Posted by Mission146
Jan 11, 2020

Introductory Terms

Advantage Player (n): A person who gambles or otherwise does gambling-related things under the presumption or belief that he does so with a positive expected value. (My definition)

Tribalism (n): Strong loyalty to one’s own tribe, party or group.*

What do the terms, “Advantage Player,” and, “Tribalism,” possibly have to do with one another?

Let’s start with the definition of a group:

Group (n): A number of persons or things ranged or considered together as being related in some way.*

Therefore, pursuant to these definitions, we can create a group and call that group, “Advantage players.” This loosely-knit group might only share the commonality that they fit the definition of an advantage player, but that commonality would no less exist.

In groups, there can also exist subgroups. A subgroup is simply a division of a group that shares a more specific commonality than the group at large. This is also the case in the world of advantage play, as we will discuss further. It is also arguably so that, because the people in subgroups have more in common with one another than does the main group, they might have more loyalty to one another, as well.

The Precipitating Cause

The next two or three articles that you are going to read have stewed around my brain for years. Usually, for one reason or another, I made the decision not to write them. That decision was based upon the fact that an appraisal that I consider honest, but others may find scathing (or both) might not make me the most popular guy in the advantage play world.

However, WoV member Darkoz recently saw fit to create this thread.

The thread in question details a specific advantage play, but not just any advantage play, it details a high-level, high dollar advantage play that involves means that other advantage players might prefer not be known, or if known, that extra attention not be brought to.

I feel like any summary of that thread’s opening post would be something of a discredit to Mr. DarkOz, so I would strongly suggest reading it for yourself, though it’s not necessarily going to be important that you do so in order to understand the remainder of these articles.

The reactions of a few others who advantage play, or who have, was strong. Beachbumbabs inquires:

What possible reason do you have for putting this out there? How can you claim to know a play is dead everywhere, or that the particular electronic issue you depended on is not in use elsewhere? You cover, what, maybe 10% of US casinos at most?


Rigondeaux has this to say regarding, “Messing with an AP’s bottom line:”

No. But there should be. Messing with someone's bottom line Is a lot worse than a personal insult.

If this is allowed I think I'm done here.

What a shame. A gambling forum that talks about gambling. We couldn’t have that now, could we?

BeachBumBabs appears to agree with Rigondeaux:

Why do you keep digging the hole deeper?

You are screwing with many people's income here. You don't have any idea what the 342 different casino jurisdictions in this country do behind the scenes, how each one is programmed, where the flaws are, what software they run on, and which ones might relate to your particular weakness of 5 years ago.

Just stop. Really.

No offense is meant to BeachBumBabs as an Administrator of the Forum, but I think it’s important to separate the motivations of the forum from whatever her own motivations are.

“Just stop.” Please. Please do not discuss this very obviously gambling-related thing at a gambling forum. Why would you do this?

But, Administrator BeachBumBabs should be thrilled to see this type of thought-provoking and substantive discussion. I suppose one caveat would be if others (such as Rigondeaux) were to leave because that could be a negative...but why should the forum be pressured to restrict gambling-related topics due to the threat of someone leaving? Would such restriction not be censorship, but not even censorship by the will of the forum, but censorship by the collective will of its members?

Rigondeaux goes on to speak of ethics, in part:

Many professions have ethics.

One of the ethics of AP, like magic, is to keep things quiet. If too much is shared too widely, the profession is boned.

Who can you tell? Well we've all at least partly learned from others. And I myself will give plenty of advice to strangers in public here on this forum about sports.

The boundaries are fuzzy.

I guess one major difference between AP and magic is that magic exists to entertain people whereas AP exists in order to make money via casinos or other gambling-related endeavors.

Beyond that, the play in question that DarkOz discussed almost undoubtedly violated the stated Terms and Conditions of that casino’s players club, and even if it hadn’t, the casino would have tossed DarkOz out (and did for something else) if it knew what was going on. To be very clear, as far as I can tell, nothing that DarkOz describes was illegal...but I’m not aware of every gambling-related law in the entire State of New York, so don’t take that to the bank.

