vpFREE2 Forums

Preview of Upcoming Article in Black Jack Insider

#1

Mickey, that's a little more than I was referring to. The majority--if not all--of AP's have posted thru the years how they are not gambling because they believe they are playing in a "positive situation" thanks to a theoretical edge.

My point is, if someone is playing any game inside any casino, they are gambling. AP's especially, because they sit so long at the machines which, in my case when I was an AP, caused me to become addicted to vp. So when someone says they are "doing their job" and/or "are not addicted to playing" instead of saying how they are really seeking that intermittent satisfaction as provided by the machines, then they are deeply into denial.

···

----- Reply message -----
From: "Mickey" <mickeycrimm@yahoo.com>

Rob, call me slow, but I don't get where the "AP's, experts, and math people" are somehow responsible. Should the entire population not be enlightened on strategic gambling because a percentage of them will turn out to be compulsive gamblers? In that case, then ignorance reins.

#2

Are you addicted to breathing, Rob? And before you answer, keep in
mind that I'll consider any denial by you as evidence of your
addiction. Is anyone doing any job therefore addicted to it?

Rob wrote:

···

Mickey, that's a little more than I was referring to. The majority--if not all--of AP's have posted thru the years how they are not gambling because they believe they are playing in a "positive situation" thanks to a theoretical edge.

My point is, if someone is playing any game inside any casino, they are gambling. AP's especially, because they sit so long at the machines which, in my case when I was an AP, caused me to become addicted to vp. So when someone says they are "doing their job" and/or "are not addicted to playing" instead of saying how they are really seeking that intermittent satisfaction as provided by the machines, then they are deeply into denial.

----- Reply message -----
From: "Mickey" <mickeycrimm@yahoo.com>

Rob, call me slow, but I don't get where the "AP's, experts, and math people" are somehow responsible. Should the entire population not be enlightened on strategic gambling because a percentage of them will turn out to be compulsive gamblers? In that case, then ignorance reins.

#3

When I first started breathing, it was exciting. I felt alive. Now I have to breath just to maintain.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Tom Robertson <007@...> wrote:

Are you addicted to breathing, Rob? And before you answer, keep in
mind that I'll consider any denial by you as evidence of your
addiction. Is anyone doing any job therefore addicted to it?

#4

The denial is more ubiquitous than you'd imagine Rob and extends far beyond AP's or even gambling. Psychologist's definition of gambling and gambling related disorders includes anything involving risk taking.

Picking risky partners for marriage, car racing, military service, the stock market, buying and selling antiques, etc... are all risky and are all subject to abuse. The list is nearly infinite.

The issue is not whether or not one gambles, we all gamble, everyday. The issue is how risky are our choices and how much forethought preparation and diligence one puts into managing their risk. If they take unnecessary risk without proportionate potential reward, "Houston we have a problem!".

Some pro's risk is far less than a cab driver in New York. Others though caution to the wind and stick their necks on a platter everyday, hoping the axeman is absent or on a potty break.

In gambling you'll find the full spectrum that lies between over- cautious and wild abandon for pros and non-pros alike.

I agree with everything you said except for your generalizations about "all-Ap's". I've never known two alike.

Playing machines in a casino is indeed "gambling", as is getting out of your bed in the morning, or for that matter staying in it.

The better question is: Is it a good gamble???

~FK

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rob.singer1111@yahoo.com" <rob.singer1111@...> wrote:

Mickey, that's a little more than I was referring to. The majority--if not all--of AP's have posted thru the years how they are not gambling because they believe they are playing in a "positive situation" thanks to a theoretical edge.

My point is, if someone is playing any game inside any casino, they are gambling. AP's especially, because they sit so long at the machines which, in my case when I was an AP, caused me to become addicted to vp. So when someone says they are "doing their job" and/or "are not addicted to playing" instead of saying how they are really seeking that intermittent satisfaction as provided by the machines, then they are deeply into denial.

----- Reply message -----
From: "Mickey" <mickeycrimm@...>

Rob, call me slow, but I don't get where the "AP's, experts, and math people" are somehow responsible. Should the entire population not be enlightened on strategic gambling because a percentage of them will turn out to be compulsive gamblers? In that case, then ignorance reins.

#5

I don't have a lot of time right now to do daily posting on every forum. Sorry, but I need to bail for now.

Good luck out there and I'll post my article on March 1st.

~FK

#6

I don't see what any of this has to do with addiction. I often risk
running out of gas for the sake of finding cheaper gas. The risk is
probably greatly disproportionate to the tiny potential gain. Does
that mean I'm addicted to cheaper gas or just stupid? Maybe I'm
concerned that medication will be involved in treating "addiction,"
which I believe is ridiculous. Isn't intelligence the only cure?
Maybe casino owners should be treated the same as drug dealers if
gambling addiction is similar to drug addiction.

Frank wrote:

···

The denial is more ubiquitous than you'd imagine Rob and extends far beyond AP's or even gambling. Psychologist's definition of gambling and gambling related disorders includes anything involving risk taking.

