Who did you vote for - and why?

[Steve_Kent]

Looks like Tom is serious about this voting stuff! I have made my choice,
have you? It's easy, and fun to decide.

I chose Tomski. To me his software has been a huge help to me in the
ongoing battle with the casino. Being able to print a strategy for any game
is huge!

Jean Scott was a consideration for me, and she is certainly a strong
candidate. Frugal Gambler really open my eyes to the way casinos operate
their comp programs. I chose Tomski over her because I felt his program was
of value to all players, experienced or not. Jean has been a huge help to
newcomers, but the old "salts" probably didn't get as much out of it.

Who did you vote for, and why?

pa

"I couldn't repair my brakes, so I made my horn louder."
"All wives are alike, but they have different faces
so you can tell them apart."

···

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

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

[tooncesthecatwhocou1]

Looks like Tom is serious about this voting stuff! I have made my

choice,

have you? It's easy, and fun to decide.

I chose Tomski. To me his software has been a huge help to me in

the

ongoing battle with the casino. Being able to print a strategy for

any game

is huge!

Jean Scott was a consideration for me, and she is certainly a

strong

candidate. Frugal Gambler really open my eyes to the way casinos

operate

their comp programs. I chose Tomski over her because I felt his

program was

of value to all players, experienced or not. Jean has been a huge

help to

newcomers, but the old "salts" probably didn't get as much out of

it.

Who did you vote for, and why?

My vote is for John Kelly. When I think about which resource was
most critical to me in my VP career, I felt that the original
Lodestone list was an incredibly powerful source of information. I
used it every time I travelled to Vegas and wouldn't think of going
into a casino for the first time without reviewing it. And the work
he put into it for years without accepting a penny for his work makes
him worthy in my eyes.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "golden bearpa" <kent@s...> wrote:

[W_Wilson]

i'm surprised dancer is leading by such a large margin. it could be
argued that he should be inducted into the video poker hall of shame
(yes shame) for his *consulting* work he has done for the casinos. he
is working both sides of the fence and milking it for all it is
worth. just read his book. you'll see the man has very little in the
way of morals or ethics. don't think for a new york minute that he
wouldn't some vp players out if it had a high enough EV.

tomski is a good choice. you don't see him trying to capitalize on
the who vp business. i would venture a guess that he wrote that
software for the purpose of personal use and was approached about
selling it, by guess who. i would like to know how the royalties for
bdwp are split. anyone know?

as a matter of fact, tom sims himself should be nominated. he doesn't
get any sort of compensation for the amount of effort and time he
puts into this board.

Looks like Tom is serious about this voting stuff! I have made my

choice,

have you? It's easy, and fun to decide.

I chose Tomski. To me his software has been a huge help to me in

the

ongoing battle with the casino. Being able to print a strategy for

any game

is huge!

Jean Scott was a consideration for me, and she is certainly a

strong

candidate. Frugal Gambler really open my eyes to the way casinos

operate

their comp programs. I chose Tomski over her because I felt his

program was

of value to all players, experienced or not. Jean has been a huge

help to

newcomers, but the old "salts" probably didn't get as much out of

it.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "golden bearpa" <kent@s...> wrote:

Who did you vote for, and why?

pa

"I couldn't repair my brakes, so I made my horn louder."
"All wives are alike, but they have different faces
so you can tell them apart."

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

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

[tooncesthecatwhocou1]

i'm surprised dancer is leading by such a large margin. it could be
argued that he should be inducted into the video poker hall of

shame

(yes shame) for his *consulting* work he has done for the casinos.

he

is working both sides of the fence and milking it for all it is
worth. just read his book. you'll see the man has very little in

the

way of morals or ethics. don't think for a new york minute that he
wouldn't some vp players out if it had a high enough EV.

Well, to some extent, this is a Hall of FAME, and Bob Dancer is one
of the biggest names in the business. I seriously considered him,
and there is little question that he added to the popularity of the
game for years. He's also given a prototype for what you need to do
to beat the game.

