vpFREE2 Forums

Ethics was Nominees for 2004 vpFREE HALL OF FAME inductee - REMINDER

#1

This will be my last post on this thread.

I regret that my original post was the locus of a mini-flame between two
fine contributors, you (Harry Porter) & Bill Velek.

One of the ways to attack criticism is to ask for specifics knowing (or
hoping) that the research won't be done. In this case, you win. I'm not going to
re-read Million Dollar Video Poker in order to cite chapter & verse where he
admits to practices that I consider unethical.

Consider, though, that every issue has at least two sides to it. There is
general agreement that Dancer has contributed something to VP. What,
specifically?

This is what comes to mind:

Strategy tables? Believe the original 4 were JB, DB, FPDW & JW. I used the
work of Frome & Paymar but did go to Dancer's original DB tables which were
excellent but very complicated. Did it add much to my play? Maybe 0.1 - 0.2% in
payback but hrs of diversion due to its complexity.

WinPoker. Written by Dean Zamzow. Tom Ski contributed speed improvements to
"Run Analysis". Bob Dancer has his name on it & therefore adds credibility to
the product. It was a fine product right from the start so I'm sure that
Dancer gave Zamzow lots of feedback about what would be useful from a player
perspective.

Many, many articles using a writing style starting with personal experience
(to relate to the reader) as an analogy for the topic at hand. So many
articles dealt with squeezing out the last fraction of a %. (All of these should be
collected & put in a book called "Beyond Optimum Play" -- sorry Dan!) I do
read the articles & enjoy the detail that he goes into. To be honest, most of
it is useful for the high-volume pro.

Analysis. In such exquisite detail, that many use it as the last word like
some zealots use the Bible. His early articles were excellent foundation
builders. BTW, in later articles, he acknowledges a lot of help came from Liam
Daily.

Classes. I've heard that he has an honest & forthright style. For his
efforts in this area, he is to be commended for educating the masses.

Consulting. Wish I knew what he & Compton are telling clients about
inventory & promos. If I did, I'd win the bet that it's not good for the player.

Is this enough to put him in the HOF? Maybe. It's important to be aware that
the contributions for which some want to give Dancer full credit weren't all
his. To his credit, it's an oversight which he corrects in Million Dollar
Video Poker.

[N.B. I don't know Bob Dancer so my opinions are based on his book & what
I've heard of him. Before you jump all over me, remember we all have an opinion
about Rob Singer, don't we?]

In a message dated 7/20/2004 10:08:32 AM Pacific Standard Time,
vpFREE@yahoogroups.com writes:

<<< Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:49:27 -0000
REMINDER

.....
The motivation behind that question was simply that vague accusations
are lobbed in Dancer's direction with a frequency and tone that
suggests he's to be blamed for all that is ill on the vp frontier.>>>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

···

From: "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Ethics was Nominees for 2004 vpFREE HALL OF FAME inductee -

#2

This will be my last post on this thread.

I regret that my original post was the locus of a mini-flame

between two

fine contributors, you (Harry Porter) & Bill Velek.

do not fret, Mr Velek seems to live for it, might have made him happy,
see his many past post's.

Mr Porter VP anaylis is always helpfull & well thought out. I learned
a lot reading them.

I torn between the wizard of odds & tomski as both have provided FREE
info to this site & i have used them a lot , so have others but these
2 seem to be the best .
M J Perry

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, TedChee@a... wrote:

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#3

mklpryy24 wrote:

> > This will be my last post on this thread.
> > I regret that my original post was the locus of a mini-flame
between two > fine contributors, you (Harry Porter) & Bill Velek.
>
do not fret, Mr Velek seems to live for it, might have made him happy,
see his many past post's.

Awww, come on. I like to _discuss_ things ... debate ... civilized arguments. Nothing wrong with that. But I don't particularly like fighting for the sake of fighting; let's get that straight. And incidentally, I was haven't been offended by anthing anyone has said here in a long time, and certainly wasn't disturbed by Harry even if I did misunderstand his 'tongue in cheek' comment. All is fine in VP land, and I love everyone. I also apologize to anyone I might have offended.

Cheers.

Bill Velek

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, TedChee@a... wrote:

#4

I am NOT positive that what I was told is absolutely true but I
understood that Dean Zamzow wrote the program, had difficulty in
selling it and therefore contacted Bob Dancer to entice him (for a
fee) to lend his name. Also told that he contributed absolutely
nothing relative to the software.
Similar situation with Frugal Video Poker and Jean Scott.