I just find it funny to bring up some vague notion of, “Ethics,” as relates to this matter. It leads me to ask a few questions:

  1. Is behaving in a fashion that directly violates the casino’s stated terms and conditions unethical?
  2. Who wrote, “The Ethics of AP?” Where can I find this book? I don’t remember ever agreeing to The Ethics of AP...maybe you only get it if you join the union.
  3. Is it not similarly unethical to restrict gambling-related subjects on what purports to be a gambling-related forum?

Speaking in terms of just the forum, there is no Earthly reason why DarkOz should be prohibited from posting what he posted. For the most part, it seems like nobody suggested that there should be, vis-a-vis the rules, so it’s a money-related thing. Let’s continue:

Axelwolf adds:

Aside from educating casinos and Darksiders there's another aspect that's potentially more dangerous to Advantage players and plays. There's that saying, "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing" and I think that applies here.

When you say stuff publicly you have absolutely no idea who's picking up on that information and what they'll attempt to do with it. It could be some totally crazy dude you wouldn't want anywhere near you or advantage play.

Axelwolf’s concerns are not unreasonable, and THIS is where we get into the tribalism/protectionism that are inherent to advantage play. Let’s get started:

Protecting the Profession

First of all, advantage play is not strictly a profession, it simply can be a profession. I leave it for you, the reader, to decide what a profession is or is not.

Advantage play itself is merely the act of gambling at an advantage. There are gamblers who might generally be losing gamblers, play at an overall expected loss, but know, “A play,” or a, “Few plays,” and are acting as advantage players when doing those. There can also be advantage players who occasionally act as a losing gambler would (negative expectation gambling) as well as advantage players who would only play if they believe they have an advantage.

Anyway, the whole concept of being an, “Advantage player,” exists on a sort of spectrum as relates the degree to which it can be considered a, “Profession.”

If it can be called a profession at all, it is certainly not a typical profession. Most professions or occupations would have a person either start a business, or go to a place and fill out an application and thereby get hired. Advantage play can have a similar type process (if you’re, ‘working,’ for someone), but it doesn’t have to.

Other professions usually purport to be offering some kind of service. While services can be both sought out or not sought out, they are usually sought out. For example:

Jerry wants to be a garbageman. There are two general ways Jerry can accomplish this:

  1. He can buy a truck of some sort, get licensed, find a place where he is permitted to dump the garbage and then finally go out and try to get customers to pay for his services.
  2. He can apply at a company that has already accomplished #1 and get hired.

What Jerry can not do is take the garbage away without the customer’s permission and then appear the following day demanding payment for services that the customer never requested to begin with. The customer likely already has a garbage collection company that is going to bill that customer whether they actually took any garbage or not. Advantage play is (usually) not a crime of any sort, but there are all kinds of possible crimes to what Jerry is doing in this hypothetical.

Advantage Play is also a unique profession in that there is no sort of formalized training or educational process. If Jerry had gotten his job as a garbageman by means #2, but had never worked as a garbageman before, then the garbage collection company would probably want him to do some sort of training for the job.

With Advantage Play, no such training process need exist, even though it can, if you’re working for someone. A person could research advantage play (using this very forum as a means of research, as well as others) and then take the information learned and try to apply it. If applied successfully and the information itself was correct, the person is, “Advantage Playing.”


That doesn’t mean that Advantage Play does not share any characteristics with other things that could be called, “Professions.” One characteristic that it shares is that there can be, “Competition,” and too much competition is seen as a negative.

Imagine a town with a makeup of 2,500 households/businesses that has 473 garbage collection companies. That’s about 5.29 customers per company if the customers were divided equally amongst them. The very notion is ridiculous because the customers would not agree to pay enough money to keep all of these garbage companies in business. Not only that, but the prices are probably going to be astoundingly low since the garbage companies have to price compete for customers, unless one is ridiculously better than others at taking a bag and throwing it in the truck.

