[vpFREE] Re: LV Trip Report -- Aug 18-24

 
.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Jean Scott's Frugal Vegas LVA BLOG - 28 AUG 2014

 

Jean Scott's Frugal Vegas LVA BLOG - 28 AUG 2014

Becoming a Great-Grandmother

http://jscott.lvablog.com/?p=3614

*************************************************
This link is posted for informational purposes
and doesn't constitute an endorsement or approval
of the linked article's content by vpFREE. Any
discussion of the article must be done in
accordance with vpFREE's rules and policies.
*************************************************

__._,_.___
Posted by: vpFREE3355 <vpfree3355@gmail.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1)

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] Re: Bob Dancer's LVA - 26 AUG 2014

 

And of course you are forgeting that a particular slot might have an average hold of say 10%, but at certain times it's an overlay because of progressives, bonuses, piggybanks, etc. The casinos love these slots because they are popular and on average they get to hold the 10% or whatever. The players love the challenge of trying to play at the right time to get a jackpot. It's a win-win.

__._,_.___
Posted by: nightoftheiguana2000@yahoo.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (8)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Bob D's no brainer at Palms

 

The discussion was about him not posting the results in the original article, and the expectations of his readers, etc.
I think most of us saw that he did post his results in his response.
My comments were addressing his comments as to why a response would be asked for.

A.P.

From: "Bruce Cohen brucedcohen2002@yahoo.com [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 12:26:19 PM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Bob D's no brainer at Palms

 
Bob did post what happened.

the problem is that he bottom posts: his post showed after the question so everybody missed it, including me.

Most people top post, or have their response appear before the message they're answering.  It used to be net etiquette to bottom post.

Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S® 5, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone


-------- Original message --------
From: "Albert Pearson ehpee@rogers.com [vpFREE]"
Date:08/28/2014 7:12 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Bob D's no brainer at Palms

 


In my first note regarding the column I mentioned that the results were irrelevant. In his reply to the other post where he says why do you care. I thought it would be obvious why people care and that is why I made my patronizing response. Like I also said in that post it was not germane to the article to mention that he was in the tournament. One could make all the relevant points without mentioning that you were entered in the tournament. 
I will bet you dollars to doughnuts that if he had won he would have mentioned it.

A.P.  

From: "harry.porter@verizon.net [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 8:41:36 AM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Bob D's no brainer at Palms

 
Maybe I've grown a thick skin after 30 years of east coast living (certainly I have more than a few callouses these days) ... but Bob's reply, while emphatic, was fully respectful.

"Why do you care?" can be an obnoxious response to a question, in some circumstances.  But I see Bob's point being that whether he came away a winner was the last thing someone would find beneficial in his column -- he writes to inform and his column had a particular focus (which wasn't the tournament outcome).

I had an aunt Naomi who frequently was dissatisfied by television movies.  If a story featured a couple, the wife pregnant with a baby (incidental to the main story line), even if the primary plot line was satisfied in the end she'd pout if the pregnancy wasn't carried to term during the movie.

Were Bob the writer in that case, I suspect he wouldn't be terribly concerned with Naomi's disappointment.


---In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <der145@...> wrote :

What a jerk to respond like this.  All this person did was ask a simple question which was probably on the minds of a lot of people who took the time to read the article.  It is a question that given the circumstances of a story about playing in a tournament that would be on one's mind after reading the article.  You didn't have to respond in such a manner.
 
In a message dated 8/27/2014 5:29:42 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, vpFREE@yahoogroups.com writes:
 
I also found the article very interesting, but the ending was missing - did he or Bonnie win anything in the tournament after all that effort?

 The short answer is no, neither one of us won anything (other than me winning the $1 from her in side bets that I "forgot" to collect) although I did talk a host into a $25 lunch comp.

The longer answer is, "why do you even care?" Even if you found out I won $1,000, what would that tell you? You still wouldn't know my year-to-date score within $50,000. You wouldn't know my net worth within $1 million. You wouldn't know whether I won or lost $100, $1000, $10,000, $100,000 later that weekend. So if my wealth/bankroll before the event was a big unknown to you, which it was, (big unknown + $1,000) is still a big unknown.

Had I won, it wouldn't have made it a better play. Even though I lost didn't mean it was a bad play. Whether a play is good or bad depends on the information available BEFORE you actually make the gamble. And as I argued in the article, thi s was a good low-roller gamble.

Bob






__._,_.___
Posted by: Albert Pearson <ehpee@rogers.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (12)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Bob D's no brainer at Palms

 

Bob did post what happened.

the problem is that he bottom posts: his post showed after the question so everybody missed it, including me.

Most people top post, or have their response appear before the message they're answering.  It used to be net etiquette to bottom post.

Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S® 5, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone


-------- Original message --------
From: "Albert Pearson ehpee@rogers.com [vpFREE]"
Date:08/28/2014 7:12 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Bob D's no brainer at Palms

 

In my first note regarding the column I mentioned that the results were irrelevant. In his reply to the other post where he says why do you care. I thought it would be obvious why people care and that is why I made my patronizing response. Like I also said in that post it was not germane to the article to mention that he was in the tournament. One could make all the relevant points without mentioning that you were entered in the tournament. 
I will bet you dollars to doughnuts that if he had won he would have mentioned it.

A.P.  

From: "harry.porter@verizon.net [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 8:41:36 AM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Bob D's no brainer at Palms

 
Maybe I've grown a thick skin after 30 years of east coast living (certainly I have more than a few callouses these days) ... but Bob's reply, while emphatic, was fully respectful.

"Why do you care?" can be an obnoxious response to a question, in some circumstances.  But I see Bob's point being that whether he came away a winner was the last thing someone would find beneficial in his column -- he writes to inform and his column had a particular focus (which wasn't the tournament outcome).

I had an aunt Naomi who frequently was dissatisfied by television movies.  If a story featured a couple, the wife pregnant with a baby (incidental to the main story line), even if the primary plot line was satisfied in the end she'd pout if the pregnancy wasn't carried to term during the movie.

Were Bob the writer in that case, I suspect he wouldn't be terribly concerned with Naomi's disappointment.


---In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <der145@...> wrote :

What a jerk to respond like this.  All this person did was ask a simple question which was probably on the minds of a lot of people who took the time to read the article.  It is a question that given the circumstances of a story about playing in a tournament that would be on one's mind after reading the article.  You didn't have to respond in such a manner.
 
In a message dated 8/27/2014 5:29:42 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, vpFREE@yahoogroups.com writes:
 
I also found the article very interesting, but the ending was missing - did he or Bonnie win anything in the tournament after all that effort?

 The short answer is no, neither one of us won anything (other than me winning the $1 from her in side bets that I "forgot" to collect) although I did talk a host into a $25 lunch comp.

The longer answer is, "why do you even care?" Even if you found out I won $1,000, what would that tell you? You still wouldn't know my year-to-date score within $50,000. You wouldn't know my net worth within $1 million. You wouldn't know whether I won or lost $100, $1000, $10,000, $100,000 later that weekend. So if my wealth/bankroll before the event was a big unknown to you, which it was, (big unknown + $1,000) is still a big unknown.

Had I won, it wouldn't have made it a better play. Even though I lost didn't mean it was a bad play. Whether a play is good or bad depends on the information available BEFORE you actually make the gamble. And as I argued in the article, thi s was a good low-roller gamble.

Bob




__._,_.___
Posted by: Bruce Cohen <brucedcohen2002@yahoo.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (11)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Bob D's no brainer at Palms

 

In my first note regarding the column I mentioned that the results were irrelevant. In his reply to the other post where he says why do you care. I thought it would be obvious why people care and that is why I made my patronizing response. Like I also said in that post it was not germane to the article to mention that he was in the tournament. One could make all the relevant points without mentioning that you were entered in the tournament. 
I will bet you dollars to doughnuts that if he had won he would have mentioned it.

A.P.  

From: "harry.porter@verizon.net [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com>
To: vpFREE@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2014 8:41:36 AM
Subject: Re: [vpFREE] Bob D's no brainer at Palms

 
Maybe I've grown a thick skin after 30 years of east coast living (certainly I have more than a few callouses these days) ... but Bob's reply, while emphatic, was fully respectful.

"Why do you care?" can be an obnoxious response to a question, in some circumstances.  But I see Bob's point being that whether he came away a winner was the last thing someone would find beneficial in his column -- he writes to inform and his column had a particular focus (which wasn't the tournament outcome).

I had an aunt Naomi who frequently was dissatisfied by television movies.  If a story featured a couple, the wife pregnant with a baby (incidental to the main story line), even if the primary plot line was satisfied in the end she'd pout if the pregnancy wasn't carried to term during the movie.

Were Bob the writer in that case, I suspect he wouldn't be terribly concerned with Naomi's disappointment.


---In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <der145@...> wrote :

What a jerk to respond like this.  All this person did was ask a simple question which was probably on the minds of a lot of people who took the time to read the article.  It is a question that given the circumstances of a story about playing in a tournament that would be on one's mind after reading the article.  You didn't have to respond in such a manner.
 
In a message dated 8/27/2014 5:29:42 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, vpFREE@yahoogroups.com writes:
 
I also found the article very interesting, but the ending was missing - did he or Bonnie win anything in the tournament after all that effort?

 The short answer is no, neither one of us won anything (other than me winning the $1 from her in side bets that I "forgot" to collect) although I did talk a host into a $25 lunch comp.