Picking risky partners for marriage, car racing, military service, the stock market, buying and selling antiques, etc... are all risky and are all subject to abuse. The list is nearly infinite.

The issue is not whether or not one gambles, we all gamble, everyday. The issue is how risky are our choices and how much forethought preparation and diligence one puts into managing their risk. If they take unnecessary risk without proportionate potential reward, "Houston we have a problem!".

Some pro's risk is far less than a cab driver in New York. Others though caution to the wind and stick their necks on a platter everyday, hoping the axeman is absent or on a potty break.

In gambling you'll find the full spectrum that lies between over- cautious and wild abandon for pros and non-pros alike.

I agree with everything you said except for your generalizations about "all-Ap's". I've never known two alike.

Playing machines in a casino is indeed "gambling", as is getting out of your bed in the morning, or for that matter staying in it.

The better question is: Is it a good gamble???

~FK

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rob.singer1111@yahoo.com" <rob.singer1111@...> wrote:

Mickey, that's a little more than I was referring to. The majority--if not all--of AP's have posted thru the years how they are not gambling because they believe they are playing in a "positive situation" thanks to a theoretical edge.

My point is, if someone is playing any game inside any casino, they are gambling. AP's especially, because they sit so long at the machines which, in my case when I was an AP, caused me to become addicted to vp. So when someone says they are "doing their job" and/or "are not addicted to playing" instead of saying how they are really seeking that intermittent satisfaction as provided by the machines, then they are deeply into denial.

----- Reply message -----
From: "Mickey" <mickeycrimm@...>

Rob, call me slow, but I don't get where the "AP's, experts, and math people" are somehow responsible. Should the entire population not be enlightened on strategic gambling because a percentage of them will turn out to be compulsive gamblers? In that case, then ignorance reins.

#7

The denial is more ubiquitous than you'd imagine Rob and extends far beyond AP's or even gambling. Psychologist's definition of gambling and gambling related disorders includes anything involving risk taking.

Picking risky partners for marriage, car racing, military service, the stock market, buying and selling antiques, etc... are all risky and are all subject to abuse. The list is nearly infinite.

The issue is not whether or not one gambles, we all gamble, everyday. The issue is how risky are our choices and how much forethought preparation and diligence one puts into managing their risk. If they take unnecessary risk without proportionate potential reward, "Houston we have a problem!".

The molecular genetics of risk will take a long time to unravel, but an important point is that evidence already exists that risk pathways can be independent. This is because side effects of certain drugs have been documented to influence specific types of risk. I can not recall the specific drug, but it is being considered to have an additional warning added to its label because it specifically targets gambling risk taking and no other.

Since this drug's side effects (surprised its not in the food at every casinos buffet) dramatically cause increased gambling risk taking behavior while leaving other risk taking behaviors unaltered that the molecular pathways for risky behaviors are not the same. Since I don't write technical papers anymore I don't have the references but this stuff is fascinating.

#8

OK one last comment and then I have to get back to my other duties...

The drug you couldn't remember is Requip used in treating Parkinson's. There are some others, this one has gotten the most press. Anything in the "dopamine agonist" category is of concern. I believe L-dopa is also on the list.

Just goggle search for, "drugs that cause gambling addiction".

Dysfunctional dopamine pathways are also linked to gambling addiction in general. The drugs merely cause the imbalance, but it can be caused by environmental and genetic factors as well. Research is ongoing.

~FK

···

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

>
> The denial is more ubiquitous than you'd imagine Rob and extends far beyond AP's or even gambling. Psychologist's definition of gambling and gambling related disorders includes anything involving risk taking.
>
> Picking risky partners for marriage, car racing, military service, the stock market, buying and selling antiques, etc... are all risky and are all subject to abuse. The list is nearly infinite.
>
> The issue is not whether or not one gambles, we all gamble, everyday. The issue is how risky are our choices and how much forethought preparation and diligence one puts into managing their risk. If they take unnecessary risk without proportionate potential reward, "Houston we have a problem!".
>

The molecular genetics of risk will take a long time to unravel, but an important point is that evidence already exists that risk pathways can be independent. This is because side effects of certain drugs have been documented to influence specific types of risk. I can not recall the specific drug, but it is being considered to have an additional warning added to its label because it specifically targets gambling risk taking and no other.

Since this drug's side effects (surprised its not in the food at every casinos buffet) dramatically cause increased gambling risk taking behavior while leaving other risk taking behaviors unaltered that the molecular pathways for risky behaviors are not the same. Since I don't write technical papers anymore I don't have the references but this stuff is fascinating.

#9

Bob Bartop wrote:

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Tom Robertson <007@...> wrote:

Are you addicted to breathing, Rob? And before you answer, keep in
mind that I'll consider any denial by you as evidence of your
addiction. Is anyone doing any job therefore addicted to it?

When I first started breathing, it was exciting. I felt alive. Now I have to breath just to maintain.

You're obviously in denial, just like everyone else.