Supply/Demand based competition is a much different kind of competition than Advantage Players have to worry about. Advantage Players are not offering the casinos (generally) a service of any kind, nor are they offering a product of any kind, so the supply/demand function does not exist. There is absolutely no demand for Advantage Players. There is a demand for customers, which the Advantage Players simultaneously happen to be, so there might be benefits associated with that.

Competition makes Advantage Play more difficult. Casinos only tangentially want them to be there in the first place, and usually would prefer they were not there, if the casinos only knew that they were Advantage Players. Therefore, there is a supply side without a corresponding demand side. But, there still exists a market.

The market is simply the availability of money that is expected to be won in casinos. Let’s look at vultures and define, “Vulture,” as someone who looks for quick turnaround plays. Let’s imagine that a casino has fourteen such machines available and those machines represent a mean average value of $82/day. With this, a lone Advantage Player might be able to achieve $1,148/day, not considering other factors. Fourteen Advantage Players (all else being equal) would each be able to make $82/day. It goes down from there with over saturation on the Advantage Player supply side that would lead some Advantage Players to leave the market. (Not go to that casino anymore, or maybe wait for a few months before checking it out again)

It’s not quite as simple as that, though, because of the different types of Advantage Play that exist. If a particular player is a Blackjack card counter and nothing but a Blackjack card counter, then someone who is strictly a machine Advantage Player does not compete with the card counter at all. They are in the same group, “Advantage Players,” but they are in two different sub-groups that have nothing really to do with the other.

In fact, the two players might help one another indirectly, even if they don’t know each other. Any resources that a casino might devote to looking for card counters might instead be worried about what our machine friend is doing and vice-versa. If the only type of advantage player was a Blackjack card counter, then any preventive type resources at the casino’s disposal would be geared towards identifying and eliminating that threat.

Yes, threat. Remember when I said there is no casino, “Demand,” for Advantage Players? I actually kind of lied a little bit. There is what I will term, “Negative demand,” for them. They are either merely tolerated or not wanted at all by the casino.

Machine players compete directly with one another, though they may not compete over the same specific plays. However, their collective presence is in itself competition. The more Advantage Players who are in a particular casino, (or who exist in general) then the more likely the casino is to see them as a problem. Who an advantage player is can make this more of a problem, both for the casino and for other advantage players. Some advantage players are less desirable than others, but not always because of how much money they make.

Maybe a certain Advantage Player doesn’t shower frequently enough and is therefore stinky. The casino might want him gone just because he stinks so badly. Maybe a particular advantage player is aggressive as relates the people who the casino actually wants to be there. Some hustlers can make other people uncomfortable, and then you have, “Creators,” but I’m not even going to get into all that.

In the end, you have a bunch of Advantage Players who the casino sometimes considers a threat and who, by extension, are also a threat to each other. (Unless they work together) If not a threat to one another, then possibly competition to each other. They can sometimes get along if there is enough, “Meat,” available for all of them at a particular time (think a promotion type play), but for the most part, they would be much happier if the others weren’t there.

Rigondeaux says this on Page 4:

I'd say antagonist posts made just to get an ego rush are the definition of trolling.

Discussing +ev plays here and there is fine. Again, the exact boundaries are fuzzy. Most APs are actually startlingly generous with info if it's done the right way.

To use the magic analogy, it's fine to teach people tricks or leave breadcrumbs or even take someone under your wing.

If too much is said to openly, the opportunities will go away entirely.

If someone started going through every magic act and explaining point by point how each trick is done, it would be a betrayal of that community.

If you wish to aid a narcissist in his quest for attention by betraying his community with troll posts, that's up to you.

All I can do is implore any magicians to refuse to participate.

For a little background, it is fair to say that Darkoz has been antagonized on the Forum, so to some extent (or maybe unintentionally so) this just seems a return to that pursuant to Forum Rules. Jabs are constantly thrown his way because he chooses to ride a bus rather than drive a car, so a high percentage of responses to him (including in this same thread!) contain some reference to a bus.