I passed on him because
1) While the strategy guides were fantastic back then, I could have
lived with public domain material.
2) BDPW was a critical tool years ago, but IMHO has been outflanked
by FVP (and were attributed to him only in marketing)
3) Bob seems mostly about ways to improve his bottom line than any
devotion to the game. Not that I wouldn't have made the same
decisions that he has, but others in the community have given up fame
and fortune for the betterment of the VP community, and I think they
deserve our honoring more.
4) Between his latest book, consulting for the casinos, and burning
casinos, it could be argued that he has hurt the game of VP as much
or more than he has helped it.

as a matter of fact, tom sims himself should be nominated. he

doesn't

get any sort of compensation for the amount of effort and time he
puts into this board.

Well, since Tom is the creator of this Hall of Fame, I think his
decision to sit at least this one out is commendable.

I wish this vote was more like a real hall of fame ballot, and we
simply voted "worthy/not worthy", and anyone who reached a certain
barrier (maybe 75%) got in. And maybe add a rule that you cannot
vote for more than half the candidates.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "W Wilson" <vivalv2001@y...> wrote:

[fayokoyama]

i'm not surprised dancer is getting votes. he's helped a lot of vp
players play better. i'm surprised you attack his morals and
ethics. that's a strong negative statement to make about a person.
you must know dancer better than those who voted for him.

by the way, tomski wrote vp strategy master. dean zamzow wrote bob
dancer presents winpoker. which author and which software are you
referring to?

Frank

i'm surprised dancer is leading by such a large margin. it could be
argued that he should be inducted into the video poker hall of

shame

(yes shame) for his *consulting* work he has done for the casinos.

he

is working both sides of the fence and milking it for all it is
worth. just read his book. you'll see the man has very little in

the

way of morals or ethics. don't think for a new york minute that he
wouldn't some vp players out if it had a high enough EV.

tomski is a good choice. you don't see him trying to capitalize on
the who vp business. i would venture a guess that he wrote that
software for the purpose of personal use and was approached about
selling it, by guess who. i would like to know how the royalties

for bdwp are split.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "W Wilson" <vivalv2001@y...> wrote:

[W_Wilson]

i'm not surprised dancer is getting votes. he's helped a lot of vp
players play better. i'm surprised you attack his morals and
ethics. that's a strong negative statement to make about a

person.

just read his book. his actions of bribery, lying, what some would
consider outright theft, on and on speak for themselves. have you
read his book?

i agree that he has helped a lot of players get better. i would also
bet my bankroll that he is responsible for selling us out to the
casinos by his *consulting*. i'm sure his *consulting* has led to the
removal of many great plays, decline of slot club bennies, and
reduction in value of casino promos. do i have proof? of course not,
dancer obviously isn't going to implicate himself. but it doesn't
take a genius to figure it out.

by the way, tomski wrote vp strategy master. dean zamzow wrote bob
dancer presents winpoker. which author and which software are you
referring to?

yes, that was my mistake. tomski is vpsm. i am corrected and admit i
was wrong.

i would still like to know the royalty split between zamzow and
dancer.

and jt, the people at dancer's classes are generally not completely
educated on exactly what dancer has done throughout his career. if i
saw dancer in person, i would not hesitate to say to him exactly what
said to the group. at least 2 others here agree with me, so i'm not
completely off base. i'm sure there are more, but they don't want to
speak out against anyone that is in the *establishment* as they say.

how could anyone vote for him when he is working both sides of the
fence? a double agent of sorts.

i'll give dancer credit for figuring it all out and profiting from
it. he obviously has a lot of people fooled.

but don't put the man on a pedestal as if he's one of the greatest
people in the vp world. far from it.

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "fayokoyama" <FYokoyama@a...> wrote:

[Randy_C]

I would not vote and be ex-communicated from the group if Bob Dancer were
the only name on the ballot.

I voted for Jazbo as his were the first strategy cards I ever bought and
still use some of them.

···

-----Original Message-----
From: W Wilson [mailto:vivalv2…@…com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 3:28 PM
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [vpFREE] dancer was Re: Who did you vote for - and why?

