Please remember that the original premise of this thread was about people's RF droughts. That theme dramatically changed when melbedewy stated "The honest answers in this thread should be conclusive evidence to the novice that one CAN NOT make a living off VP in 2011."
So, the "argument" is whether one can or cannot make a living off of vp in the current casino environment. Arci and I both made the point that allowing for a personal determination of what constitutes "making a living", that we both happen to know people who can and do. It sounds like Arci plays for profit and not entertainment and if the truth be told; I fall clearly into that category.
I'm in no way being judgmental against those who simply want to play for the entertainment value, believe that "streaks" will make them a winner or even those who deviate against computer perfect strategy. It's your money folks so feel free to play it as you like. There are many slot players on these boards and no one says that they're wrong for choosing to play slots so I find it disheartening as to why the same respect and appreciation can't be shared by the (for lack of better description) math vs. non-math people here.
I still stand by my contention that people can make a living playing vp in 2011. I can say this simply because I know people that do. Not many, but some. The bigger group that I’m aware of and would like to consider myself part of is advantage players that make a low 5 digit profit from their hobby. One can choose to believe this or not and frankly, I don't care. I'm not trying to sell the concept of one quitting their day job to play vp for a living. I'm also not trying to convert everyone over to the "math" camp. Frankie is right and I think Arci would agree....if everyone played "by the book", any remaining playable games would vanish.
Money, while it might not be for you, it’s clearly a risk/reward scenario that works for Dancer. Some might think he’s crazy but it’s his choice and the alternative of working in a conventional job from 9-5 is scary to him so that’s a driving factor as well. Just think of the bankroll as working capital in a business. Some businesses are riskier, some derive lower margins, but in the end, that doesn't mean that they're not profitable.
Casinos have gotten savvier and therefore it is tougher to find good plays. However, don’t give casinos and in particular, their marketing departments too much credit. I can give you scores of examples where casinos have simply screwed up and made a game or promo too lucrative. A really common and well known example was HET when they rolled out Total Rewards (I believe it was version 2) and the DIAD offer. There were many people on here that quickly accelerated to that level and at the time (since corrected by Harrahs), they were simply giving away too much for the amount of play/risk on the part of the player. Yes, I realize that today is a different day but I can assure you that there are other casinos right now that are making similar errors….they’re giving away too much and a knowledgeable player can and many do take advantage of this.
I would agree that playing vp only for a living without consideration to the cash back, bounce back, promos, and various other perks is not possible. The flip side is that all these benefits do come with playing and very typically mean the difference between winning and losing.
Finally, just because someone chooses to play vp to supplement their income shouldn’t be grounds to be critical. It’s their choice and just because it’s not yours, can you simply opt to just respect their decision? Also, please don’t believe that because of their motivation that they’re not having fun. This is akin to saying that someone who plays the guitar in a band for a living is not having fun….fun is only left for those who play as a hobby or recreationally. These two events don’t have to be mutually exclusive.
My 2 cents…
Dan