Further, Darkoz has related accounts of his AP activity and other affairs without offering either too many specifics or proof. It has been implied by more than one person, on these occasions, that Darkoz lies or at least exaggerates. Maybe they should have tried honey instead of vinegar, I don’t know.

But, Darkoz is not a part of all of the Advantage Player subgroups. In fact, if we look at subgroups in terms of, “Type,” and then we add a subgroup called, “Location,” and then have a “Location and type,” sub-sub group...Darkoz is not in that sub-sub group with very many people at all.

There is also the conception that DarkOz is a, “One play wonder,” which may or may not be true. Darkoz is not perceived as having a ton of experience or experience that is particularly varied. Darkoz is perceived as not like the others.

Let’s look at this again:

Discussing +ev plays here and there is fine. Again, the exact boundaries are fuzzy. Most APs are actually startlingly generous with info if it's done the right way.

To use the magic analogy, it's fine to teach people tricks or leave breadcrumbs or even take someone under your wing.

In other words, we can reveal a little bit, but we can’t reveal everything.

I wonder why that would be.

Maybe because increased competition on the supply side can be good for some subgroups of AP’s, but not so much for others.

We go back to our vulturing theoretical above. If those types of plays are revealed and a ton of people try to do it, maybe that’s fine, because if a ton of people are trying to do it, then that will generate a ton of competition for those plays and it will be decided that ($$$) they aren’t worth doing after all.

Why would that be someone’s goal?

Think about it: If advantage players start out learning low-level plays and have a very lucrative experience, then that will enable them to save up some money with an eye towards doing bigger plays for bigger stakes. Along the way, if they have sufficient interest, these low-level advantage players will almost certainly learn about additional plays, some of them high-level. These players then get to that level and create competition…

For high-level plays.

Those who do high-level plays likely share a few qualities:

  1. They don’t really bother with low-level plays, unless bored.
  2. They do not want extra competition for their plays.
  3. Unlike vulturing, they are often doing plays that the casinos might not even know about. Or, if the casinos knew that the plays were going on to the extent that they do, (and that Darkoz said) they might look for those plays and similar plays to prevent them.

Remember: There is NEGATIVE DEMAND for Advantage Players. The casinos do not want them, for the most part. In 99%+ of cases where they are not actively unwanted, they are merely tolerated...or sometimes it’s because they lose money to the house overall.

Unfortunately for the high-level players, this creates a very delicate balance. The problem for them is that, if their high-level plays are put to an end, there aren’t many low-level opportunities to seek out because they have allowed-if not encouraged-competition there.

If too much is said to openly, the opportunities will go away entirely.

Case in point.

Axelwolf adds, in part, on Page 5:

Anything to talk about that one hit wonder. I would like to say he goaded Into it, however, I'm not sure you could be goaded in something when you're actually looking for the opportunity.

I'm not quite sure I would say he's been ostracized unfairly, it's self inflicted. He knows spreading TMI is loathed by most other AP's and potentially harmful to other AP's bottom line. It seems like it's more important for him to prove something and get personal attention than than it is protecting the AP community.

Remember when he had no clue if the Plaza Promo had any value and posted about it on the Forum? One can only take from that, he didn't have enough knowledge about AP to realize the value, or it didn't matter to him since he wasn't going to play it anyways. I have a feeling it was both.

For whatever reason, DO does this type of stuff. I doubt anybody is going to change that. I'm not trying to stop his freedom of speech. I can only hope other people( perhaps someone new) will take heed and realize spreading TMI about AP is a bad thing.

The first thing happening here is that Darkoz is again called a one hit wonder. Axel also suggests that Darkoz was looking for any opportunity to fully detail the play, even though he only might have been goaded.

So, we have simultaneous goading with a presumption that he was not goaded. That’s at least interesting.

