Greektown barring article in Stricly Slots

[marksalot300]

Again, I haven't seen the articles myself yet, but I would believe that
Anthony might have mentioned that a casino has the right to bar anyone for any
reason not related to equal rights (race, handicap, etc.). All of us here know
that. I sure hope to be able to see those articles, and I'll be happy to
apologize for doubting the information in the original post in this thread, if it's
appropriate.

Greektown really did take it in the backside with all the publicity over
those barrings. Local newspapers, TV stations, and more just couldn't have enough
fun publicizing that stunt. Served Greektown right, too.

- Brian in MI

In a message dated 12/20/2006 11:51:43 PM Eastern Standard Time,
greeklandjohnny@aol.com writes:

It turns out there were actually 2 articles by Anthony Curtis in Strictly
Slots. The first one was in January 2003 where he talked about the barrings in
his annual "Thoughts" column. In March 2003, he responsed to the flood of
mail he received on the January article.

<snip>

His first point is that Greektown screwed up on the barrings. It was a
financial disaster and a public relations nightmare.

The second point that he made is that most of the players probably had
themselves to blame for being booted. He talked about greedy players milking a
promotion or trying to take every single nickel out of a promotion. I disagreed
that I fit that description and gave a few examples to support my claim.

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

[WP_SF]

Again, I haven't seen the articles myself yet, but I would believe that
Anthony might have mentioned that a casino has the right to bar

anyone for any

reason not related to equal rights (race, handicap, etc.). All of

us here know

that. I sure hope to be able to see those articles, and I'll be

happy to

apologize for doubting the information in the original post in this

thread, if it's

appropriate.

Greektown really did take it in the backside with all the publicity

over

those barrings. Local newspapers, TV stations, and more just

couldn't have enough

fun publicizing that stunt. Served Greektown right, too.

- Brian in MI

In a message dated 12/20/2006 11:51:43 PM Eastern Standard Time,
greeklandjohnny@... writes:

> It turns out there were actually 2 articles by Anthony Curtis in

Strictly

> Slots. The first one was in January 2003 where he talked about the

barrings in

> his annual "Thoughts" column. In March 2003, he responsed to the

flood of

> mail he received on the January article.

<snip>

I vaguely remember the article. The problem with the barring was that
some of the bar-ees were squares, it was a little more random that.

The side point I'd like to make is that if the casino goofs, it really
is bad form to pass the blame on the player by barring him. It's
really extreme. Backing him off the mail or the promos should really
be sufficient. After all, the casino sets all the conditions of
contest regarding their slot program, from promotion rules to setting
payouts on machines. All backing off does, in my eyes, is just
illuminate the incompetentcy of slot operations and/or promotions.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Marksalot300@... wrote:

_______________________________________________________________________

paladingaming.net

[caplatinum]

These people were led out by uniform security officers, they were
paraded in front of the neighbors as criminals - stop making excuses
for Curtis defending this.

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

>
> Again, I haven't seen the articles myself yet, but I would

believe that

> Anthony might have mentioned that a casino has the right to bar
anyone for any
> reason not related to equal rights (race, handicap, etc.). All

of

us here know
> that. I sure hope to be able to see those articles, and I'll be
happy to
> apologize for doubting the information in the original post in

this

thread, if it's
> appropriate.
>
> Greektown really did take it in the backside with all the

publicity

over
> those barrings. Local newspapers, TV stations, and more just
couldn't have enough
> fun publicizing that stunt. Served Greektown right, too.
>
> - Brian in MI
>
>
> In a message dated 12/20/2006 11:51:43 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> greeklandjohnny@ writes:
>
> > It turns out there were actually 2 articles by Anthony Curtis

in

Strictly
> > Slots. The first one was in January 2003 where he talked about

the

barrings in
> > his annual "Thoughts" column. In March 2003, he responsed to

the

flood of
> > mail he received on the January article.
>
> <snip>

I vaguely remember the article. The problem with the barring was

that

some of the bar-ees were squares, it was a little more random

that.

The side point I'd like to make is that if the casino goofs, it

really

is bad form to pass the blame on the player by barring him. It's
really extreme. Backing him off the mail or the promos should

really

be sufficient. After all, the casino sets all the conditions of
contest regarding their slot program, from promotion rules to

setting

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Marksalot300@ wrote:
payouts on machines. All backing off does, in my eyes, is just
illuminate the incompetentcy of slot operations and/or promotions.

_____________________________________________________________________
__

paladingaming.net

[WP_SF]

You obviously don't know the neighborhood very well, then. Unless
you're heading east, it gets rough almost immediately. If you're
heading east, it gets rough after about 3/4 of a mile or so.

I'm not defending AC at all. While Casino Player and Strictly Slots
are fine (pun unintended) publications, they are what they are, you know?