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "fayokoyama" <FYokoyama@a...> wrote:

i'm not surprised dancer is getting votes. he's helped a lot of vp
players play better. i'm surprised you attack his morals and
ethics. that's a strong negative statement to make about a

person.

just read his book. his actions of bribery, lying, what some would
consider outright theft, on and on speak for themselves. have you
read his book?

i agree that he has helped a lot of players get better. i would also
bet my bankroll that he is responsible for selling us out to the
casinos by his *consulting*. i'm sure his *consulting* has led to the
removal of many great plays, decline of slot club bennies, and
reduction in value of casino promos. do i have proof? of course not,
dancer obviously isn't going to implicate himself. but it doesn't
take a genius to figure it out.

by the way, tomski wrote vp strategy master. dean zamzow wrote bob
dancer presents winpoker. which author and which software are you
referring to?

yes, that was my mistake. tomski is vpsm. i am corrected and admit i
was wrong.

i would still like to know the royalty split between zamzow and
dancer.

and jt, the people at dancer's classes are generally not completely
educated on exactly what dancer has done throughout his career. if i
saw dancer in person, i would not hesitate to say to him exactly what
said to the group. at least 2 others here agree with me, so i'm not
completely off base. i'm sure there are more, but they don't want to
speak out against anyone that is in the *establishment* as they say.

how could anyone vote for him when he is working both sides of the
fence? a double agent of sorts.

i'll give dancer credit for figuring it all out and profiting from
it. he obviously has a lot of people fooled.

but don't put the man on a pedestal as if he's one of the greatest
people in the vp world. far from it.

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

ADVERTISEMENT

<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=251812.3170658.4537139.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=17050657
32:HM/A=1652963/R=0/SIG=11tvulr8i/*http:/www.netflix.com/Default?mqso=601782
75&partid=3170658> click here

<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=251812.3170658.4537139.1261774/D=egroupmai
l/S=:HM/A=1652963/rand=990556859>

vpFREE Links: http://tinyurl.com/a7ga

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.

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

[vpFREE4]

From this year's HOF announcement:

···

On 23 Jul 2003 at 21:16, tooncesthecatwhocoulddriveaca wrote:

I wish this vote was more like a real hall of fame ballot, and we
simply voted "worthy/not worthy", and anyone who reached a certain
barrier (maybe 75%) got in. And maybe add a rule that you cannot
vote for more than half the candidates.

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

The 2003 Hall of Fame election will be conducted between 17 July and 31 July. The nominee who receives the
most votes from the 2100+ vpFREE members will be the 2003 Hall of Fame inductee. Each vpFREE member
may cast one vote for one nominee, and can change their vote at any time during the voting period. If there is a
tie vote, the vpFREE Administrative Committee will break the tie and determine the 2003 inductee.

This process will be repeated in 2004 through 2007. In 2008 and subsequent years, an inductee must win the
popular vote, and then receive approval of 75% of the voting members in a second election. If the popular vote
winner doesn't receive 75% approval, there won't be an inductee that year.

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

vpFREE Administrator

[lowroller39565]

I like Bob Dancer and Jean Scott and will probably vote for them in
the future, but this year I voted for Dan Paymar because he is long
overdue the recognition.
Linda in Biloxi

[paisonvp]

Trying to catch up with my vpFREE reading, I've come to this thread
rather late. Nevertheless, I want to note that I heartily agree with
those who have voted for Dan Paymar. I have done the same. His book
on Optimum Play, I think, is still the most important and persuasive
discussion/explanation of effective positive vp play. And he has
continued to this day to contribute to our understanding. Also,
unlike some others on the list of nominees, he has always worked only
the players' side of the subject with grace, quiet competence, and an
ethical center.

One of the problems inherent in voting of this type is that those who
come to serious vp play in the past few years are understandably much
more aware of the most recent and hot "names" in the field. Often,
they have little or no knowledge of those who have paved the way for
the contemporary player. I have little doubt that, if this forum
continues and we vote every year, I'll eventually get around to
struggling with myself over whether to vote for TomSki, Scott, Zamzow,
Hughes, etc., for all have contributed meaningfully to our vp
proficiency and, I trust, success. (I purposely left Dancer's name
out of the above for I agree with Randy on this one, but that's for
another discussion.)

In short, I think all those I've named and others deserve to be
honored in a vp HOF, and I'll be pleased for any of them if they're
elected this year. However, I'll be saddened by our group's lack of
historical perspective and the passing over of Dan Paymar. This all
reminds me of a discussion I had with a few young American Legion
baseball players a few years ago. The subject was great right
fielders, and the names which dominated were those these 16 year olds
knew. Probably as it should be. I questioned how any of the players
they had named could possibly be more important to baseball than
Roberto Clemente. And one of the yougnsters turned to me and said,
"Who?" Sigh!!!!

