sell information to players, casinos, manufacturers, and governmental agencies. I have never presented myself as an advocate for players. I do believe that players who take my classes and read the materials I produce will have better gambling results than players who don't. If you believe otherwise, don't read my stuff.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I agree, you can sell information to both groups. That doesn't mean you can go on the radio telling people how great a promotion is while at the same time going to the casino and trying to tell them how to change the promotion. Your role on the radio show is similar to a journalist and this would be a career ending mistake for a journalist.
It should be clear to everyone that you have a dog in this fight. I would hope that players would similarly use their first amendment right to make it difficult for you to go out in public. I would hope that any person that sees you sells your true name and identity to the casino you are playing at. I would hope you are now banned from the blackjack ball as someone who tries to work for the casinos.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bob Dancer <bobdancervp@...> wrote:
MHS wrote:
In that case, he should stop trying to present himself as an advocate
for players. And the alternative is . . . . presenting himself as a
??? for the casinos.I produce and sell information to players, casinos, manufacturers, and governmental agencies. I have never presented myself as an advocate for players. I do believe that players who take my classes and read the materials I produce will have better gambling results than players who don't. If you believe otherwise, don't read my stuff.
Some players have an "us against the casinos" view of the world and find it easier to understand if I'm always on one side or the other. That's not the way I operate. My view is that players and casinos both have to survive for this to work. If casinos take all the money from players, then casinos will go broke because there is nobody to support them. Likewise, if casinos lose too much money to players (as a whole), the casinos go broke and then the players will have nobody to win from.
There's a happy medium. Casinos can survive while offering decent games --- that the best players can exploit. I do what I can to support this "view of the world." If somebody else doesn't like it, so be it.
Would it bother you if a doctor or dentist had both players and casino executives for patients? Or a grocer sold food to both groups? I don't see it as a lot different than that to sell information to both groups.
Bob__._,_.__I_
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Apples and grapefruits. A real analogy would be if the doctor is dealing in or prescribing medications, equipment, insurance or procedures in which he has strong financial interests.
On 7/12/2013 12:11 PM, Bob Dancer wrote:
Would it bother you if a doctor or dentist had both players and casino executives for patients? Or a grocer sold food to both groups? I don't see it as a lot different than that to sell information to both groups.
Bob
> Would it bother you if a doctor or dentist had both players and
casino executives for patients? Or a grocer sold food to both groups? I
don't see it as a lot different than that to sell information to both
groups.
> Bob
Apples and grapefruits. A real analogy would be if the doctor is
dealing
in or prescribing medications, equipment, insurance or procedures in
which he has strong financial interests.
Ok Please moderator, this is turning out to be another "bashing-on-Bob"
tread!
I personally do not have tolerance to lose $100 DOLLARS in any Casino.
Certanly would not travel across the US just to see what is going on. I
read most treads, but tired of this one. We are now getting way off
track. I see no benefit for me to continue listening to most of the
replies to the negatives. But then this is VPFree
Bob, continue to give your opinion no matter what THEY say!
Bob...
Your "view of the world" is bat-scheet-freaking-insane.
Here is why.
The casinos are basically managed by morons with a
private mint to print money.
Skilled players can't really harm them unless they
do something so moronic that they DESERVE to get
spanked just for being stupid.
You sound as if you think teaching the casinos will
create a balance. This is totally insane.
The idea that casinos would go broke from skilled
play is almost as insane. If they really, really
got hurt, they'd eventually plug the huge leaks, but
more than likely their general level of stupid
would still leave good plays to be played. Over
time, perhaps decades, they'd eventually learn to hire
some kid out of MIT to do what you do, but given the
resistance you faced to even get some of them to listen,
we can be pretty sure that would happen at a much
slower pace than it did with your input.
The only reason there are ANY good plays anywhere
is because the casinos are not only stupid, they are
too stupid to listen to what you are teaching them.
If they had listened to you all these years, they'd
all be like South Point or worse. Mostly worse.
The South Point is a really good example. It used to
be a nice little play. It was never huge, but it was
pretty decent. You came in and not much later the
mail dried up and there were no more 3x days. And
at NO POINT was the South Point in trouble. They were
surviving and thriving all that time. If they had
any problems, it was due to the economy, not skilled
players. And, in fact, that casino did pretty well
even during the bad days of 2008-2009. Once they
understood the situation, there was no "balance". They
just decimated the place and left a few crumbs.
This "happy medium" you refer to is simply not realistic.
