vpFREE2 Forums

Hypothetical casino smoking ban (XVP)...

#21

mickeycrimm wrote:
I'm in the S2 category, I guess. I'm certainly not going to quit
what I do because of a smoking ban. I've already experienced it
anyway. In Butte, Montana, where there are about 30 casinos, 2 were
non-smoking. One just happened to have my play in it. I figure I
spent about 10 or 12 minutes an hour outside which would be about $12
an hour in lost ER.

···

==================================
So Mickey, what you're saying is that this is proof that a smoking ban
actually caused a casino to increase their revenue by $12 an hour in
ER, and since you're an S2 (play slightly less than you did before),
numerous unsuspecting casinos would save money by incorporating a
smoking ban. I see your point. :slight_smile:

#22

Unfortunately, that's the dilemma I will face in the future if I
continue to smoke. On the Montana play, I would play 5 to six hours a
day. That's about $60 to $70 a day I was costing myself in the one
spot just to get a nicotine fix. That's some mighty expensive smoking.

Most casinos are safe as they don't have anything I want to play
anyway.

Smoking is costly too for a poker player these days. If you get up
after looking at your third position hand and skip a lap, about twenty
minutes, and you are a winning player you are cutting your hourly rate
by 33%. I took to jumping up after looking at the fifth position hand,
skipping the fourth and third positon hands, but making it back to the
table for the big blind. I play less than 5% of the hands in those
spots, but still, it costs money. No-limit is not so costly as Limit
as the blinds are smaller in relation.

Yep, I'm just gonna have to face the music. Something has to go.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "jeffcole2003oct" <jeff-cole@...> wrote:

mickeycrimm wrote:
I'm in the S2 category, I guess. I'm certainly not going to quit
what I do because of a smoking ban. I've already experienced it
anyway. In Butte, Montana, where there are about 30 casinos, 2 were
non-smoking. One just happened to have my play in it. I figure I
spent about 10 or 12 minutes an hour outside which would be about $12
an hour in lost ER.

So Mickey, what you're saying is that this is proof that a smoking ban
actually caused a casino to increase their revenue by $12 an hour in
ER, and since you're an S2 (play slightly less than you did before),
numerous unsuspecting casinos would save money by incorporating a
smoking ban. I see your point. :slight_smile:

#23

S4

My CI in Illinois for 2007 was $1.2 Million; for 2008 it will be zero.

#24

Smoking is costly too for a poker player these days. If you get up
after looking at your third position hand and skip a lap, about

twenty

minutes, and you are a winning player you are cutting your hourly

rate

by 33%. I took to jumping up after looking at the fifth position

hand,

skipping the fourth and third positon hands, but making it back to

the

table for the big blind. I play less than 5% of the hands in those
spots, but still, it costs money. No-limit is not so costly as Limit
as the blinds are smaller in relation.

Yep, I'm just gonna have to face the music. Something has to go.

When I was still smoking, and if the poker room was non (not all were
then), here is what I did whenever I wanted a smoke. Since I play
rather tightly, I see very few flops anyway (probably enter less than 5
hands voluntarily per hour, but I never really counted). So after I
muck preflop I run off to grab a few drags. The dealer knew to deal me
in and that I would be back before it was my action on the next deal.
Still this does cost money because 1) when you get a hand that you ARE
going to play, by the time you return to your cigarette, it burnt out
so you have to fire up another one 2) normally when you muck preflop,
all the action in that hand is free information that you can use when
you are playing, by missing this free information, you do lose some of
your edge. But that being said, I would say that the cost is less than
disappearing entirely for a round.

···

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

#25
#26

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

,
> all the action in that hand is free information that you can use
when
> you are playing, by missing this free information, you do lose
some of
> your edge. But that being said, I would say that the cost is

less

than
> disappearing entirely for a round.
>
I am very glad that casino poker is nonsmoking, because the smokers
are such easy targets. You have a perfect read on anyone who does
the muck-and-dash; if they look and then sit back down, you KNOW
it's a monster because what other than a monster hand could make
them sit back down instead of dashing out to enjoy that wonderful
luscious yummy cigarette--they can almost TASTE it---ummmmmmmm---

I folded pocket KK once after a muck-and-dasher had sat back down
and raised the pot; that saved me my entire stack ($140).

In a NLHE game these days, you gather your edge from observation;
very few players nowadays don't know at least the basics. I would
therefore suggest that NO player who has his mind in the ashtray

can

possibly beat a NLHE game these days. Limit might be another story,
as you can play ABC limit HE with only about 1/50 of your brain
engaged.

On the contrary, ABC gets the money in NLH.

#27

N1. I quit smoking when I was 23 after ten yrs,(Yes, I was 13

when I started) and have not smoked since. However, the anti-this

or

anti-that factions in America distress the hell out of me. The

great

experiment with freedoms that this country started with has taken a
hard LEFT turn and I'm afraid of where we are headed as a nation.
     Why can't I have a business where I tell you upfront that this
is a smoking establishment and you can enter or work at your own

risk?

