I just read Bob Dancer's Jan 25th column

Having a team would spread the risk/reward. It wouldn't change the math. If Dancer could absorb the risk, there is no reason for a team.

"Team", when it comes to gambling, or cash, IMO, will often lead to one or more "team" members gaining at the expense of other "team" members. Seen it before.

No way for me to ever trust a team other than perhaps one or two family members, or long time associates. Someone will get the short straw, and will not know it.

Hell of a thread. I guess our bringing the column to LVA was a good move. Here are my comments.

Dancer's play was solid. He wasn't "chasing comps" or doing anything that won't accrue to increased profits down the line. Do you really think this guy is sloppy? Not remotely. And no one but he has ALL the facts.

Singer is disingenuous and ill-informed. Anyone who gives him a shred of creedence is sorely out of touch.

We at LVA need to pay more attention to these message boards and we will. Interested in moderating? Contact me.

I'm amazed at the relative civility of this discussion, but hear this. The next person that uses a real name, first, last, or otherwise of a pseudonymed gambler will never post here again. It's not remotely cool or clever. Do not do it again.

Absolutely agreed. No real names should be used -- including the real names of professional gamblers and authors who use "pen names" and including the real names of those who post here under "handles."

And YES bringing his column here was an EXCELLENT MOVE. Thank you. Next -- add videos.

edited to add: also appreciate the updates to let us know when new columns are posted.

One thing that I've repeatedly stated to is that we only have the information presented in the columns authored by Dancer.

Incomplete information.

Something I've mentioned before, but which everyone else has ignored, is that this contest was for Invited Guests.

Perhaps the guest list of those invited was "published" with the leader board, rules, etc. Perhaps the casino only invited a handful of players to participate, or perhaps many dozens. We do not know, but Dancer may have. Perhaps their was a private party for invited guests. And a guest list for everyone.

We do not know.

And perhaps he personally knows each of those invited guests, and has knowledge of their "worth" and ability to compete. Their willingness to risk millions.

So the "possibility" of his not winning, based on the number of invited Guests, who they are, and more information than we have, he could very reasonably make an informed decision, and formulate a strategy that would provide a nearly 100% chance of winning the prize.

And, it is very possible he could have decided with a reasonable amount of certainty that he would win the car with $2.5 to $10 million coin in.

The "Invited Guests" list would keep out the mysterious stranger with deep pockets looking for that vehicle." Sorry, you were not invited. :::shrug:::

Just one possibility, but it certainly could shoot holes and sink your boat if you've sided with A.L. and his pure math approach of not allowing for the possibility of not winning because someone with deep pockets "could" show up.

There's more I could say, but I do not have all of the facts.

Neither do the "naysayers".

We only have what what facts were published in the columns.

The "invited guest list" would probably not be publicly available --- yeesh, that would be a weird and unusual breaking of privacy and protocol. Roadtrip --- you made your point and all that previously. Such a list exists for such events, of course, and Dancer could have bribed somebody to get hold of it at check-in or elsewhere, but that would be illegal and blah, blah, and such. He probably could get hold of it if he went to proper lengths -- point made. Would that be ethical, legal, and so on? Not unless everyone had one.

I've only been to a couple of these invite-only high-roller things -- has anyone attended one that featured an actual real-name guest list given to attendees? If anyone has, please let me know, and I'll make sure I don't attend another.

Oh please. Dancer's analysis was complete, but as usual when it comes to dealing with players club promos, he was dealing with incomplete information. And then he had to use his judgment gained from years of experience.

alanleroy, you would do best to stay away from serious video poker, because frequently you have to deal with incomplete information. After you've played all month, a casino (Southpoint) can cut back on their usually generous mailer. Or a casino host, like one at the Tropicana in 2010, could lie to Dancer about the cashback percentage. Or a casino could even substantially cut back on their mailer when a player takes advantage of a free buffett. Dancer suspects that happened recently, but he isn't sure. See, alanleroy, incomplete information, NOT incomplete analysis.

And I guarantee you that Dancer's fine Luxury Land Rover has by now been converted into liquid funds.

I was referring to the analysis that was published in his column. I'll buy Anthony's statement that "And no one but he has ALL the facts." You and others seem comfortable that all his homework was done and that it was a solid proposition based soley on his reputation. I'm cynical about a basic assumption here...you bought it hook, line and sinker...but, I wish you nothing but 'luck' to be driving that Land Rover out of the Next M contest.

I used to play these types of things a lot. There are always unknowns. You analyze and decide whether or not you want to play. If it's yes, you draw up a game plan, implement it, and are prepared to alter the plan as the competition progresses. Sometimes you're way off in your original thinking. Usually not.