Do you really think that casinos would truly learn the
situation AND continue to allow folks to make serious
money or even decent money? That is not how any
business works. Each and every business will take any
edge it can get and will happily remove ALL good plays
if it boosts their bottom line.
This is why Obamacare is GUARANTEED to
cause a massive shift to part time labor and so on.
Even companies that could afford to keep the same
number of full time workers will switch so their
profits will be even higher. This is why your
idea of a happy balance is so wrong.
Under your "world view" there might be a few $10 an
hour plays out there for PR or whatever, but that's
about it. By the time I bailed on Vegas, it seemed
like I could make about $10-14 an hour all over town
but more than that was rare, and mostly as the result of
some information you had not managed to teach the
casinos. This is what you caused and worked to achieve.
And I am sure your own hunting grounds of higher limit
games are a lot less well stocked as well. In fact,
it probably hurt you MORE than most. A good promo with
your bankroll can be worth thousands or ten of thousands.
We will never know how many truly great plays you
could have crushed had you simply kept your mouth shut.
About all your tactics have done is the following....
Made the casinos more money
Made you short term gain (but probably not long term)
Destroyed VP in Vegas and many other places.
The sad thing is that I know you have benefited from
other VP players. Players who would never have helped
you at all if they had any clue you would sell information
to the casinos. I can concede that you owe nothing to
them, but it still takes a pretty cold heart to take
actions you know will hurt those who you worked with and
befriended.
But even if we set that aside, in the long run your
whole approach probably hurt your bottom line too.
One can never be certain, but it seems likely to me
that Vegas VP would still be a lot better for everyone,
including you, if you had stuck to teaching software
and such.
So please Bob...If you think its OK to behave as you have,
then maybe you can justify it and sleep at night, but please
don't for a nanosecond act like you are doing anyone a
favor with this "happy medium" nonsense. You are not
serving some meta-higher purpose. You are (maybe) lining
your pockets, pure and simple.
QZ
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bob Dancer <bobdancervp@...> wrote:
MHS wrote:
In that case, he should stop trying to present himself as an advocate
for players. And the alternative is . . . . presenting himself as a
??? for the casinos.I produce and sell information to players, casinos, manufacturers, and governmental agencies. I have never presented myself as an advocate for players. I do believe that players who take my classes and read the materials I produce will have better gambling results than players who don't. If you believe otherwise, don't read my stuff.
Some players have an "us against the casinos" view of the world and find it easier to understand if I'm always on one side or the other. That's not the way I operate. My view is that players and casinos both have to survive for this to work. If casinos take all the money from players, then casinos will go broke because there is nobody to support them. Likewise, if casinos lose too much money to players (as a whole), the casinos go broke and then the players will have nobody to win from.
There's a happy medium. Casinos can survive while offering decent games --- that the best players can exploit. I do what I can to support this "view of the world." If somebody else doesn't like it, so be it.
Would it bother you if a doctor or dentist had both players and casino executives for patients? Or a grocer sold food to both groups? I don't see it as a lot different than that to sell information to both groups.
Bob__._,_.__I_
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
You had me till you mentioned Obamacare, actually it is the Affordable Health Care Act. I thought this was not a political site.
________________________________
From: what7do7you7want <what7do7you7want@yahoo.com>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2013 3:13 AM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: : Bob Dancer's LV Advisor Column - 9 JUL 2013
Bob...
Your "view of the world" is bat-scheet-freaking-insane.
Here is why.
The casinos are basically managed by morons with a
private mint to print money.
Skilled players can't really harm them unless they
do something so moronic that they DESERVE to get
spanked just for being stupid.
You sound as if you think teaching the casinos will
create a balance. This is totally insane.
The idea that casinos would go broke from skilled
play is almost as insane. If they really, really
got hurt, they'd eventually plug the huge leaks, but
more than likely their general level of stupid
would still leave good plays to be played. Over
time, perhaps decades, they'd eventually learn to hire
some kid out of MIT to do what you do, but given the
resistance you faced to even get some of them to listen,
we can be pretty sure that would happen at a much
slower pace than it did with your input.
The only reason there are ANY good plays anywhere
is because the casinos are not only stupid, they are
too stupid to listen to what you are teaching them.
If they had listened to you all these years, they'd
all be like South Point or worse. Mostly worse.
