Royal Buster Strategy on Progressives

[Joe_Schober]

Rob Singer wrote...

There are plenty of highly bankrolled "advantage players" --

certainly enough to give action to the ONE machine I described.

I disagree and there's no way you would know that assertion. Common
sense says anyone who uses over a million dollars to gamble with has
no need to be playing video poker as an "AP", and they would in fact
be very unintelligent overall in doing so.

I disagree. Most people who have that kind of money have a significant portion of their net worth tied up in a diversified stock portfolio -- stocks, of course, just being another form of gambling. A typical benchmark diversified stock portfolio (say, the S&P 500) has an "EV" of about +10% per YEAR, averaged across many years. Tell these investors that they can have an EV of +0.76% in TEN SECONDS (or whatever time it takes to play a hand) and I think you'd get some interest.

And there's always the possibility for less well-funded advantage

players to form teams and pool their bankrolls.

Yes....very unprofessional--don't you think?

No, I've never thought of teamwork as unprofessional.

I am not of the opinion that any FPDW machine would lose money
because in my inquiries, I've found that not to be the case anywhere.
A $100 player can be just as accurate or inaccurate as a 25c player.
It also wouldn't get much play, and if it did the margin would be
slightly less--a tabu for any business.

You're always claiming that advantage players play far more than they should, but now when I propose a scenario that would be very tempting to advantage players, you say it wouldn't get much play. Strange. But I certainly won't argue against offering some $25 FPDW and $10 FPDW to help increase the player base to those with lower bankrolls.

Again, the profit margin on those idle high-stakes games is ZERO (idle games make no money!), so any action on them would be an improvement for the casino. Thank you for supporting my argument.

--Joe

[Mickey]

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Joe Schober <afljoeys@...> wrot

I disagree. Most people who have that kind of money have a
significant portion of their net worth tied up in a diversified

stock

portfolio -- stocks, of course, just being another form of

gambling.

A typical benchmark diversified stock portfolio (say, the S&P 500)

has

an "EV" of about +10% per YEAR, averaged across many years. Tell
these investors that they can have an EV of +0.76% in TEN SECONDS

(or

whatever time it takes to play a hand) and I think you'd get some
interest.

I believe Bob Dancer has written that he keeps his bankroll in mutual
funds and plays on markers. When he wins he buys more mutual funds,
when he loses he sells off to pay the markers.

[Rob_Singer2]

I disagree. Most people who have that kind of money have a

significant portion of their net worth tied up in a diversified

stock

portfolio -- stocks, of course, just being another form of

gambling.

A typical benchmark diversified stock portfolio (say, the S&P 500)

has an "EV" of about +10% per YEAR, averaged across many years.
Tell these investors that they can have an EV of +0.76% in TEN
SECONDS (or whatever time it takes to play a hand) and I think you'd
get some interest.

I don't believe you're disagreeing with me because I agree with you
on that. 100%. My bankroll is far less than a million dollars--but
that's only my GAMBLING bankroll. I'd never put it all on the line
like many, many do.

No, I've never thought of teamwork as unprofessional.

I do. There's so many phonies running around the streets of LV and
Reno proclaiming how they're "professional gamblers" and they are
not. They're either bankrolled by an individual or group of
individuals, or as that particular bankrolling individual they take
the status of being a "professional". As for the "team members", when
they win they don't really win, and when they lose they never lose. I
see no relationship to the term "professional" in either of those
instances.

You're always claiming that advantage players play far more than

they should, but now when I propose a scenario that would be very
tempting to advantage players, you say it wouldn't get much play.
Strange.

Of course they play too much and they KNOW they do. And every casino
manager knows exactly who they are because of the sacred value the
players place on those colorful little slot club cards they'd be lost
without--and AP's are VERY well loved by casinos

I only said a very high limit machine wouldn't be played much. Of
course AP's will play promotions or as Mickey says, "good plays"
until they're broke and have no other method of obtaining cash.

···

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Joe Schober <afljoeys@...> wrote:

[Rob_Singer2]

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

I believe Bob Dancer has written that he keeps his bankroll in mutual
funds and plays on markers. When he wins he buys more mutual funds,
when he loses he sells off to pay the markers.

I've seen that, and typical with those who sell strategy and just about
anything else they can peddle in video poker, when you put it
altogether with some of his many other statements he doesn't make real
sense. In essence here, he's spinning his assets on hand into being the
amount of his gambling bankroll when it is not (one would hope). He's
not that dumb. Then you'd of course have to ask why he works...at so
many things? Third, no financial advisor would recommend that course of
action with mutual funds. It's all part of a show, and kudos to him for
coming up with what he does and his ability to sell so much of it.