There is also a subtle attempt to discredit DarkOz by stating that he posted about a promotion, but had no idea whether or not that promotion was valuable. I do recall that he posted about it, but don’t specifically recall if he knew the best way to play it or commented much to the effect. Either way, still more goading, and an attempt to discredit him as an AP.

But, why discredit him?

For one thing, it’s already been established that Darkoz can say what he wants, provided what he says (and how) is within Forum Rules. This is very much a decided matter. The only tactic left to protect subgroups of Advantage Play is to try to discredit DarkOz, (make it seem like he stumbled on a lucky find and knows nothing else) just in case he:

1.) Actually also knows other plays.


2.) Decides to detail those.

What we see here is that DarkOz is considered a threat. Hell, the posters in the thread have openly admitted he is a threat. Why is a member of this sub-sub-sub group saying something that hurts the overall group when doing so doesn’t benefit him at all?

So, maybe he does have a vendetta, but let’s make very clear that any such vendetta does not take away from the validity of his post in the beginning of that thread.

It’s big. It might be one of the biggest plays you’ll ever see freely discussed.

Maybe the subgroups of APs would do well not to throw vinegar at each other, I don’t know.

The only thing about this thread that is not astonishing is the notion that someone is ridiculed at every turn might eventually fire back.


Why should I try to write it when DarkOz did as solid a job as I would:

What it comes down to is a "brotherhood" of AP's, many who have not met each other but feel the shared angst of discovery by the casino.

However, this same brotherhood is quick to stab each other in the back to protect secrets that are advertised in national newspapers and will send subordinates to hog chairs at valuable seats in casinos so no other AP's can obtain value or get the other enemy, the ploppies, to leave behind valuable plays like multipliers without their knowledge.

How does Tribalism relate to this?

Much like a business for which there is actually Positive Demand can be an Entrepreneurship, a Partnership or a Corporation, advantage play can exist the exact same way. The terms are often a little more loosely defined with Advantage Players because some projects require a group, (or group pool of money) whereas others are more of an individual pursuit.

Vultures can work together sometimes, but are usually more inclined to be loners. If they do work together at all, usually it’s a temporary partnership, “Okay, here’s the deal. Racing each other for seats is stupid and will draw attention. Let’s each throw $100 in and we’ll go around together and do the plays. When one of us is ready to leave, we each get half of whatever is on the ticket.”

That is perhaps the lowest ($$$) form of a partnership in this regard. We do compete, but right now, competing is not in our best interest. If the two guys are friends they might go around individually to the machines, trust one another as to the results, then share the amount at the end.

These sorts of partnerships can also occur on high-level plays, but then it is usually either bankroll-related or people who know each other and often work as a group, anyway. There can also be what are effectively little corporations by which individuals put what they can afford in (stock) and then the take is distributed proportionately at the end.

What DarkOz has posted betrays the high-level tribes to the greatest degree and places all of them who, despite DarkOz’ protests, do any play similar to this at all, at risk.

The numbers are a problem.

The thing about most of these plays is that they can be hinted at here and there, and that’s fine, because it doesn’t speak to the volume. In the case of Darkoz’ post, he illustrated and basically proved than an expected loss of $200 can generate well over $20,000 in free play on that one particular play. Naturally, that was with only two players club cards.


“Can someone call marketing, please? Like, NOW!?”

I could definitely understand why the tribe wouldn’t want the casinos to know that six figures a month is coming out of there, just on this one play. If I’m the casino, it kind of makes me want to start looking around for other plays that might be doing the same thing, which there certainly are, in some casinos.

Arguments can be made that this information coming out has the potential to negatively impact all APs, but then arguments can also be made to the contrary.

One thing that can’t be argued is that this information has the potential to harm the sub-group of APs that focus on casino free play offers, whether or not such focus is in conjunction with the use of multiple players club cards. The information speaks directly to the concept behind that and could cause the casinos to focus on things related to that concept.

The subgroup is small mainly because the subgroup requires bankroll. In order to, “Get into,” the subgroup, you either have to be invited in or have the bankroll to get yourself there.

