I already said how the bet would be resolved. If you have another suggestion, go ahead.
Casinos are very reactionary institutions. We just saw the palms change their bingo promotion after they lost too much money. We see stuff like this every month. The removal of high denom vp was most likely a reaction to the Internet analysis of it.
--- In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, "rob.singer1111@yahoo.com" <rob.singer1111@...> wrote:
>
> So you're saying the casino "forgot" to remove the hi-limit slots even though they strategically removed the hi-limit vp machines....so as a sure thing/easy money/all-balls fix, they chose to ban those who played them and knowingly accepted the coming lawsuits from all these "on the up & up" anonymous, but now legendary, players?
>
> It sure is baffling that someone wants to bet $1k on hearsay and anonymous postings from the Internet. How will a winner be determined? Seems to me we'd have to wait for the hearing and Revel has to ADMIT to doing that to players with real names.
>
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "Mickey" <mickeycrimm@...>
> To: <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LV Advisor Column - 9 JUL 2013
> Date: Wed, Jul 10, 2013 3:38 pm
> It was reported in the WoV thread early on that in the first couple of days of the promotion players who were hammering the $25 slots and the one $100 slot were being disqualified from the promotion. I suspect these are the people who are going to sue. There is no way to manipulate the card on those slots. And I suspect that these players were the sharpest, biggest bankrolled players in the house, and had enough moxie to stay away from card manipulation.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [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 (8) |
