For our May 31 Gambling with an Edge podcast, we interviewed Maria Konnikova, a journalist with a Ph.D. in psychology who worked with Eric Seidel to become more knowledgeable about poker and ended up winning several tournaments. Maria impressed both Richard Munchkin and me.
Preparing for the interview, I learned that one of Konnikova’s books, The Confidence Game, is a study of the men and women who are con artists. She also created a podcast called “The Grift” where she has 10 half-hour episodes of extended studies discussing the con artists she wrote about in the book.
I started to l listen to the first podcast episode, and five hours later I had listened to them all. I was hooked. I ordered The Confidence Game to read what else she said on the subject.
Today’s blog is primarily about why I decided to study what Konnikova wrote. Next week’s blog is about the book itself.
It is arguably self-centered to describe my thought process on why I chose to read a particular book. Still, when I’ve studied other professional gamblers, it was always important to me to know the “why” of their actions rather than just the “what.” So that’s where I’m going to start.
I’ve been conned more than once. I was never suckered in a three-card Monte game or sent money to help a Nigerian prince, but I’ve been conned just the same.
I started playing backgammon for real money in 1994. I was 27 years old at the time. At least twice I was successfully conned — but didn’t know it at the time. Months later I was reading Danny Kleinman and read about the very hustles I fell for. I would have possibly never known had I not read about it.
I’m “older and wiser” now, but a few years ago I still found myself trusting a player not deserving that trust. At that time, it felt appropriate. Afterwards, there were plenty of signs I missed. I wrote here about me being conned, but in exchange for being paid most of what I was owed, I took down the articles and promised never to re-post them.
In reading The Confidence Game, I hoped to learn about many schemes that have already been pulled on others — so hopefully I can recognize them when someone tries to pull them on me. As we will see in next week’s blog, the book is chock full of examples.
I have no idea what con is coming my way next. Even though I am smarter than many and not completely naïve in this area, I do not presume I am immune from being victimized. It’s happened before and possibly could happen again. I’m hoping that the more I know about the methodology of how it is done, I’ll be able to safely dodge the bullet next time.
The second, totally unrelated, reason I wanted to study this book is as a “how to” primer. I do not consider myself a grifter or con artist at all. At the same time, sometimes a bit of subterfuge is critical to being an AP — and even to success in everyday life. It’s nice to learn some of the principles of how it’s done.
If you listen to the Kelly Sun interview on GWAE, you’ll see she and Phil Ivey incorporated many elements of the con in what they did. Both Richard and I believe that what they did was completely legal and they should prevail in court. So far, the courts have disagreed with these beliefs.
In my Million Dollar Video Poker autobiography, I described how the MGM Grand was giving away the store because their slot management department was arithmetically challenged. I gave them all sorts of plausible reasons why I was playing so many hours and never once explained that they were idiots for offering such a lucrative $500/hour game for players with a bankroll who could play 9/6 Jacks or Better well. Was this conning them? Maybe. Maybe not. As I said, a bit of subterfuge is critical to being a successful AP.
I’ve used “seat of the pants” methodology in this regard, with moderate success. According to the book, some of the things I’ve been doing are well executed, and some are not. Learning how to be more successful is always part of my agenda.
We asked Maria Konnikova on the air whether her book was meant to be an instructional manual on how to be a con artist. She said that certainly wasn’t her intention, but she might have accomplished that nonetheless.
I found many of her pointers quite useful. I’ll tell you more about them next week.
In 1994, I don’t think you were 27 years old.
Whoops. A typo.
My backgammon career started in 1974 — at which time I was indeed 27. In 1994, I was 47 and beginning a new career in video poker.
Even though that $500/hour MGM Grand promotion is long gone, I’m really curious as to what it was and how it offered a profit of that much. Could you tell us all about it, Mr. Dancer?
He wrote a book about it: “Million Dollar Video Poker”, if you need a recommendation I would strongly recommend it for what that’s worth. I think he and his wife were playing $125 to $250 per hand so $500 per hour is only a couple of hands. It’s not like he was playing nickel video poker or anything like that. And the $500 per hour is a theoretical, it’s not like he was pulling a constant wage out of it. And in the end I think he and his wife ended up clearing much more than just $500 per hour. MGM overreacted, they should have let them continue play, with some tightening of the promotions of course, but they should have let them continue play so they would have a chance of getting some of the payout back. I think Bob’s banned from all MGM’s for life, which is a ridiculous abuse of power. If MGM had played things right they probably could have encouraged some Dancer wannabees to try their luck at being Bob Dancer.
Interesting article. I’ll be reading your next article on the book. I still have my copy of your MILLION DOLLAR VIDEO POKER. I’ve read it several times and consider myself a wannabe, but don’t think I could ever make it. I just got around to discovering that the best option for Bob Dancer Presents Winpoker is to put it on TEST mode. That way, you have no chance of correcting your mistake, except in learning from it. I’ve been using the game for over 20 years, and I had always used WARN mode, which is too much of a crutch. I have to say it has improved my play, but it has not increased my frequency of royals. M
Being conned, regardless of the endeavor, is an unintended consequence of being a risk taker. We’ve all been burned somewhere along the line and while extremely unpleasant, it shouldn’t define us or stop us from venturing onward. Of course, it also helps to have supportive people ease us through the emotional roller coasters life takes us on.