The subgroup usually doesn’t do anything to harm other members in the subgroup because it would be counterintuitive. For one, you wouldn’t want to start a, “War,” whereby members of the subgroup, “Out,” other members or plays to the casino. Secondly, there’s no competition like a play on an individual machine where only one person can get that play...while multiple players, or teams, doing this at one casino would be more likely to get attention, there’s really not much they can do from preventing other players or teams from doing it. They tolerate each other, when known to begin with, basically because they have to.


The main thing to be taken away from this article is that there is no casino demand for Advantage Players; there can only be Negative Demand for advantage players. Depending on what they are doing, how they are doing it and how much they make; Advantage Players are, at best, tolerated. Another possibility is that it is unknown that a particular person is an advantage player because the casino does not know about the play, or if it does, does not know that the person is doing that play.

The problem that the subgroup has with this information coming to light is that it might cause them to go from the, “Tolerated,” group (no demand for them) to being untolerated (negative demand for them). Perhaps worse still, it could cause that which would not be tolerated if it was known (but it is not known) to become known enabling the negative demanders to take action against it.

Over the next four articles related to this topic, we will explore the following:

Part II: General Plays and Who Does Them

Part III: The Casino Perspective

Part IV: Darkoz: The Man Behind the Mask

Part V: The Future of the Tribes


beachbumbabs Jan 11, 2020

"I should be thrilled" that you're excerpting my comments in opposition to this egotistical series of destructive posts aimed at ruining other people's plays? How dare you post my comments in this article and then claim the higher ground.

I have no problem with discussing Advantage Play in the abstract, the ethics, and the different perspectives. I have a BIG problem with the motives of darkoz going to this level of detail in an entire class of plays still in use, just to hurt other players. And you, yourself, with the misguided motivation of supporting his punitive actions by stirring the pot further. Shame on you both.

Mission146 Jan 11, 2020

This article does discuss Advantage Play in the abstract, I'm not sure where it does anything else. I have not offered any details of a particular play (aside from what DarkOz said) and have no intention whatsoever to do so. You'll notice that I only linked to the thread, I didn't even quote anything that he said about the operation of the play itself.

My interpretation of Darkoz' motives are more than he was unfairly belittled for the amusement of others. It was implied that he lied and exaggerated. Now that he decides to prove that position wrong, I would argue conclusively, it becomes a problem. I think he's more effectively defending himself than he is trying to hurt others. I do think that he showed a disregard for the other implications of what his specific, "Dead," play revealed...but I don't know what the intent, if any, was behind that.

To be clear, I would not have detailed the play that DarkOz detailed. I am simply defending his right to discuss any gambling-related thing that he wants to on a gambling message board provided that his posts do not violate any forum rules.

In any case, I have no intention of revealing the, "Ins and outs," of any given play in this series of articles. Anything that I discuss will be extremely general. I think that's what people are really worried about, "Giving away the playbook," don't worry; not happening.

DRich Jan 11, 2020

The lesson I took from this is that no one should train garbage men. If we train more garbage men then there is a larger supply and the demand goes down therefore the current pool of garbage men will make less money.

Mission146 Jan 11, 2020


That's a wise way to look at it! Of course, nor can one garbageman cover the entire world.

odiousgambit Jan 12, 2020

I guess the point is there is a downside to belittling anyone. In sports it gives the opposition bulletin board material; in other things in life the assumption that there is no harm in poking away can result in a sucker punch right in the solar plexus. It could have been worse.

As far as "is AP a profession?" I think you have to say 'definitely' as the IRS does recognize it, they have the category 'professional gambler'. We know a legitimate pro *should* be an AP though this is always an assumption in any individual case, and it can be otherwise.

Mission146 Jan 12, 2020

Iím glad the intended point was received!

Definitely agree with the last paragraph. I guess my point was it exists on a spectrum with proper tax filing and gambling for a living exclusively being on the far end of that spectrum.