···

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 10:43:03 EDT, you wrote:

This will be my last post on this thread.

I regret that my original post was the locus of a mini-flame between two
fine contributors, you (Harry Porter) & Bill Velek.

One of the ways to attack criticism is to ask for specifics knowing (or
hoping) that the research won't be done. In this case, you win. I'm not going to
re-read Million Dollar Video Poker in order to cite chapter & verse where he
admits to practices that I consider unethical.

Consider, though, that every issue has at least two sides to it. There is
general agreement that Dancer has contributed something to VP. What,
specifically?

This is what comes to mind:

Strategy tables? Believe the original 4 were JB, DB, FPDW & JW. I used the
work of Frome & Paymar but did go to Dancer's original DB tables which were
excellent but very complicated. Did it add much to my play? Maybe 0.1 - 0.2% in
payback but hrs of diversion due to its complexity.

WinPoker. Written by Dean Zamzow. Tom Ski contributed speed improvements to
"Run Analysis". Bob Dancer has his name on it & therefore adds credibility to
the product. It was a fine product right from the start so I'm sure that
Dancer gave Zamzow lots of feedback about what would be useful from a player
perspective.

Many, many articles using a writing style starting with personal experience
(to relate to the reader) as an analogy for the topic at hand. So many
articles dealt with squeezing out the last fraction of a %. (All of these should be
collected & put in a book called "Beyond Optimum Play" -- sorry Dan!) I do
read the articles & enjoy the detail that he goes into. To be honest, most of
it is useful for the high-volume pro.

Analysis. In such exquisite detail, that many use it as the last word like
some zealots use the Bible. His early articles were excellent foundation
builders. BTW, in later articles, he acknowledges a lot of help came from Liam
Daily.

Classes. I've heard that he has an honest & forthright style. For his
efforts in this area, he is to be commended for educating the masses.

Consulting. Wish I knew what he & Compton are telling clients about
inventory & promos. If I did, I'd win the bet that it's not good for the player.

Is this enough to put him in the HOF? Maybe. It's important to be aware that
the contributions for which some want to give Dancer full credit weren't all
his. To his credit, it's an oversight which he corrects in Million Dollar
Video Poker.

[N.B. I don't know Bob Dancer so my opinions are based on his book & what
I've heard of him. Before you jump all over me, remember we all have an opinion
about Rob Singer, don't we?]

In a message dated 7/20/2004 10:08:32 AM Pacific Standard Time,
vpFREE@yahoogroups.com writes:

<<< Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:49:27 -0000
From: "Harry Porter" <harry.porter@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: Ethics was Nominees for 2004 vpFREE HALL OF FAME inductee -
REMINDER

.....
The motivation behind that question was simply that vague accusations
are lobbed in Dancer's direction with a frequency and tone that
suggests he's to be blamed for all that is ill on the vp frontier.>>>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm

Yahoo! Groups Links

#5

<<I am NOT positive that what I was told is absolutely true but I
understood that Dean Zamzow wrote the program, had difficulty in
selling it and therefore contacted Bob Dancer to entice him (for a
fee) to lend his name. Also told that he contributed absolutely
nothing relative to the software.
Similar situation with Frugal Video Poker and Jean Scott.>>

I did make some suggestions, i.e., the function of figuring cashback/comps %'s. And, of course, the 11-minute video included with the software featured Brad and me. But there has never been any question in anyone's mind that I didn't contribute anything technical or mathematically. And I am very careful to see that Jim's name is always given as the creator of this software although sometimes people mistakenly call it casually Jean Scott's software. I only gave him permission to use the term "frugal" because I felt it was something I could sincerely promote as being the best on the market. My name is not a part of the software title; my only function is to promote and market it.

···

________________________________________
Jean $¢ott - Go to http://www.FrugalGambler.biz
  for VP software and strategy cards and for the
  Frugal series of books.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#6

I happen to be reading BD's Million $ VP book and here's how he
describes his involvement with WinPoker. At the time Zamzow
approached him, he was using and recommending another program, I
believe it was VP Tutor. He looked over Zamzow's software and told
him it wasn't as good as VP Tutor. Zamzow probed and said, well, what
would it take to make it better? Over dinner one night Bob and
Shirley came up with a list of about 15 things that, in their
opinion, would make it the ideal software for its purpose and Dean
basically said "I can do that." So he made the changes and they began
their business arrangement.

It would be interesting to know exactly what the changes were, in
order to gage Dancer's exact contribution, but in general I buy the
idea that both he and Jean contributed a good deal to the
functionality of their respective programs.

