Some of the thoughts in these posts deserve a response. First of all, the Bob Dancer consulting firm is in business to make money and has the right to offer their services to any business or individual that pays their fees. Secondly, it is possible to have pay tables that are good for both the casino and the player. The best example of this as Bob Dancer has often said is double bonus poker. The edge for the player with perfect play is slight and therefore since most players, even with teaching an dpractice, never achieve that level it is a money maker for the casinos as well. The problem occurs when a casino has a promotion that is poorly thought out, especially from a mathematical viewpoint. Giving something away to get business is one thing, allowing players to shovel out the cash (Fiesta 4K promotion a few years back) is another thing). Bob Dancer gave a class a few years ago about advantage play and the figure 1.5% came up. If the machine, comps, promos, and slot
cash go over 1.5% the promotion becomes so attractive that the professionals will wipe it out and its intent to bring in business is lost. You have to achieve a balance. I have no love for the casinos and many of their practices of trickery (odds as for instead of to, a tight machine next to a lose machine in regular slots, gimmicky pay tables, fine print in promos and other advertising to excess, allowing smoking to please a minority at the expense of the health of the majority) but honesty belongs on both sides. Bob Dancer admits he and especially his wife were lucky and 2 large royals in a small time totaling 500K would eb called good fortune by anyone. The Bob Dancers of the world have done a lot to increase the knowledge, and th epopularity of video poker which is good for both the players and the casinos. The person getting 95% return on his play, getting disgusted and leaving, is now getting 98% and lasts longer making him and the casino happier. Too many casino
promos were seat of th epants, either giving nearly nothing to the players and not working, or too much with a disasterous result. Thus a consulting firm specializing in this is a good thing. The casinos are profit making entities, they are not player charities. of course, we, as consumers can choose the best that there is to offer. But as long as they offer an honest game in a decent environment ( there is a problem here as the environment is often hazardous due their allowing smoking) with the pay offs clearly spelled out, it is our choice to play or not to play (unfortunately the employees don't have this choice to endure the bad atmosphere as work is often what you can get)as we see fit. I find places that have good machines with decent pay tables where the comp value of rooms, meals, and slot cash neutralizes the small house edge and more. To close here is a simple example. the Golden Nugget downtown has poor video poker by most standards but they have a few BP with
its standard 99.2% return plus slot cash. Allowing for not knowing penalty card situations in BP and some errors assume you play at 99% with about .2% slot cash. The offers you get for discounted rooms, coupon books, etc easily put you over 100%. Of course you can't be a pro and play there (not including the high limit stuff out of my range as don't know the perks those players get) and make a profit at quarter and dollar levels but have the equivalent of free vacations -yes-that you can do. Let us not judge someone for increasing his consulting business by offerring services to casinos, after all, how many of you privately have sought his services? He is open about it and I see no conflict here. If Bob offers classes downtown or at Casinos I frequent ont he days I come to town I would be glad to attend them. Enjoy the classes and the benefits they provide, leave the complaining to the sorer losers. have I made my point?
henryitkin <henryitkin@cox.net> wrote: > Shortpaydan wrote:
The Danceman
himself will be teaching his classes there. This means 2 things, both
bad for us seasoned pros.
"Bob Dancer" <bdancer@...> wrote:
You are misrepresenting what I've done and what I'm responsible for.
I wish to comment on the posting of Shortpaydan and the expected
response from Bob Dancer. I have played many hours next to Bob
Dancer, have talked with him about many topics, and consider him to
be a friend, at least a casual friend in that we know each other on
sight and it has been that way for well over ten years. I know a
reasonable amount about him and feel my response is educated in that
area.
Shortpaydan call Bob Dancer "The Danceman" which surely tells you
where he stands but not whether he is right or wrong. My opinion,
which I believe to be knowledgeable is in three pieces. Firstly,
about the decline in playable video poker machines in all
denominations. This is due to two reasons. First is that casinos
want higher profits, and even today, most video players are not all
that well educated and will play any convenient machine. Lowering
pay tables irritates the more knowledgeable players, but makes
little or no difference to the majority of players. Thus more
profits to casinos. The second reason is that I believe casino
executives take it personally when certain people, or groups of
people, can take assets out of a casino when combining payback of
the machine, slot club benefits, and comps provided to gamblers in
general. It's quite personal in that reductions of pay tables are
not the only response. Other more severe responses are directed
directly at the more skilled players. Whether you consider
these "take it personally" responses reasonable depends on your
point of view. Would you like somebody coming into your
establishment, gambling or otherwise, knowing full well, that in the
long run, he is a losing customer for you? I don't know. Probably
depends on whether you might consider it a loss leader or just good
business sense. You can't blame Bob Dancer for the general decline
in video poker pay tables any more than you could blame some of the
well educated writers on Blackjack which has seen extreme responses
from all casinos. The hayday of Blackjack may be over and this
might be analagous to video poker.
Secondly, about his teaching classes. Bob Dancer's response must be
considered to be directly on point. The pay tables are better when
he is teaching there than they were before he taught, and after he
left teaching at that particular casino. Bob Dancer educates people
on how to play video poker, which without question, brings more
players into that casino. And some, if not most of those people,
will never be really skilled video poker players. Also this
publicizes video poker, and this isn't bad. Look what it's done for
regular poker. All these new poker players and nobody can say
that's been bad for the experienced poker players or poker in
general. I think the net effect of Bob Dancer's teaching of classes
is positive for everybody in video poker.
There is thirdly, one more subject. That is consultation with
casinos on video poker, the kinds of machines and payoffs to allow,
and other marketing matters concerning video poker. I am not privy
to what Bob Dancer is consulting now or what he consulted in the
past. I know he did some consulting, at least in the past. This
can't be good for video poker players at any skill level and
especially the more skilled players. I wish he wouldn't consult at
all. If there is any complaint against the man, it would be only in
this area, at least in my opinion.
So if you want to rail against the guy, do it in the area in which
he might have some culpability, not in areas in which he has helped
people and, in a positive manner, helped to publicize our beloved
game.
"henryitkin" henryitkin@cox.net
···
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]