[Mickey]

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "robsinger1111"
<robsinger1111@...> wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "mickeycrimm" <mickeycrimm@>
wrote:
> I believe Bob Dancer has written that he keeps his bankroll in

mutual

> funds and plays on markers. When he wins he buys more mutual

funds,

> when he loses he sells off to pay the markers.

I've seen that, and typical with those who sell strategy and just

about

anything else they can peddle in video poker, when you put it
altogether with some of his many other statements he doesn't make

real

sense. In essence here, he's spinning his assets on hand into being

the

amount of his gambling bankroll when it is not (one would hope).

He's

not that dumb. Then you'd of course have to ask why he works...at

so

many things? Third, no financial advisor would recommend that

course of

action with mutual funds. It's all part of a show, and kudos to him

for

coming up with what he does and his ability to sell so much of it.

I've fixed everythiing up, Rob, with the question about how a real
video poker player would respond to the offer of a casino offering
him $25 9/6 Jacks with 1% cashback with the stipulations I listed in
a prior post to you. I asked Mr. Dancer what his opinion of such an
offer would be. At first, he said he would have to think about it.
But two days later he responded: "I accept the offer. But with some
reservations." He is writing an article about it for
Casinogaming.com.

I also asked him if he were to accept such an offer if I could get
$10,000 worth of the action. I ain't the worlds greatest investor
but I know a good thing when I see it.

Now, all you have to do, Rob, is go out and get us a casino to put
this play down on. People are chomping at the bit to get in on this
play. Just think about it, Rob. If we lose, you'll be the King of
Video Poker.

[Rob_Singer2]

What you're missing, Mickey, is the fact that Mr. Dancer never met a video poker machine he wouldn't play. Why he even writes about being suckered in to play a foreign machine on a cruise ship just because it said "9/6"! This "I'll think about it" was a good ploy to keep people interested and now he's got them reading his column for a reply. Marketing strategy at its best. Next to Jean Scott he's the most creative player to ever lurk the streets of LV. I say "lurk" because they're both totally immune to casino execs and their watchful eyes. Not only do they win win win---they collect all the top gift giveaways, they get maximum cash back/bounce back cash/coupon cash offers, and they receivew more comps than anyone else in the game---and all because they always use their colorful array of slot club cards that track every detail of their play! And THEN, they get to both write about their conquests and mock the casinos and their management for having such "easy money
pickins'" right in the faces of the casino managers, who simply choose to look the other way so they can continue depleting casino bank accounts over and over again. Quite a gig, don'tcha think?
   
  Maybe I'll write an article about it too so a decent number of players can see the story.

          --- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "robsinger1111"
<robsinger1111@...> wrote:

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "mickeycrimm" <mickeycrimm@>
wrote:
> I believe Bob Dancer has written that he keeps his bankroll in

mutual

> funds and plays on markers. When he wins he buys more mutual

funds,

> when he loses he sells off to pay the markers.

I've seen that, and typical with those who sell strategy and just

about

anything else they can peddle in video poker, when you put it
altogether with some of his many other statements he doesn't make

real

sense. In essence here, he's spinning his assets on hand into being

the

amount of his gambling bankroll when it is not (one would hope).

He's

not that dumb. Then you'd of course have to ask why he works...at

so

many things? Third, no financial advisor would recommend that

course of

action with mutual funds. It's all part of a show, and kudos to him

for

coming up with what he does and his ability to sell so much of it.

I've fixed everythiing up, Rob, with the question about how a real
video poker player would respond to the offer of a casino offering
him $25 9/6 Jacks with 1% cashback with the stipulations I listed in
a prior post to you. I asked Mr. Dancer what his opinion of such an
offer would be. At first, he said he would have to think about it.
But two days later he responded: "I accept the offer. But with some
reservations." He is writing an article about it for
Casinogaming.com.

I also asked him if he were to accept such an offer if I could get
$10,000 worth of the action. I ain't the worlds greatest investor
but I know a good thing when I see it.

Now, all you have to do, Rob, is go out and get us a casino to put
this play down on. People are chomping at the bit to get in on this
play. Just think about it, Rob. If we lose, you'll be the King of
Video Poker.

