AP business morality
Here is my question to them. If the IRS and the Federal government feel income derived from legal gambling wins (not cheats) is taxable, then isn't the government declaring these as a legitimate business as well?
You cannot declare income from illegal means. A Cocaine dealer cannot state on his return $100,000 earned from Cocaine sales.
But a card counter or comps hustler can (and is supposed to) declare $100,000 in winnings from the casino.
Gambling in such a way that you repeatedly turn a profit is a legal business endeavor under the eyes of the federal government.
In fact, the MIT team actually incorporated with the expressly written company goal of winning at blackjack and filed all necessary state and federal taxes and business documents.
Therefore, gambling to turn a profit IS a legal business occupation.
Thoughts, please
Quote: darkozI know from other threads Paigowdan and others feel AP'ing (card counting or comp hustling) is a vulture activity and that casinos are victimized because they are the legitimate and licensed businesses.
Here is my question to them. If the IRS and the Federal government feel income derived from legal gambling wins (not cheats) is taxable, then isn't the government declaring these as a legitimate business as well?
You cannot declare income from illegal means. A Cocaine dealer cannot state on his return $100,000 earned from Cocaine sales.
But a card counter or comps hustler can (and is supposed to) declare $100,000 in winnings from the casino.
Gambling in such a way that you repeatedly turn a profit is a legal business endeavor under the eyes of the federal government.
In fact, the MIT team actually incorporated with the expressly written company goal of winning at blackjack and filed all necessary state and federal taxes and business documents.
Therefore, gambling to turn a profit IS a legal business occupation.
Thoughts, please
You have part of this wrong. A cocaine dealer is supposed to claim any money from illegal sales. You are also supposed to declare income if you rob a house or business and take anything from there.
You would have to clean the money before filing unless you wanted ATF agents swooping down on you because you were stupid enough to claim cocaine sales as your primary income.
Quote: darkozMy point was there is a legal aspect in filing returns to gambling--not to drug dealing or robbing a house.
You would have to clean the money before filing unless you wanted ATF agents swooping down on you because you were stupid enough to claim cocaine sales as your primary income.
A better example may be how in AC card counting is specifically legal and casinos cannot bar you from play for doing it. However while legality and morality oftentimes coincide one does not affect the other.
Perhaps morality was the wrong word to involve. My point to this thread was that the government considers it a LEGAL business to AP because it is a taxable and reportable item on IRS returns therefore it is a legitimate business.
Quote: darkozPerhaps I should point out I was trying to address the specifics of Paigowdans stance that the casinos are a legit business and AP's are not.
Perhaps morality was the wrong word to involve. My point to this thread was that the government considers it a LEGAL business to AP because it is a taxable and reportable item on IRS returns therefore it is a legitimate business.
Taxation and legality are unrelated. Income derived from both legal and illegal gambling is taxable, but neither has anything to do with morality, especially of being an advantage player.
There's nothing immoral about taking advantage of a particular business transaction, whether it's a hand of blackjack or a coupon for free breakfast cereal. Nobody looks at "extreme couponing" as immoral. There shouldn't be any dispute about card counting either.
Now intentionally acting to change the edge of a game, that's a different story. I posted a question a few months back about influencing the dice, specifically if you could throw them in such a way as to make your bets win while others' bets lost. The vast majority of respondents seemed to think that was okay. I'm not convinced. If you were playing roulette and you were telekinetic, you could hit your numbers and cause everyone else to lose. Aside from that clearly being cheating, why wouldn't that be wrong?
Quote: mickeycrimmI find it hilarious that paigowdan and his cronies, who are in the business of fleecing the public, consider AP's to be scum. The pot is calling the kettle black.
Well said. Exactly my position. The gambling industry is based on chance, with the house holding an edge. Some people will win. Many more will lose. AP's playing legally, don't change that equation one bit and are actually accounted for in the business model. The house edge is the house edge and the casino will make more than that for that game in the long run even with AP's.
And when you add it all up, AP's playing completely legally within the rules are not only not effecting the casino's but are actually accounted for in the business model. See above...where it says some people will win??? :-)
Now, I specifically separated legal play AP from cheats. Cheating is another matter. Casinos should do everything in their power to eliminate and prosecute cheats.
Many of the 'more advanced' AP methods, holecarding, shuffle tracking, ace sequencing, edge sorting, type things are nothing more than casino sloppiness. While not illegal, they come about because of casino's sloppy procedures or in the case of edge sorting, sloppy products. Fix your procedures and products and you have eliminated these opportunities without changing the game or denying anyone.
