For what it's worth, I didn't have huge expectations for the educational aspects of the show, and I didn't have a problem with how it turned out. I think that, perhaps, finding ways to make it applicable to advantage players would be better. For example, you talked about the 2 bottled waters for $1, but I would want to see a discussion on how to make the relationship between the advantage player and the cocktail waitress a mutually beneficial relationship. To most advantage players, 8 ounces of coke or water for $1 is not a +EV situation. Would she prefer I bring my own non-alcoholic drinks, how not to look like an ass when I hit a $5,000 jackpot that doesn't make me even for the night, etc.
But I wouldn't say that Michael's experiment of bringing in a different type of guest has failed (especially if done as a change of pace). Though I will say that I was listening to a podcast, and not over terrestrial radio.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, Bob Dancer <bobdancervp@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Last night's show featured cocktail waitress Dollie Wong and I'm afraid it got a little out of hand. At one point we asked her why she did something and her response was "because I have big tits and I'm hot!" That is NOT the kind of answer that I find helpful to gamblers looking for an edge. Her language was a little free flowing for AM radio and our producer had to bleep her seven times. She showed up with her boy toy and they couldn't keep their hands off of each other. This tended to make her answers flirtatious --- but perhaps she's always that way. I actually take the mission of the show seriously --- listeners will be more knowledgeable gamblers tommorow from listening to the show than they were yesterday --- and shows like this one didn't quite meet that mission statement. For that I apologize. I'm sure, however, that some folks will find Dollie's sexy flirtatiousness to be fascinating radio. Oh well. Bob
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