It is then left to personal choice, which,IMO, is the way it should
be.

I don't care if people want to smoke in their own homes or cars
(except
I get squeamish about both when there are young children there, but
if
people chose to smoke around young children it is their choice and
they
must deal with the consequences), but my feeling is that it shouldn't
be allowed in public buildings. That is the case in my county and I
like it. I am far from left wing, a registered Republican for 40
years.

I drink wine, lots of it, but I never drink and drive and I
definitely
don't pour it down the throats of people who are repulsed by it. My
drinking it in public does not automatically cause me to do either of
these things, while public smoking does cause others to partake
against
their will.

Would I still go to casinos if there were no drinking? Yes, I
would. It would be a trade-off of one vice for another and I would
consider myself to be better off for only partaking in one at a time.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "vpbauer1" <dbauer33@...> wrote:

#28

correna2 wrote:
My CI in Illinois for 2007 was $1.2 Million; for 2008 it will be zero.

···

=============================
Many questions come to mind, but I'll just ask 3.
What was your total coin-in (not just Ill.) for 2007?
What do you think your total coin-in will be for 2008?
Was the smoking ban the single reaaon for your non-play in Ill.?

#29

I drink wine, lots of it, but I never drink and drive and I
definitely
don't pour it down the throats of people who are repulsed by it. My
drinking it in public does not automatically cause me to do either

of

these things, while public smoking does cause others to partake
against
their will.

I refuse to believe that the people (including those on this board)
who so passionately defend their (nonexistent) "right" to smoke in
public don't fathom that distinction. You are perfectly within your
rights to do any bloody thing you want AS LONG AS IT AFFECTS NO ONE
ELSE---go ahead, kill yourself slowly, knock yourself out! But public
smoking ADVERSELY AFFECTS OTHERS!!!

DUH!!!!!

#30

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

I refuse to believe that the people (including those on this board)
who so passionately defend their (nonexistent) "right" to smoke in
public don't fathom that distinction. You are perfectly within your
rights to do any bloody thing you want AS LONG AS IT AFFECTS NO ONE
ELSE---go ahead, kill yourself slowly, knock yourself out! But public
smoking ADVERSELY AFFECTS OTHERS!!!

A distinction that apparently you are missing...If people who don't
want to be around smoke only went to the non-smoking venues, then the
only other people that smokers are affecting are other smokers. Anyone
entering the smoking venue is implicitly giving their consent to be
around smoke.

···

DUH!!!!!

#31

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

>
I am very glad that casino poker is nonsmoking, because the smokers
are such easy targets. You have a perfect read on anyone who does
the muck-and-dash; if they look and then sit back down, you KNOW
it's a monster because what other than a monster hand could make
them sit back down instead of dashing out to enjoy that wonderful
luscious yummy cigarette--they can almost TASTE it---ummmmmmmm---

I folded pocket KK once after a muck-and-dasher had sat back down
and raised the pot; that saved me my entire stack ($140).

I absolutely agree that when a person who plays less than five hands
voluntarily per hour enters a pot, you know they have a strong hand.
Whether they are doing the muck-and-dash or sitting at the table, is
irrelevant. All the muck-and-dash does is make it more obvious. So
I suppose if you are not all that observant, you would have no idea
that the guy had been folding darn near every hand unless he wasn't
present at the table anymore. At any rate, the muck-and-dash doesn't
give any more information, it just SHOUTS the information. But of
course making this info more obvious so someone who wouldn't have
realized it otherwise, now picks up on it, is another cost of doing
this.

The only time the muck-and-dash gives MORE info then just muck-and-
sit is if a smoker plays tighter when they have a cigarette burning,
which is just bad poker to let that be a determining factor. I never
did that, but there are people who do. But from what I've seen the
people who play tighter just because they have a cigarette waiting
for them are normally tourists, drunk, or both. In which case their
poker is so bad anyway, the muck-and-dash is one of the smaller holes
in their game.

#32

Just over $3.2 mil

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "jeffcole2003oct" <jeff-cole@...> wrote:

correna2 wrote:
My CI in Illinois for 2007 was $1.2 Million; for 2008 it will be zero.

Many questions come to mind, but I'll just ask 3.
What was your total coin-in (not just Ill.) for 2007?

*******************************************************

What do you think your total coin-in will be for 2008?

   I expect it will be similar to 2007.
*******************************************************

Was the smoking ban the single reaaon for your non-play in Ill.?

    Yes.

#33

You have not been in the nosmoking section of MGM
Detroit where THE smokers are setting smoking up a
storm and Not one security telling them to STOP....
Nick

···

--- pokegimp <wincerwj@yahoo.com> wrote:

> A distinction that apparently you are missing...If
people who don't
want to be around smoke only went to the non-smoking
venues, then the
only other people that smokers are affecting are
other smokers. Anyone
entering the smoking venue is implicitly giving
their consent to be
around smoke.

> DUH!!!!!
>

      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