But stop crying that a few people win (by thinking). That is part of the business model. And stop lumping players that are playing legally and doing nothing more than thinking in with cheats. What a bunch of crybabies this industry is. It's like they are holding a bridge tournament but only want to invite bad players. lol
Supermarkets sometimes offer milk and eggs below cost to drive shoppers to their stores. Playing a casino game intelligently is no more immoral than going to a supermarket and only buying milk. You are playing by the rules offered and promoted by the business. Sure, the supermarket would prefer you fill your cart with high-margin items, and sure, the casino would prefer you play its negative games, but there's nothing at all wrong with shopping well and playing smart.
The cost of advantage play, for casinos, is like any other cost of doing business. Keeping the lights on, security, insurance, a hundred other costs, these are all things businesses have to budget for if they want to open their doors to the public. Playing a game well is no more immoral than selling a casino insurance.
Quote: GWAEYou have part of this wrong. A cocaine dealer is supposed to claim any money from illegal sales. You are also supposed to declare income if you rob a house or business and take anything from there.
This is a lesson Al Capone learned from the IRS. They did what Ellior Ness could not !
The New Jersey gaming commission has even gone so far as to say casinos cannot ask you to leave for counting cards. There is no immorality in using public information to make your decisions. That is the game the casino has created and offers. If they do not want to offer it then they can close up shop.
Quote: mickeycrimmI find it hilarious that paigowdan and his cronies, who are in the business of fleecing the public, consider AP's to be scum. The pot is calling the kettle black.
I have no problem with people like Dan, who, like
Babs, has a game he invented in the casino. As
long as they admit it's fleecing the public by offering
a game they can't possibly win at in the long run.
Dan refuses to do that, he says everybody knows that
and they play at their own risk. I'll say it again, most
(MOST) people who are casino patrons are under the
illusion they can get ahead and stay ahead. I know this
because I've been asking them for 30 years and I still
do all the time. Casinos depend on this attitude, and
they do nothing to change it and everything to foster it.
So it's fine they have games, just don't try and tell me
it's all sweetness and light when it isn't.
Quote: kewljMany of the 'more advanced' AP methods, holecarding, shuffle tracking, ace sequencing, edge sorting, type things are nothing more than casino sloppiness. While not illegal, they come about because of casino's sloppy procedures or in the case of edge sorting, sloppy products. Fix your procedures and products and you have eliminated these opportunities without changing the game or denying anyone.
I've been thinking about this lately. I used to think that holecarding, edge sorting, etc. in a casino environment were not cheating. But I think morally they may well be cheating. In a casino setting, it seems like the edge sorter is and entirely different animal than the guy using dop to mark cards. But if someone was edge sorting me in a home poker game I would definately consider the guy a cheater and consider it a moral failling of the individual. What's the difference besides the setting where the gambling occurs? How is it cheating if I am hurt by the activity but not cheating if Gary Loveman is hurt? Morality is far too often murky and open to interpretation. For legal purposes, though, I am convinced that it is more important to paint a bright line. Cheating statutes should require that a person ALTER THE ELEMENTS OF CHANCE. Marking the cards, switching in loaded dice, etc. Convincing casino dealers to rotate cards a certain way or hiring a tiny person to catch a dealers hole card and communicating that information to confederates does not alter the elements of chance.
MathExtremist posed excellent thought experiments in this area: Telekenisis in roullette and dice control in craps. These are grey areas but I think that if the casino stick man slides you dice and allows you to set and throw them as you choose, then this is clearly not cheating. In fact, I don't think that it is even in the morally murky area that edge sorting is, where it feels immoral in some situations but maybe not in others. Eventually the casinos will wise up and realize that what they had supposed to be an element of chance is, in fact, an element of skill. Rather than discussing telekenisis in roullette, let's pretend that you are invisible (or a skilled magician) and can walk up to the table and manipulate the ball without being seen. This is both morally and legally cheating in any circumstance.
Quote: EvenBobI have no problem with people like Dan, who, like
Babs, has a game he invented in the casino. As
long as they admit it's fleecing the public by offering
a game they can't possibly win at in the long run.
Dan refuses to do that, he says everybody knows that
and they play at their own risk. I'll say it again, most
(MOST) people who are casino patrons are under the
illusion they can get ahead and stay ahead. I know this
because I've been asking them for 30 years and I still
do all the time. Casinos depend on this attitude, and
they do nothing to change it and everything to foster it.
So it's fine they have games, just don't try and tell me
it's all sweetness and light when it isn't.
This has always been my view as well. I don't care that casino's fleece their patrons. Just don't pee down my back and tell me it's raining.
Quote: rainmanThis has always been my view as well. I don't care that casino's fleece their patrons. Just don't pee down my back and tell me it's raining.
Exactly! I have no problem as long as they're upfront
about what they do. Don't tell me you're offering
'entertainment', when in fact you're offering a tilted
game to a mostly uninformed public.
A heroin dealer will tell you he doesn't force people to
buy his product, they seek him out. But he enables
them to buy it, which makes him a bad person. Casinos
are enablers, they deal in illusion and misdirection.
