Now that's funny. Anybody that can turn $10,000 into $2,000 and call it a success is definitely the type of player the casino is going to give $2,500 in free play.
Stu
···
Sent from my iPad 
free play question
Stu wrote: Now that's funny. Anybody that can turn $10,000 into $2,000 and call it a success is definitely the type of player the casino is going to give $2,500 in free play.
I don't know the context of your comment or who you were talking about --- you possibly could have been sneering at me because many times I've had losses of approximately the size you're indicating --- but in some contexts I completely agree with you, whether you were referring to me or not. Playing for large stakes can very well mean that sometimes you turn $10K into $2K and occasionally turn $10K into $50K. If you're playing a 100% (i.e. breakeven) game, overall it balances out --- over time --- with some ugly streaks along the way. But if you can talk the casino into giving you $2500 in free play when you lose $8K --- and keep the full amount when you win $40K, now you've turned a 100% (i.e. breakeven) game into a highly profitable one. A good game now has become a GREAT game. The key to making this work is that the casino has to think it has the edge over you --- and that your recent losses are typical. In that case, they believe that anything they give you will be coming back into their coffers very soon. For most gamblers this is an appropriate way for the casino to think. But if you're actually good enough to beat the casino over time, taking advantage of a casino underestimating you is a very smart way to go. It's intelligent play to ask for something extra when you lose. Hosts tend to be nurturing people who don't understand casino math. Deciding whether a play is a good one or not should be made BEFORE you know the results. Players or casino employees who only look at the results afterwards and THEN decide whether it was a good play or not totally misunderstand the winning process. Asking for something extra from employees like this whenever you lose can be more lucrative than the game itself.
.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
It was a reference to Rob Singer's post (message #121633) in this thread.
···
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bob Dancer <bobdancervp@...> wrote:
I don't know the context of your comment or who you were talking about ---
nemartin wrote:
It was a reference to Rob Singer's post (message #121633) in this thread.
Thanx for the clarification. I usually skip Rob's posts. Reading it now, Rob doesn't say what the pay schedule of the games were or what the benefits were for continuing to play. In the right circumstances it could have been a very enlightened move to keep playing. Rob belittles the guy based on the fact that he kept playing after reaching his high point of the day (as if anyone could know without more play) --- which is one of the least important criteria to judge a play by. If the DDB turned out to be 9/6 or less and the BP turned out to be 8/5 or less and there was no extra benefit for playing additional (including slot club, mailers, drawings, extra comps, additional loss rebates, etc.), then I would agree with Rob that it was a mistake for the guy to continue. Not because the guy gave back money from his high point (nobody can know that until the day is done --- he could have hit a royal) but because he was playing at a big disadvantage. But not knowing the parameters of why the guy continued to play, I can't evaluate how smart the play was. Bob
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]