Pete

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "lowroller39565" <lnmabry@c...> wrote:

I like Bob Dancer and Jean Scott and will probably vote for them in
the future, but this year I voted for Dan Paymar because he is long
overdue the recognition.
Linda in Biloxi

[nitaroyal]

I, too, am just catching up with a week of posts, and was mentally
drafting a reply saying the very same thing. But you said it so
well. . . thanks for saving me the effort!

Though there are many good choices, we can't allow the pioneers to
be forgotten. Without them, some of the other nominees would have
never made it to the spotlight. While I respect the marketing
skills of those with more recent fame, my vote also went to Dan
Paymar.

Trying to catch up with my vpFREE reading, I've come to this

thread

rather late. Nevertheless, I want to note that I heartily agree

with

those who have voted for Dan Paymar. I have done the same. His

book

on Optimum Play, I think, is still the most important and

persuasive

discussion/explanation of effective positive vp play. And he has
continued to this day to contribute to our understanding. Also,
unlike some others on the list of nominees, he has always worked

only

the players' side of the subject with grace, quiet competence, and

an

ethical center.

One of the problems inherent in voting of this type is that those

who

come to serious vp play in the past few years are understandably

much

···

--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "paisonvp" <paison@i...> wrote:

more aware of the most recent and hot "names" in the field.

[Harry_Porter]

paisonvp wrote:

Trying to catch up with my vpFREE reading, I've come to this thread
rather late. Nevertheless, I want to note that I heartily agree
with those who have voted for Dan Paymar. I have done the same.
His book on Optimum Play, I think, is still the most important and
persuasive discussion/explanation of effective positive vp play.

Pete, you've ripped the words from my throat. When I cast my vote for
Dan a couple of days ago it was precisely for this reason. I think he
is one of the most well-reasoned writers on the subject to be found
and I believe I've expressed in the past (here or elsewhere) that his
book is an unsurpassed reference to the beginning player and the more
advanced player alike. As a player becomes more proficient with a
game, a revisit of this text is warranted.

···

------

I'd like to touch on my thoughts about Bob Dancer in respect to this
poll -- both because of his strong showing and also the hostility
that's expressed here on occasion.

I have considerable respect for Bob based upon my limited direct and
indirect exposure to date. I find his commitment to game precision to
be admirable. While I don't find it necessary for a player to sweat
every minor penalty play, taking the most significant penalties into
consideration can lead to a much stronger attention to hand details
and a marked improvement in accuracy. I don't think game strategy
presents the strongest challenge to a player. Long after basic
strategy is mastered, play errors due to occasional inattention is a
thorn in every player's side.

Yet it's a fact that ultimately luck plays a tremendous role in a
player's fortune. Dancer's recent book illustrates too clearly the
role of a blessed fate in his bankroll buildup. I do find it a little
ironic that in a recent article he placed VERY strong emphasis on the
contribution of his attention to the smallest of errors to his results.

Given a fairly high play volume at high denominations, the impact may
very well be considerable and of a magnitude that most anyone would
consider to be valuable. However, in the hands of the typical player
I'm hard pressed to believe that the difference in ER's without and
with penalty considerations will ever be significant. Tips in a given
day have an impact of a magnitude higher.

That said, I would still point to his efforts in conducting classes
and his writings as a keynote of his career (no matter the
motivation). Innumerable players have benefited. As to his other
activities, there are claims that he has harmed the average player.
I'm not familar with the specifics, but I suspect that harm is limited
to other players in the "pro" circle. I won't suggest that I'm
insensitive to that, but as I've made clear I'm coming from the
perspective of a recreational player -- as are the wide majority of
members here. From our perspective, I think Bob Dancer ultimately
merits inclusion in the "Hall".

I appreciate the forebearance of anyone who's waded through this
discussion. There have been some rather heated comments posted here
in the past concerning Bob and I felt driven to speak my mind. I
won't discount the merits of the dissent, but until some relevant
specific examples are discussed I hold that the whole of the members
here have greatly benefited from his efforts.

- Harry