The longer answer is, "why do you even care?" Even if you found out I won $1,000, what would that tell you? You still wouldn't know my year-to-date score within $50,000. You wouldn't know my net worth within $1 million. You wouldn't know whether I won or lost $100, $1000, $10,000, $100,000 later that weekend. So if my wealth/bankroll before the event was a big unknown to you, which it was, (big unknown + $1,000) is still a big unknown.

Had I won, it wouldn't have made it a better play. Even though I lost didn't mean it was a bad play. Whether a play is good or bad depends on the information available BEFORE you actually make the gamble. And as I argued in the article, thi s was a good low-roller gamble.

Bob




__._,_.___
Posted by: Albert Pearson <ehpee@rogers.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (10)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Bob D's no brainer at Palms

 

I agree with Harry.   Bob used the "Why do you care?" question to illustrate the important point that the outcome has nothing to do with whether a play was a good bet.   I found the tone of the response to be matter-of-fact, and not obnoxious in the least.

--Dunbar

---In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <harry.porter@...> wrote :

Maybe I've grown a thick skin after 30 years of east coast living (certainly I have more than a few callouses these days) ... but Bob's reply, while emphatic, was fully respectful.

"Why do you care?" can be an obnoxious response to a question, in some circumstances.  But I see Bob's point being that whether he came away a winner was the last thing someone would find beneficial in his column -- he writes to inform and his column had a particular focus (which wasn't the tournament outcome).

...

__._,_.___
Posted by: h_dunbar@hotmail.com
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (9)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Bob D's no brainer at Palms

 

Maybe I've grown a thick skin after 30 years of east coast living (certainly I have more than a few callouses these days) ... but Bob's reply, while emphatic, was fully respectful.

"Why do you care?" can be an obnoxious response to a question, in some circumstances.  But I see Bob's point being that whether he came away a winner was the last thing someone would find beneficial in his column -- he writes to inform and his column had a particular focus (which wasn't the tournament outcome).

I had an aunt Naomi who frequently was dissatisfied by television movies.  If a story featured a couple, the wife pregnant with a baby (incidental to the main story line), even if the primary plot line was satisfied in the end she'd pout if the pregnancy wasn't carried to term during the movie.

Were Bob the writer in that case, I suspect he wouldn't be terribly concerned with Naomi's disappointment.



---In vpFREE@yahoogroups.com, <der145@...> wrote :

What a jerk to respond like this.  All this person did was ask a simple question which was probably on the minds of a lot of people who took the time to read the article.  It is a question that given the circumstances of a story about playing in a tournament that would be on one's mind after reading the article.  You didn't have to respond in such a manner.
 
In a message dated 8/27/2014 5:29:42 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, vpFREE@yahoogroups.com writes:
 

I also found the article very interesting, but the ending was missing - did he or Bonnie win anything in the tournament after all that effort?

 The short answer is no, neither one of us won anything (other than me winning the $1 from her in side bets that I "forgot" to collect) although I did talk a host into a $25 lunch comp.

The longer answer is, "why do you even care?" Even if you found out I won $1,000, what would that tell you? You still wouldn't know my year-to-date score within $50,000. You wouldn't know my net worth within $1 million. You wouldn't know whether I won or lost $100, $1000, $10,000, $100,000 later that weekend. So if my wealth/bankroll before the event was a big unknown to you, which it was, (big unknown + $1,000) is still a big unknown.

Had I won, it wouldn't have made it a better play. Even though I lost didn't mean it was a bad play. Whether a play is good or bad depends on the information available BEFORE you actually make the gamble. And as I argued in the article, thi s was a good low-roller gamble.

Bob


__._,_.___
Posted by: harry.porter@verizon.net
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (8)

.

__,_._,___

Re: [vpFREE] Metropolis and Southern Indians

 

Yeah sounds cool, wish it was there this week. 


On Thursday, August 28, 2014 2:52 AM, "tringlomane@yahoo.com [vpFREE]" <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


 
Yep.  Metropolis is sorta neat if you have any interest in Superman.  My g/f and I really don't, but we still posed in the Superman/Superwoman cutouts anyway.  lol

As for VP, yeah, pretty much sucks.  But when the 2012 "Race to Rewards" was on, the 7/5 DDB multi-way progressive was near a Double Royal...so it was a reasonable ~98% to try to earn 25 Tier Credits on.  Did I hit anything on it...no.  I really miss that promo though...


__._,_.___
Posted by: Clinton House <hpof6@sbcglobal.net>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (7)

.

__,_._,___

[vpFREE] NYTimes on what CZR knows

 





If he know so much why can't he use it.

Cheers,

Henry

__._,_.___
Posted by: hkhenry <hkhenry@yahoo.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group • Start a New Topic • Messages in this topic (1)

.

__,_._,___
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)