$1 Billion Gambled away!!!!

Ex-mayor's $1 billion gambling woes stun San Diego

SAN DIEGO (AP) — Maureen O'Connor was a physical education teacher who won a seat on the San Diego City Council when she was only 25 years old, later winning two terms as the city's first female mayor as she charmed voters with a populist flair.

But her rapid rise was matched by her fall, culminating Thursday when she acknowledged in federal court that she took $2.1 million from her late husband's charitable foundation during a decade-long gambling spree in which she won — and lost — more than $1 billion.


>>>Full story here<<<

*O'Connor's game of choice was video poker at casinos in San Diego, Las Vegas and Atlantic City, N.J.

*O'Connor, 66, once had a personal fortune that her attorney estimated between $40 million and $50 million, inherited from her husband of 17 years, Robert O. Peterson, founder of the Jack in the Box Inc. fast-food chain.

The "two" Maureen's, 1) A Democrat and 2) a lying, cheating thief- one and the same. The story sounds like a Hollywood script- brain tumor, a cane, started "grief gambling" 7 years after her husbands death (7 years?). Stole 2.1 million from an Alzheimer's foundation to cover more gambling, gambling debts and living costs. Living costs? And,of course, she intended to repay the foundation but blames her "brain tumor" for her behavior. (And no one knew that this was going on for over 10 years.) Then she was allowed to plead "not guilty" in return for 2 years deferred prosecution while she tries to repay the foundation. One will probably find her in another casino recouping the stolen funds. Just another elected official doing what they do.

She didn't gamble away $1 billion. She lost just over $13 million on over a billion in action. Not a bad loss rate at all, better than one would get at the pass line, and think of all the comps!

You need to re-read the story.

Chilcoot-- One of the definitions for "obtuse" is - "not quick or alert in perception,feeling or intellect,not observant,dull. I believe that, for me, describes you. Now have someone read and explain my comments to you before you comment about what I write.

One of the definitions of "narcissism" is inordinate fascination with oneself; excessive self-love; vanity. Synonyms: self-centeredness, smugness, egocentrism. Basically being a self-centered tool who has no ability to comprehend that (1) there are other people in the world, or that (2) sometimes others pay them no mind.

I was responding to Blade, who titled this post $1 Billion Gambled away!!!! The woman did not gamble $1 billion away, she wagered $1 billion and lost just over $13 million, according to her attorney.

Next time specify as to whom you are replying to, as I did. Your reply to Blade was made almost 2 hours after she posted,but less than 30 minutes after my post, which I know you read. Once again, another example of you being "obtuse".

That my initial post responded to nothing drmilled wrote would have been been a sufficient clue for a non-narcissistic person that maybe I was giving some attention to someone else's thoughts.

I hope she was getting some good comps with that much play.

Back to the original post. Very good discussion on this over on the VPFree Yahoo group.

She did indeed lose over $1 billion. She had just over $1 billion in W2 reported wins along with more of course where her hits didnt generate a W2. Her net loss, after wins and losses were around $13 million. As far as how much action the estimates vary over on VPFree but they speculate she had in the neighborhood of $1.5 Billion in action to have generated the $1 Billion in reported wins. It does show she had at least some command of the game to have such a low loss rate on that kind of action.

As to comps it was speculated they really were immaterial. As with most problem gamblers it was the rush of the action and now free rooms or food which were the motivating factor.

There is also some thought about how fast she played and on what machines to get that sort of action in over the time in question.

Her net loss was about $13M so I am having trouble with the statement that she "lost over $1B." Her only loss is her net loss. That is like buying a $10 lottery ticket, getting a $3 return and saying "I won $3" when that person actually lost $7. My wife likes to say those kind of things.
Anyway I guarantee the Mayor was not playing quarter VP like most of us do.