Further, in both cases I think we have people who have worked hard
over many years to develop a following by making sound
recommendations on products to buy. Software vendors approach them
with co-marketing ideas and they basically respond by saying, I'll
only do this if the product truly is the best one on the market. They
give advice, and even if it covers only a small part of the code, it
is among the most valuable parts to the consumer. Even more
important, these arrangements frequently result in a software package
that is updated more frequently. All-in-all I think they are win-win
arrangements, and I thank both Jean and Bob for their involvement
with the respective programs.

Also, on Dancer's ethics, since I'm fresh reading I might remember
more of the details: the worst things he did were along the lines of
minor bribery, by tipping employees of casinos to act against their
employer's best interests. Most extreme, I guess, would be tipping
the cage people to cash multiple tickets that were intended to be one
per customer, and tipping change girls to issue multiple contest
entries on wins that were entitled to just one. Next worst after this
would be fraud-type things like trying to hide winning hands made
when a bonus was not in effect until the time when a bonus would be
in effect, leaving winning hands on the screen and collecting contest
entries twice for the same win. And then theft type things like
knowingly profiting from casino payout mistakes (sometimes leaving
the casino immediately after in case the mistake was discovered),
taking abandoned coins out of coin trays or credits left on machines.
Finally, there are the borderline acts such as discovering a
programming flaw in a machine (VP machine giving out cashback at a
slot machine rate) and playing as hard as he can until discovery,
finding nebulous coupon wording and arguing his way into being paid
for things the casino didn't contemplate, and putting on acts to fool
casino hosts into giving him comps, such as lying about lots of slot
play at another casino.

Now, does this mean he should be disqualified from the vpFree's Hall
Of Fame? In my opinion, absolutely not.

First of all, you have to respect his honesty in telling all these
things (although, of course, we don't know what else he might have
done that he didn't tell us about). We're using his own words to cite
his ethical misdeeds, while our own acts are known only to ourselves.
Now, it happens to be the case that I personally would not do some of
the things he did on grounds of ethics, but that is no reasonto take
a holier-than-thou attitude. If I laid out my life as honestly as he
apparently did his, he might find some things I have done that he
would never consider, and I think that's true of all of us (except,
of course, the 2 or 3 perfect individuals who are going to chime in
here about how they never do anything anyone could possibly consider
unethical).

Second, what he did has to be viewed in the context of competing
against casinos which IMHO are not paragons of ethics themselves. The
genreal ethics codes most people live by, I think, include exceptions
for "fighting fire with fire", and most of the "wrong" things he did
arguably fall in this category.

Third, what do we know about the ethics of the other candidates? Are
we only going to exclude book-writers on ethics grounds, or are we
going to conduct ethics inquiries into all the candidates?

Finally, I think "ethics" investigations and debates are such a scam
in the politcal world that we really should resist strongly letting
them invade other realms. It is a temptation because ethics are very
important - the problem is that is so difficult contemporaneously to
judge another person's ethics. Thos who come off best in such
investigations are the shadier type who know to hide the evidence of
their misdeeds as they go along. The honest man who thinks he has
nothing to hide is more likely to leave questions behind him, and
under the "where there's smoke there's fire" theory these are the men
most likely to look bad in an ethics investigation.

#7

blaw57 wrote:

I happen to be reading BD's Million $ VP book ...

snip

Also, on Dancer's ethics, since I'm fresh reading I might remember
more of the details: ...

snipped _quite_ a long list of acts which Bob is supposed to have admitted and which you characterize as "unethical", but which -- as a judge -- I can assure you are actually "crimes" in most jurisdictions (and quite probably _all_ jurisdictions).

Now, does this mean he should be disqualified from the vpFree's Hall
Of Fame? In my opinion, absolutely not.

I agree with you, but then again I'm still pissed off that Pete Rose was kept out of the Baseball Hall of Fame -- and for something that I think most of us would consider to be a whole lot less significant than what Bob has apparently admitted to doing. However, I guess baseball stars are supposed to be a role model for our youth, and I doubt anyone would argue the same thing for gamblers and members/nominees for the VP HoF.

snip

genreal <sic: general> ethics codes most people live by, I think,
include exceptions for "fighting fire with fire", and most of the
"wrong" things he did arguably fall in this category.

