Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock’s quest for ‘perfect play’ on video poker
or
or
<a href="https://goo.gl/BX91Fv">
https://goo.gl/BX91Fv</a>
*************************************************
This link is posted for informational purposes
and doesn't constitute an endorsement or approval
of the linked article's content by vpFREE. Any
discussion of the article must be done in
accordance with vpFREE's rules and policies.
*************************************************
Warning: paranoid rant ahead:
If nothing else, this article makes me reluctant to have open discussions here about anything related to video poker.
I mean, does such a thorough investigation portend unwanted scrutiny of our favorite hobby and all who play it?
Is “The Law” or “big brother” going to go on a witch hunt, either publicly or even worse, surreptitiously, for people who fit some part this kook’s profile?
Only tens of thousands of us play serious video poker.
Here’s a thought: Maybe it’s only you lurkers who never post anything have something to worry about - Paddock was intensely private.
It’s a shame that the microscope might turn on our little corner of the world playground.
There’s plenty of paranoia in this group already - I don’t see a lot of open discussions or trip reports. Maybe our worries about good plays being outed, casino employees figuring out that who of us might be advantage players or that the IRS will audit anyone who writes about a profitable trip will become petty concerns compared to the possibility of the FBI monitoring our posts for key word usage, in their misguided search for future crazed lunatics.
And, if you don’t fit the new profile? Well, that part makes you suspect too: Paddock didn’t fit previous mass shooter profiles either.
What do you think? Dare you reply?
I don’t know why, but this classic movie comes to mind:
Koyaanisqatsi - Life out of Balance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koyaanisqatsi
~M-m-words
— vpfree3355@… wrote :
Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock’s quest for ‘perfect play’ on video poker
I’ll be sure to never play in sweatpants and flip flops. Problem solved.
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 8:51 PM, mark_my_words_ag…@…com [vpFREE] > <vpF…@…com> wrote:
Warning: paranoid rant ahead:
If nothing else, this article makes me reluctant to have open discussions here about anything related to video poker.
I mean, does such a thorough investigation portend unwanted scrutiny of our favorite hobby and all who play it?
Is “The Law” or “big brother” going to go on a witch hunt, either publicly or even worse, surreptitiously, for people who fit some part this kook’s profile?
Only tens of thousands of us play serious video poker.
Here’s a thought: Maybe it’s only you lurkers who never post anything have something to worry about - Paddock was intensely private.
It’s a shame that the microscope might turn on our little corner of the world playground.
There’s plenty of paranoia in this group already - I don’t see a lot of open discussions or trip reports. Maybe our worries about good plays being outed, casino employees figuring out that who of us might be advantage players or that the IRS will audit anyone who writes about a profitable trip will become petty concerns compared to the possibility of the FBI monitoring our posts for key word usage, in their misguided search for future crazed lunatics.
And, if you don’t fit the new profile? Well, that part makes you suspect too: Paddock didn’t fit previous mass shooter profiles either.
What do you think? Dare you reply?
I don’t know why, but this classic movie comes to mind:
Koyaanisqatsi - Life out of Balance
~M-m-words
— vpfree3355@… wrote :
Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock’s quest for ‘perfect play’ on video poker
Look for Mandalay to make some security upgrades: cameras in the hallways, stairwells, and elevators; a security guard always watching the outsides of the hotel for fire, broken windows, drones, and such; regular room inspections no exceptions; metal detectors like Wynn says they have, hidden ones, not obvious ones like at the airport; a guard at all doorways with mandatory weapons check like they used to do in Texas. Some people have said these changes would scare away customers, on the contrary I think they would make customers feel a little safer in what is an unsafe enviroment to begin with. Security should be actually doing security and not shaking down winning customers who are not breaking any laws.
I found it laughable that a casino employee would judge any gambler based on appearance. Most of the REALLY big players I’ve known tend to dress down. I recall an acquaintance in AC who looked like a Boardwalk bum, and carried a ragged knapsack with $100K+. There may be some Versace in Reno, but I’ve seen a lot more jeans and sweatpants in most high limit rooms.
And the quest for perfect VP play is supposed to be some important factor around this evil nutjob? Clearly there’s so little real information that writers are grasping at straws to fill a column. If they find out that he frequented Starbucks, perhaps they will link his behavior to caffeine addiction!