The South Point is a really good example. It used to
be a nice little play. It was never huge, but it was
pretty decent. You came in and not much later the
mail dried up and there were no more 3x days. And
at NO POINT was the South Point in trouble. They were
surviving and thriving all that time. If they had
any problems, it was due to the economy, not skilled
players. And, in fact, that casino did pretty well
even during the bad days of 2008-2009. Once they
understood the situation, there was no "balance". They
just decimated the place and left a few crumbs.
This "happy medium" you refer to is simply not realistic.
Do you really think that casinos would truly learn the
situation AND continue to allow folks to make serious
money or even decent money? That is not how any
business works. Each and every business will take any
edge it can get and will happily remove ALL good plays
if it boosts their bottom line.
This is why Obamacare is GUARANTEED to
cause a massive shift to part time labor and so on.
Even companies that could afford to keep the same
number of full time workers will switch so their
profits will be even higher. This is why your
idea of a happy balance is so wrong.
Under your "world view" there might be a few $10 an
hour plays out there for PR or whatever, but that's
about it. By the time I bailed on Vegas, it seemed
like I could make about $10-14 an hour all over town
but more than that was rare, and mostly as the result of
some information you had not managed to teach the
casinos. This is what you caused and worked to achieve.
And I am sure your own hunting grounds of higher limit
games are a lot less well stocked as well. In fact,
it probably hurt you MORE than most. A good promo with
your bankroll can be worth thousands or ten of thousands.
We will never know how many truly great plays you
could have crushed had you simply kept your mouth shut.
About all your tactics have done is the following....
Made the casinos more money
Made you short term gain (but probably not long term)
Destroyed VP in Vegas and many other places.
The sad thing is that I know you have benefited from
other VP players. Players who would never have helped
you at all if they had any clue you would sell information
to the casinos. I can concede that you owe nothing to
them, but it still takes a pretty cold heart to take
actions you know will hurt those who you worked with and
befriended.
But even if we set that aside, in the long run your
whole approach probably hurt your bottom line too.
One can never be certain, but it seems likely to me
that Vegas VP would still be a lot better for everyone,
including you, if you had stuck to teaching software
and such.
So please Bob...If you think its OK to behave as you have,
then maybe you can justify it and sleep at night, but please
don't for a nanosecond act like you are doing anyone a
favor with this "happy medium" nonsense. You are not
serving some meta-higher purpose. You are (maybe) lining
your pockets, pure and simple.
QZ
--- In mailto:vpFREE%40yahoogroups.com, Bob Dancer <bobdancervp@...> wrote:
MHS wrote:
In that case, he should stop trying to present himself as an advocate
for players. And the alternative is . . . . presenting himself as a
??? for the casinos.I produce and sell information to players, casinos, manufacturers, and governmental agencies. I have never presented myself as an advocate for players. I do believe that players who take my classes and read the materials I produce will have better gambling results than players who don't. If you believe otherwise, don't read my stuff.
Some players have an "us against the casinos" view of the world and find it easier to understand if I'm always on one side or the other. That's not the way I operate. My view is that players and casinos both have to survive for this to work. If casinos take all the money from players, then casinos will go broke because there is nobody to support them. Likewise, if casinos lose too much money to players (as a whole), the casinos go broke and then the players will have nobody to win from.
There's a happy medium. Casinos can survive while offering decent games --- that the best players can exploit. I do what I can to support this "view of the world." If somebody else doesn't like it, so be it.
Would it bother you if a doctor or dentist had both players and casino executives for patients? Or a grocer sold food to both groups? I don't see it as a lot different than that to sell information to both groups.
Bob__._,_.__I_
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Obama himself recently said he liked it to be called "Obamacare",
and in fact does call it the same thing.
________________________________
From: J D <royalandme@yahoo.com>
To: "vpFREE@yahoogroups.com" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2013 8:17 AM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Re: : Bob Dancer's LV Advisor Column - 9 JUL 2013You had me till you mentioned Obamacare, actually it is the Affordable Health Care Act. I thought this was not a political site.
________________________________
From: what7do7you7want <what7do7you7want@yahoo.com>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2013 3:13 AM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: : Bob Dancer's LV Advisor Column - 9 JUL 2013Bob...
Your "view of the world" is bat-scheet-freaking-insane.
Here is why.