···

mickeycrimm <mickeycrimm@yahoo.com> wrote:

---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

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

[Mickey]

--- In FREEvpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Rob Singer <robsinger1111@...>
wrote:

This "I'll think about it" was a good ploy to keep people
interested and now he's got them reading his column for a reply.
Marketing strategy at its best. Next to Jean Scott he's the most
creative player to ever lurk the streets of LV.

Actually, I fired him a post and he responded within a few minutes.
Anyone would have to have some time to think through the implications
of the offer.

I say "lurk" because they're both totally immune to casino execs and
their watchful eyes. Not only do they win win win---they collect all
the top gift giveaways, they get maximum cash back/bounce back
cash/coupon cash offers, and they receivew more comps than anyone
else in the game---and all because they always use their colorful
array of slot club cards that track every detail of their play! And
THEN, they get to both write about their conquests and mock the
casinos and their management for having such "easy money
pickins'" right in the faces of the casino managers, who simply
choose to look the other way so they can continue depleting casino
bank accounts over and over again. Quite a gig, don'tcha think?
   

Is this the pot calling the kettle black? Aren't you supposed to be
out there doing the same thing? Beating the casinos then writing
about in the high profile Gaming Today? With your picture splashed
all over everything?

Maybe I'll write an article about it too so a decent number of
players can see the story.

That would be great! Maybe enough interest could be generated that
we could actually get a casino to make such an offer. It would be
great PR for them. It would certainly require Bob and Shirley to
play almost exclusively for a few months in one casino. Think about
it. They could have a roped off area to play in and the tourists
could flock past gazing at them. Just think of the interest that
would be generated. They coulc call it something like "THE GREAT
VIDEO POKER CHALLENGE AT BRAND X CASINO." Or, even "MILLION DOLLAR
VIDEO POKER." Something like that. Maybe the folks at Gaming Today
might know some casino execs that would be interested in such a deal.
Find us somebody, Rob. We want to put this play down.

Think of all the hours you've put in in the last ten years at
debunking us. All that time writing those Gaming Today articles.
All the time you've spent on the internet. And all the flack you've
had to take doing it. This is the opportunity of a lifetime for you.
Go for the jugular.

Talk to the execs, talk to your publisher, write articles, do
whatever it takes but get us the play.

[Rob_Singer2]

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

Actually, I fired him a post and he responded within a few

minutes. Anyone would have to have some time to think through the
implications of the offer.

More likely, he was adding up his paychecks minus the bills for the
next month and checking to see if he could handle the action.

Is this the pot calling the kettle black? Aren't you supposed to

be out there doing the same thing? Beating the casinos then writing

about in the high profile Gaming Today? With your picture splashed
all over everything?

Not at all the same thing. For starters, I don't use a card all the
time. Next, I don't play at nearly the limits those two do--or should
I say four, as they've inflicted the same curse upon their partners.
Then, I write about what happens exactly as it happens, and I don't
portend to be making millions from the casinos. Finally, I'm out
there daring the casinos to bar me because I play so little compared
to most, that I'll never have a problem finding a place to play.

> Maybe I'll write an article about it too so a decent number of
>players can see the story.

That would be great! Maybe enough interest could be generated that
we could actually get a casino to make such an offer. It would be
great PR for them. It would certainly require Bob and Shirley to
play almost exclusively for a few months in one casino. Think

about

it. They could have a roped off area to play in and the tourists
could flock past gazing at them. Just think of the interest that
would be generated. They coulc call it something like "THE GREAT
VIDEO POKER CHALLENGE AT BRAND X CASINO." Or, even "MILLION DOLLAR
VIDEO POKER." Something like that. Maybe the folks at Gaming

Today

might know some casino execs that would be interested in such a

deal.

Find us somebody, Rob. We want to put this play down.

Think of all the hours you've put in in the last ten years at
debunking us. All that time writing those Gaming Today articles.
All the time you've spent on the internet. And all the flack

you've had to take doing it. This is the opportunity of a lifetime
for you. Go for the jugular.

I've already ripped out that jugular many times over.

Talk to the execs, talk to your publisher, write articles, do
whatever it takes but get us the play.

Remember what happened the last time to Dancer? He went around town
begging others to help bankroll him and Shirley on the MGM's $25 JoB
play. He happened to get lucky and hit a Royal, then he made a stupid
play and went to the $100 game which only severe addicts would do
after winning on a lower level. Then they got extremely lucky and hit
another. If that doesn't happen this time around you're looking at
some serious losses--which I'm sure is why he's "thinking about it"
and coming up with several stipulations to be disclosed at a later
date. 9/6 JoB is a losing proposition without some royals and he
knows it.