George Knapp’s interview with Sheriff Lombardo showed total ignorance when it comes to video poker and shooter’s level of play. First of all Paddock played $25 VP and generated over a million dollars in coin-in when he played. If he played at Caesars Entertainment he would earn a 7 Stars card every couple of days. He also played 10 play $25 VP. Was easily one of top level players at each property he played at. As far as him being on a losing streak that could only be properly evaluated if the casino took into account the amount of free play he was receiving. Obviously he would be net loser on the game itself if you didn’t account for the free play. No VP games he was playing returned over 100%. As previous poster said his appearance was meaningless. He had huge lines of credit at the casinos. If your playing 10 play $25 VP you can win and lose hundreds of thousands of dollars per night. Every couple of hands your generating a taxable. You also notice none of the casinos are disclosing how much Paddock won or lost in a year or what level customer he was. If the sheriff knows how much he lost over the last two years why not state it. Why is it private. The public is entitled to know how much Paddock lost and if he was in debt. Being transparent means disclosing everything.
I think that Sheriff Lombardo was stretching for an answer to the constant questions he was getting from the
media etc. If you watched any of the Sheriff’s briefings in the day or two after --you’ll note how he is constantly
begging the press to give more time rather than field the annoying (to him) barrage of questions he was getting.
I’m sure these questions persisted and in the Sheriff’s mind – this answer made perfect sense to him – and probably
the rest of the world. . . . As you can tell – the Sheriff must not be a gambler and doesn’t have a clue as to a gambler’s mentality.
I don’t think knowing how much he won or lost would help anything – it’s all relative. It’s only what was in Paddock’s mind
at this time that was important and we all know the ups and downs of gambling – even with a positive or near positive play it can be
a downer–sometimes. (how many discussions have we read here about going xxx cycles without a royal?) and add to that the fact
that Paddock seemed to be an intensely private person. . . . I’m guessing we’ll never know.
Jean H
From: “vpkin…@…com [vpFREE]” <vpF…@…com>
To: vpF…@…com
Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 2:01 PM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock’s quest for ‘p erfect play’ on video poker
George Knapp’s interview with Sheriff Lombardo showed total ignorance when it comes to video poker and shooter’s level of play. First of all Paddock played $25 VP and generated over a million dollars in coin-in when he played. If he played at Caesars Entertainment he would earn a 7 Stars card every couple of days. He also played 10 play $25 VP. Was easily one of top level players at each property he played at. As far as him being on a losing streak that could only be properly evaluated if the casino took into account the amount of free play he was receiving. Obviously he would be net loser on the game itself if you didn’t account for the free play. No VP games he was playing returned over 100%. As previous poster said his appearance was meaningless. He had huge lines of credit at the casinos. If your playing 10 play $25 VP you can win and lose hundreds of thousands of dollars per night. Every couple of hands your generating a taxable. You also notice none of the casinos are disclosing how much Paddock won or lost in a year or what level customer he was. If the sheriff knows how much he lost over the last two years why not state it. Why is it private. The public is entitled to know how much Paddock lost and if he was in debt. Being transparent means disclosing everything.
VpKing wrote: “No VP games he was playing returned over 100%.”
That’s not 100% certain. He may have found something or may have been using one of the smartphone apps that predict when to hit the button or otherwise manipulate the pseudo-random-number-generator. It’s possible he was losing and that set him off, but it’s also possible he was winning and something else set him off. If he was winning he may have thought he was in complete control of the world and could do whatever he wanted. He may have thought everything was just a video game.
In 07, a big player convinced Caesars to put in full pay deuces wild in their high limit suite:
My recollection isn't that he specifically requested FPDW; I thought he asked for 3-coin $100 deuces, and they put in the "wrong" pay table.
On Tue, 7 Nov 2017, nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com [vpFREE] wrote:
In 07, a big player convinced Caesars to put in full pay deuces wild in their high limit suite:
liontales.com/2007/04/lucky-me.html http://www.liontales.com/2007/04/lucky-me.html
On gamblingwithanedge someone brought up the possibility that he did his taxes wrong and was carrying forward his losses on Schedule C, something you can’t do with gambling income, then either got audited or discovered he owned more in back taxes (on his phantom “wins”) than he was worth after reading “Tax Help for Gamblers” and that caused him to lose it, after all he no doubt considered himself to be the best accountant and video poker player in the world, suddenly he discovered he was just a hack with zero net worth.