The casinos are basically managed by morons with a
private mint to print money.Skilled players can't really harm them unless they
do something so moronic that they DESERVE to get
spanked just for being stupid.You sound as if you think teaching the casinos will
create a balance. This is totally insane.The idea that casinos would go broke from skilled
play is almost as insane. If they really, really
got hurt, they'd eventually plug the huge leaks, but
more than likely their general level of stupid
would still leave good plays to be played. Over
time, perhaps decades, they'd eventually learn to hire
some kid out of MIT to do what you do, but given the
resistance you faced to even get some of them to listen,
we can be pretty sure that would happen at a much
slower pace than it did with your input.The only reason there are ANY good plays anywhere
is because the casinos are not only stupid, they are
too stupid to listen to what you are teaching them.
If they had listened to you all these years, they'd
all be like South Point or worse. Mostly worse.The South Point is a really good example. It used to
be a nice little play. It was never huge, but it was
pretty decent. You came in and not much later the
mail dried up and there were no more 3x days. And
at NO POINT was the South Point in trouble. They were
surviving and thriving all that time. If they had
any problems, it was due to the economy, not skilled
players. And, in fact, that casino did pretty well
even during the bad days of 2008-2009. Once they
understood the situation, there was no "balance". They
just decimated the place and left a few crumbs.This "happy medium" you refer to is simply not realistic.
Do you really think that casinos would truly learn the
situation AND continue to allow folks to make serious
money or even decent money? That is not how any
business works. Each and every business will take any
edge it can get and will happily remove ALL good plays
if it boosts their bottom line.
This is why Obamacare is GUARANTEED to
cause a massive shift to part time labor and so on.Even companies that could afford to keep the same
number of full time workers will switch so their
profits will be even higher. This is why your
idea of a happy balance is so wrong.Under your "world view" there might be a few $10 an
hour plays out there for PR or whatever, but that's
about it. By the time I bailed on Vegas, it seemed
like I could make about $10-14 an hour all over town
but more than that was rare, and mostly as the result of
some information you had not managed to teach the
casinos. This is what you caused and worked to achieve.
And I am sure your own hunting grounds of higher limit
games are a lot less well stocked as well. In fact,
it probably hurt you MORE than most. A good promo with
your bankroll can be worth thousands or ten of thousands.
We will never know how many truly great plays you
could have crushed had you simply kept your mouth shut.About all your tactics have done is the following....
Made the casinos more money
Made you short term gain (but probably not long term)
Destroyed VP in Vegas and many other places.The sad thing is that I know you have benefited from
other VP players. Players who would never have helped
you at all if they had any clue you would sell information
to the casinos. I can concede that you owe nothing to
them, but it still takes a pretty cold heart to take
actions you know will hurt those who you worked with and
befriended.But even if we set that aside, in the long run your
whole approach probably hurt your bottom line too.
One can never be certain, but it seems likely to me
that Vegas VP would still be a lot better for everyone,
including you, if you had stuck to teaching software
and such.So please Bob...If you think its OK to behave as you have,
then maybe you can justify it and sleep at night, but please
don't for a nanosecond act like you are doing anyone a
favor with this "happy medium" nonsense. You are not
serving some meta-higher purpose. You are (maybe) lining
your pockets, pure and simple.QZ
--- In mailto:vpFREE%40yahoogroups.com, Bob Dancer <bobdancervp@...> wrote:
MHS wrote:
In that case, he should stop trying to present himself as an advocate
for players. And the alternative is . . . . presenting himself as a
??? for the casinos.I produce and sell information to players, casinos, manufacturers, and governmental agencies. I have never presented myself as an advocate for players. I do believe that players who take my classes and read the materials I produce will have better gambling results than players who don't. If you believe otherwise, don't read my stuff.
Some players have an "us against the casinos" view of the world and find it easier to understand if I'm always on one side or the other. That's not the way I operate. My view is that players and casinos both have to survive for this to work. If casinos take all the money from players, then casinos will go broke because there is nobody to support them. Likewise, if casinos lose too much money to players (as a whole), the casinos go broke and then the players will have nobody to win from.
There's a happy medium. Casinos can survive while offering decent games --- that the best players can exploit. I do what I can to support this "view of the world." If somebody else doesn't like it, so be it.
Would it bother you if a doctor or dentist had both players and casino executives for patients? Or a grocer sold food to both groups? I don't see it as a lot different than that to sell information to both groups.
Bob__._,_.__I_
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Actually it is the affordable care act I believe
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 13, 2013, at 11:17 AM, J D <royalandme@yahoo.com> wrote:
You had me till you mentioned Obamacare, actually it is the Affordable Health Care Act. I thought this was not a political site.