I just read Bob Dancer's Jan 25th column

Yeah, blowing 65 grand in 2 days doesn't make you a failure-it makes you a "pro".

You either have a bias that you can't get over, or you simply don't get it. Either way, your position is off base.

I'll just add the obvious --- since a large strip casino was snagged for rigging a drawing a couple of years back and got the wrist slap (which did no real damage to their rep), these drawings can be rigged. Not only that, they were caught because insiders came forward and spilled the beans, not because some outsider discovered the riggings.

Now, the obvious questions are: If they were caught doing this, had they done it in the past (without being caught)? Since being caught was due to insiders blowing the whistle, isn't it likely other casinos don't get caught when insiders don't blow the whistle?

So, when it comes to drawings, we are sometimes talking about really, really incomplete information.

If a Dancer runs into just one of these rigged scenarios in a span of 50 of these drawings, he's actually playing a big-money negative expectation game, even if he's omniscient regarding who's playing how much. Now Dancer is aware of this, which is why sometimes I think he may be making a group sale when he pitches these things, or the tail, as I said, may be wagging the dog.

Then of course there's Larry Volk and American Coin that swindled tens of thousands of casino players out of untold millions of dollars... by rigging VP machines.
In a perfect world of course that could never happen again.......
and we all know we live in a perfect world now, right?





Don't worry folks it can never happen again-so keep buying those strategy cards and software!

IF it were not possible to get a royal on a VP machine, what would the HA than be?

Let's use a 9-6 JOB.

Thanks


Never mind.....
I used Wizardofodds.com calculator.

thanks

I'm curious about this: you decide to play for this promotion with the goal of winning the car. at what point do you decide that you have lost too much money to continue? in other words, is there a point where you are throwing good money after bad?

thanks

Reasonable and intelligent question. Assuming the basics of the promotion haven't changed and it's still positive, only bankroll considerations would dictate stopping. I once discovered a keno game with a 20% player advantage, but it required hitting a long-shot 5 or 6 on a 6-spot. I played it and got very unlucky, finally getting to a point where I worried about my solvency if I were to continue. At that point, I called friends who I knew to be better capitalized. I brought them in on the play at a much diminished position for myself, but only because I could no longer stand the bad swings. The point is, the play was as good on the 100th keno ticket as it was on the first. It's not important to this discussion, but under the new arrangement we hit what we were going for (and I couldn't prior) twice in one game in less than a half hour of play. My capitalized friends made out like bandits, while I got back only a portion of my losses and the casino closed the loophole. If it's good and you can afford bad luck, you never stop.

Hey Anthony - since you're following this thread - how about doing us all a favour and banning "Black Jesus". No need for his trash on this board - IMO.....Thanks....

As a neewbie at playing VP, I'm not quite seeing something here. Dancer is a "VP expert" and is describing how he laid down more than 60k for a 40k automobile. All the while telling us this was a good experience for other folks to try?

I understand he had a slight advantage, however I don't get how he actually used his advantage to get the car? An "expert" is supposed to show us "lay people" how to use their expert knowledge to achieve a result that most folks won't be able to duplicate. If Dancer's objective was to show us how to spend more money for a car than what it was worth, he did quite well. If however, his objective was to win the car spending as little as possible, he failed, rather badly I might say.

The way Dancer explained what he was doing lead me to believe he was chasing comps. He never had any type of stopping point, just what it took to bring down the car. Anyone with their right mind is only going to spend a certain amount of money for something. Why would I spend $20,000 more for a car than it was worth? I thought the premise here was to get the car while spending the least amount possible. Or was I totally off in trying to figure out what he was trying to show us little minions.

Bingo.