FleaStiff Jan 12, 2020

I am reminded of the inscription at the Dumbarton Oaks conference center: Trust in Allah, but keep your camel tied. And of course in more of a gambling theme, there is the expression about keeping your cards close to your vest. So I think there is always an advantage in keeping things secret.

Advantage Players are indeed on a spectrum, one that runs from the dregs of society to the refined, formal gambling clubs wherein gentlemen wear Evening Attire including tophats and white gloves. Discussions about bottom-feeding vultures is disgusting to me and discussions about extreme wealth are alien to me.

Mission146 Jan 13, 2020


I definitely agree with your first paragraph! I think there are definitely aspects better left unspoken, but that doesnít take away oneís right to say them.

The second paragraph seems pretty scathing, ouch! Maybe we are using the word, ďVulture,Ē in different ways. I think you might enjoy Part II, itís up now.

sammydv Jan 30, 2020

Is the irony not lost, that the whole boycotting 'ap' group as well as any 'ap' player is [i]against[/i] all casino rules regardless of any 'ap' spewed justification for their plays and shenanigans and if done outside of the private casino would constitute intentional criminal conduct involving any governmental, industrial, retail or any other financial enterprise, such as shoplifting (taking a left over cash ticket), atm skimming (leaving a player card in a machine to gain points as if another's account or finding a card and keeping it... offering guidance to a newbie to get them to leave with credits on the machine- (intentionally selling fake jewelry from your overcoat) etc etc etc. The parallels are all there.
'ap' play is a almost totally a individual thing, there's no real loyalty or trust, unless the rare team events. Even those disappear in a moments notice. To argue ap is some sort of profession or actual gambling is to insult what real professions represent when 'ap' appears to operate in the shadows and the questionable.
The ap arguments themselves seem to be spacious and hollow as the 'profession' itself in practice.

Mission146 Jan 30, 2020

Taking a leftover cash ticket doesn't equate to shoplifting. It basically equates to finding a bill on the ground outside of a casino and taking it, which would be legal in some states but not others. I'm not sure what you think gives the casino or any other entity more claim to a slot ticket compared to any other entity. The only, "Rightful," owner being the person who left it, and I don't see casinos bending over backwards to make sure each individual little ticket gets back to its owner. Hell, they could tell who was on the machine if they had their card in when they left the ticket.

Anyway, nothing else that you said (including that) is even an AP play. Even though I did it a few times years ago, leaving your card in a machine to accumulate points is not a play.

Whether or not AP is, "Gambling," I would say that it is certainly gambling, in most cases. I'd have to question how many advantage plays you're aware of if you don't believe that gambling is involved.

sammydv Feb 02, 2020

ap players do gamble occasionally. When they are not watching other players for jump in opportunities, leaving their cards in other peoples games etc, looking for left over credits which isn't gambling.
I guess it's gambling when one sits down to play off some other persons left over credits.
The gambling would be in team work and sitting at a game playing as it may show a pay off session in the making.

But mostly ap is opportunistic and claiming someone else is reveling their 'techniques' is shallow and self serving.
And pretty much hypocrisy. And trying to justify hypocrisy is insulting to common decency. There is nothing really decent in the casino industry and the ap denizens are just part of the shady community of casino life.

It is this website amongst others that has enlightened me about ap plays and players in the last few years enough to become more aware of my surroundings in casinos. I appreciate that. However, none of these websites can or will convince me that ap players are some sort of robin hood noble breed. That's just being factious on ap peoples parts.


sammydv Feb 02, 2020

On a unrelated note. Why is it you almost always use an asian model in almost every single image of slots you embed in your articles. I like the image touch, but was wondering about that.

Mission146 Feb 02, 2020


Thanks for reading and for the comment! I am not the one responsible for creating the images or putting them into the articles. Vlad actually publishes the articles (BralasLT on the site) and Ana selects/creates the images...I'm not sure if Ana actually participates here as a poster or not.

So, I guess the answer is, "I don't know!"

Please login or register in order to leave a comment