You had me till you mentioned Obamacare, actually it is the Affordable Health Care Act. I thought this was not a political site.
________________________________
From: what7do7you7want <what7do7you7want@yahoo.com>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2013 3:13 AM
Subject: [vpFREE] Re: : Bob Dancer's LV Advisor Column - 9 JUL 2013
Bob...
Your "view of the world" is bat-scheet-freaking-insane.
Here is why.
The casinos are basically managed by morons with a
private mint to print money.
Skilled players can't really harm them unless they
do something so moronic that they DESERVE to get
spanked just for being stupid.
You sound as if you think teaching the casinos will
create a balance. This is totally insane.
The idea that casinos would go broke from skilled
play is almost as insane. If they really, really
got hurt, they'd eventually plug the huge leaks, but
more than likely their general level of stupid
would still leave good plays to be played. Over
time, perhaps decades, they'd eventually learn to hire
some kid out of MIT to do what you do, but given the
resistance you faced to even get some of them to listen,
we can be pretty sure that would happen at a much
slower pace than it did with your input.
The only reason there are ANY good plays anywhere
is because the casinos are not only stupid, they are
too stupid to listen to what you are teaching them.
If they had listened to you all these years, they'd
all be like South Point or worse. Mostly worse.
The South Point is a really good example. It used to
be a nice little play. It was never huge, but it was
pretty decent. You came in and not much later the
mail dried up and there were no more 3x days. And
at NO POINT was the South Point in trouble. They were
surviving and thriving all that time. If they had
any problems, it was due to the economy, not skilled
players. And, in fact, that casino did pretty well
even during the bad days of 2008-2009. Once they
understood the situation, there was no "balance". They
just decimated the place and left a few crumbs.
This "happy medium" you refer to is simply not realistic.
Do you really think that casinos would truly learn the
situation AND continue to allow folks to make serious
money or even decent money? That is not how any
business works. Each and every business will take any
edge it can get and will happily remove ALL good plays
if it boosts their bottom line.
This is why Obamacare is GUARANTEED to
cause a massive shift to part time labor and so on.
Even companies that could afford to keep the same
number of full time workers will switch so their
profits will be even higher. This is why your
idea of a happy balance is so wrong.
Under your "world view" there might be a few $10 an
hour plays out there for PR or whatever, but that's
about it. By the time I bailed on Vegas, it seemed
like I could make about $10-14 an hour all over town
but more than that was rare, and mostly as the result of
some information you had not managed to teach the
casinos. This is what you caused and worked to achieve.
And I am sure your own hunting grounds of higher limit
games are a lot less well stocked as well. In fact,
it probably hurt you MORE than most. A good promo with
your bankroll can be worth thousands or ten of thousands.
We will never know how many truly great plays you
could have crushed had you simply kept your mouth shut.
About all your tactics have done is the following....
Made the casinos more money
Made you short term gain (but probably not long term)
Destroyed VP in Vegas and many other places.
The sad thing is that I know you have benefited from
other VP players. Players who would never have helped
you at all if they had any clue you would sell information
to the casinos. I can concede that you owe nothing to
them, but it still takes a pretty cold heart to take
actions you know will hurt those who you worked with and
befriended.
But even if we set that aside, in the long run your
whole approach probably hurt your bottom line too.
One can never be certain, but it seems likely to me
that Vegas VP would still be a lot better for everyone,
including you, if you had stuck to teaching software
and such.
So please Bob...If you think its OK to behave as you have,
then maybe you can justify it and sleep at night, but please
don't for a nanosecond act like you are doing anyone a
favor with this "happy medium" nonsense. You are not
serving some meta-higher purpose. You are (maybe) lining
your pockets, pure and simple.
QZ
--- In mailto:vpFREE%40yahoogroups.com, Bob Dancer <bobdancervp@...> wrote:
>
> MHS wrote:
> In that case, he should stop trying to present himself as an advocate
> for players. And the alternative is . . . . presenting himself as a
> ????? for the casinos.
>
> I produce and sell information to players, casinos, manufacturers, and governmental agencies. I have never presented myself as an advocate for players. I do believe that players who take my classes and read the materials I produce will have better gambling results than players who don't. If you believe otherwise, don't read my stuff.
> Some players have an "us against the casinos" view of the world and find it easier to understand if I'm always on one side or the other. That's not the way I operate. My view is that players and casinos both have to survive for this to work. If casinos take all the money from players, then casinos will go broke because there is nobody to support them. Likewise, if casinos lose too much money to players (as a whole), the casinos go broke and then the players will have nobody to win from.
> There's a happy medium. Casinos can survive while offering decent games --- that the best players can exploit. I do what I can to support this "view of the world." If somebody else doesn't like it, so be it.
> Would it bother you if a doctor or dentist had both players and casino executives for patients? Or a grocer sold food to both groups? I don't see it as a lot different than that to sell information to both groups.
> Bob
>
>
>
>
> __._,_.__I_
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (12) |