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "caplatinum" <belairgold@...> wrote:

These people were led out by uniform security officers, they were
paraded in front of the neighbors as criminals - stop making excuses
for Curtis defending this.

_________________________________________________________________________

paladingaming.net

[ggman444]

Re: Anthony Curtis' Articles on the 2002 Greektown Barrings:

Johnny Z knows the Greektown saga better than anyone. He is correct
about Anthony Curtis' articles. AC wasn't there, and hence his take
in the articles had some flaws, but I agreed with most of what he
wrote.

I'd like to add two comments. First, as to "greed," my observation
at the time (the spring of 2001) was that MOST players made a real
effort to preserve the play for as long as possible by limiting their
daily "catch" to a reasonable amount. Of course, what is "reasonable"
in that context could be debated. Greektown was paying 2% CB on
games like $3P NSUD, $5 SL NSUD, and 10-coin, 50-cent fullpay BJ with
an unlimited "Let It Ride" betting option. With those game choices,
the CB can add up pretty fast.

Second, as for "cheating," with unlimited 2% CB on breakeven games,
why would anyone cheat? FWIW, I appealed my barring to the Michigan
Gaming Control Board. They, of course, told me to go away; but they
at were kind enough to add that I had done nothing wrong. That
applies eqaully to the other players that I personally observed at
the time.

There was a circulating rumor that, following a change of bill
acceptors, one Greektown machine began awarding $5 credits for $1
coin in, and that a small group of out-of towners locked up that
machine for several days so that neither Greektown nor any other
players would discover the error. As to that, I know not what the
truth may be. -- The GMan

In a message dated 12/20/2006 11:51:43 PM Eastern Standard Time,
greeklandjohnny@... writes: It turns out there were actually 2

articles by Anthony Curtis in Strictly Slots. The first one was in
January 2003 where he talked about the barrings in his
annual "Thoughts" column. In March 2003, he responsed to the flood
of mail he received on the January article.

<snip>

His first point is that Greektown screwed up on the barrings. It

was a financial disaster and a public relations nightmare.
The second point that he made is that most of the players probably
had themselves to blame for being booted. He talked about greedy
players milking a promotion or trying to take every single nickel out
of a promotion. I disagreed that I fit that description and gave a
few examples to support my claim.

···

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

[Mickey]

From what I'm reading here this was a play begging to be torched. You
don't make fans torching plays but you do make money. Why stretch out
making, say, $20,000 over several months when you can make it in one
month then go on and do something else. Throw the money in the bank or
the stock market or something or invest it in another VP play and let
it make some more money. But if one doesn't torch the play someone
else will leaving one feeling like they screwed themselves. When you
find a big play just say to yourself "this play is going to get torched
anywaly so I'm going to be the one to do it." Torch it.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "ggman444" <gleng4444@...> wrote:

I'd like to add two comments. First, as to "greed," my observation
at the time (the spring of 2001) was that MOST players made a real
effort to preserve the play for as long as possible by limiting their
daily "catch" to a reasonable amount. Of course, what is "reasonable"
in that context could be debated. Greektown was paying 2% CB on
games like $3P NSUD, $5 SL NSUD, and 10-coin, 50-cent fullpay BJ with
an unlimited "Let It Ride" betting option. With those game choices,
the CB can add up pretty fast.

[WP_SF]

See, I'm not a big fan of burning down stuff, you sort of have to
judge for yourself what's going on. Something is obviously seriously
wrong with this picture, and if it's getting harder and harder to find
something to play, well, by all means, if it's not going to be you,
then, certainly someone else. This situation cries out for burning it
down.

Don't forget the .50 17-10 LDW and the Pick'em as well. I was doing
other stuff, actually even more profitable in Detroit at that time,
but that's another story.

···

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

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "ggman444" <gleng4444@> wrote:
>
> I'd like to add two comments. First, as to "greed," my observation
> at the time (the spring of 2001) was that MOST players made a real
> effort to preserve the play for as long as possible by limiting their
> daily "catch" to a reasonable amount. Of course, what is "reasonable"
> in that context could be debated. Greektown was paying 2% CB on
> games like $3P NSUD, $5 SL NSUD, and 10-coin, 50-cent fullpay BJ with
> an unlimited "Let It Ride" betting option. With those game choices,
> the CB can add up pretty fast.

From what I'm reading here this was a play begging to be torched. You
don't make fans torching plays but you do make money. Why stretch out
making, say, $20,000 over several months when you can make it in one
month then go on and do something else. Throw the money in the bank or
the stock market or something or invest it in another VP play and let
it make some more money. But if one doesn't torch the play someone
else will leaving one feeling like they screwed themselves. When you
find a big play just say to yourself "this play is going to get torched
anywaly so I'm going to be the one to do it." Torch it.

_______________________________________________________________________

paladingaming.net