I have to strongly disagree with you on your point that Bob's misdeeds constitute "fighting fire with fire" unless he was cheating a casino that was _cheating_ him; simply voluntarily playing in a casino that has the edge, but which has honest machines and is honest with its cashback, etc., is no justification for cheating. And even if the casinos were, in fact, somehow cheating players in some ways, that would not have constituted a legal defense for his misconduct under any laws that I'm familiar with. Moreover, that sense of justification certainly violates the 'ethics' truism that "two wrongs don't make a right". Still, I agree that none of this has a thing to do with whether Bob contributed, in balance, more than the other nominees for the VP HoF, and I think that that's what the choice ought to be based upon. Now, if folks here decide that they want to select a saint, then I'm your guy. Hey, I like that: Bill Velek, patron saint of video poker. :wink:

snip

Aside from my disagreement with you on that one point, I'm in complete agreement with you and the several other valid points you've made. By the way, you put a lot of time into that post, and I appreciate it. Thanks.

Cheers.

Bill Velek

#8

--- "blaw57" wrote: (much snipped)

on Dancer's ethics: the worst things he did were ... minor bribery, ...
fraud, ... theft and ..... lying .

Now, does this mean he should be disqualified from the vpFree's Hall
Of Fame? In my opinion, absolutely not.

We all vote according to our own criteria.

First of all, you have to respect his honesty in telling all these
things

Sorry, no I don't. I read the book too. Seemed like he was bragging and giving a lot
of people ideas on how to cheat.

(although, of course, we don't know what else he might have
done that he didn't tell us about).

The petty crimes could have been storytelling too, who knows? Writers aren't always
factual.

Now, it happens to be the case that I personally would not do some of
the things he did on grounds of ethics, but that is no reason to take
a holier-than-thou attitude.

It's exactly the reason.

Third, what do we know about the ethics of the other candidates? are we
going to conduct ethics inquiries into all the candidates?
It is a temptation because ethics are very
important - the problem is that is so difficult contemporaneously to
judge another person's ethics.

Cop out. I really think video poker can be a relatively simple world. We're talking
about voting for a peer-award , not political office. Just the same, ethics ARE
important, and each of us influences a lot of people. Why reward an unethical
person? He makes enough money off of us all already. For selling us math facts. That
pays more and is the kind of recognition that lasts longer.

~Mark

#9

Jean's reply below is that of an HONEST woman. She did offer
suggestions but, because of her lack of computer skills did not
actually write any of the program, but she tells it as it is and we
should all respect her for that.
I've known her for years and I have NEVER heard her deliberately lie
or attempt to "con" anyone or a casino.
Negative comments about her are probably due to jealousy on the part
of the speaker. Her success is well deserved.

···

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 19:15:25 -0700, you wrote:

<<I am NOT positive that what I was told is absolutely true but I
understood that Dean Zamzow wrote the program, had difficulty in
selling it and therefore contacted Bob Dancer to entice him (for a
fee) to lend his name. Also told that he contributed absolutely
nothing relative to the software.
Similar situation with Frugal Video Poker and Jean Scott.>>

I did make some suggestions, i.e., the function of figuring cashback/comps %'s. And, of course, the 11-minute video included with the software featured Brad and me. But there has never been any question in anyone's mind that I didn't contribute anything technical or mathematically. And I am very careful to see that Jim's name is always given as the creator of this software although sometimes people mistakenly call it casually Jean Scott's software. I only gave him permission to use the term "frugal" because I felt it was something I could sincerely promote as being the best on the market. My name is not a part of the software title; my only function is to promote and market it.

________________________________________
Jean $¢ott - Go to http://www.FrugalGambler.biz
for VP software and strategy cards and for the
Frugal series of books.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

vpFREE Links: http://members.cox.net/vpfree/Links.htm

Yahoo! Groups Links

#10

I read the book too, and you provided a very good summary of
the "ethics" issues. A couple additional points. (1)At the end of
the book he said he would never do most of those things today because
of his current status as a VP guru. He did those things when he was
essentially broke and struggling to survive financially (build a
bankroll, as he put it). (2) On several occasions he milked a "play"
for weeks on end and never mentioned to casino staff that their
current promo favored the player ... which they apparently did not
realize. Is that unethical? Personally, I don't think it is.

This may seem unrelated, but watching the World Series of Poker on TV
the commentators are always extolling the skill of a player who
manages to trick another player ... by bluffing with a worthless hand
or sucking someone in deeper when they know they have the winning
hand. That seems pretty unethical to me!!! Just kidding of course.

In fact, in any sport (football, basketball, baseball, etc.)
deception is largely the essense of the game ... the goal is to fool
your opponent, and thus beat them "fair and square".

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "blaw57" <blaw57@y...> wrote:

Also, on Dancer's ethics, since I'm fresh reading I might remember
more of the details.