Quote: darkozI know from other threads Paigowdan and others feel AP'ing (card counting or comp hustling) is a vulture activity
So casinos can deal a game that they know is tilted in their favor, but a patron using solely his or her brain to play the game in a way that possibly changes those odds is not ok. In other words EV - 1% fine, EV + 1% not fine.
LOL I can't relate to that mode of thinking even a little bit.
Quote: michael99000
LOL I can't relate to that mode of thinking even a little bit.
Look at casino ads on TV. Extremely ecstatic people
winning huge jackpots. Has that been your experience?
I see mostly grim looking people over 50 when I go,
not exactly having the time of their lives. They look
tired and sad and frustrated. The polar opposite of what
casinos offer in their ad's, in the illusion they're fostering.
Quote: EvenBobLook at casino ads on TV. Extremely ecstatic people
winning huge jackpots. Has that been your experience?
I see mostly grim looking people over 50 when I go,
not exactly having the time of their lives. They look
tired and sad and frustrated. The polar opposite of what
casinos offer in their ad's, in the illusion they're fostering.
You could go to different casinos, you know...
This is why I don't gamble downtown in Vegas.
Quote: EvenBobExactly! I have no problem as long as they're upfront
about what they do. Don't tell me you're offering
'entertainment', when in fact you're offering a tilted
game to a mostly uninformed public.
A heroin dealer will tell you he doesn't force people to
buy his product, they seek him out. But he enables
them to buy it, which makes him a bad person. Casinos
are enablers, they deal in illusion and misdirection.
Your heroin analogy mirrored my cigarette analogy, so I won't use it.
But, to play Devil's Advocate...
Isn't every single thing exactly like this? Taking Cialis doesn't suddenly leave you with a hot wife and a relationship replete with passion. Buying a Silverado doesn't leave you hairy chested and chisel jawed with 20% larger testicles. 4 out of 5 dentists might recommend it, but chewing Trident doesn't translate into perfectly straight, painfully white teeth.
I argue that every single business, bar none, advertises an experience or a good that doesn't reflect the actual experience of purchasing it. Blatant false advertising aside, isn't it the responsibility of the consumer to not be a dullard?
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceYou could go to different casinos, you know...
This is why I don't gamble downtown in Vegas.
I'm mostly talking about Indian casinos, they're
the ones that advertise on TV constantly. But
they're all the same, they depend on an uninformed
public.
Yes, nobody here is like that. But this forum is a miniscule
part of the gambling public. Ask people what WoO is and
99% of casino patrons have no idea.
Quote: FaceYour heroin analogy mirrored my cigarette analogy, so I won't use it.
But, to play Devil's Advocate...
Isn't every single thing exactly like this? Taking Cialis doesn't suddenly leave you with a hot wife and a relationship replete with passion. Buying a Silverado doesn't leave you hairy chested and chisel jawed with 20% larger testicles. 4 out of 5 dentists might recommend it, but chewing Trident doesn't translate into perfectly straight, painfully white teeth.
I argue that every single business, bar none, advertises an experience or a good that doesn't reflect the actual experience of purchasing it. Blatant false advertising aside, isn't it the responsibility of the consumer to not be a dullard?
This is exactly how I feel about it. I have never once gotten a big mac that looks like the one in the picture.
Quote: EvenBobLook at casino ads on TV. Extremely ecstatic people
winning huge jackpots. Has that been your experience?
I see mostly grim looking people over 50 when I go,
not exactly having the time of their lives. They look
tired and sad and frustrated. The polar opposite of what
casinos offer in their ad's, in the illusion they're fostering.
They don't have much choice. If casinos are gonna make commercials they can't show a grimy degenerate hitting a hard 15 and busting. Advertising the best of what you offer is just how it's done. When ESPN runs a commercial plugging an upcoming Heat Lakers game they don't show Jodi Meeks shooting a free throw, it's Lebron on a breakaway dunk. Just like with the players celebrating a jackpot win, what they're showing is something that makes up probably less than 1% of what the actual experience is like. But IMO as long as what's shown in the ad EVER happens.. Then it's fine
Quote: FaceYour heroin analogy mirrored my cigarette analogy, so I won't use it.
But, to play Devil's Advocate...
Isn't every single thing exactly like this? Taking Cialis doesn't suddenly leave you with a hot wife and a relationship replete with passion. Buying a Silverado doesn't leave you hairy chested and chisel jawed with 20% larger testicles. 4 out of 5 dentists might recommend it, but chewing Trident doesn't translate into perfectly straight, painfully white teeth.
I argue that every single business, bar none, advertises an experience or a good that doesn't reflect the actual experience of purchasing it. Blatant false advertising aside, isn't it the responsibility of the consumer to not be a dullard?
What are you talking about? Every time I drink Dos Equis, I'm transported to a cozy bar surrounded by women. Aren't you?
Quote: Faceisn't it the responsibility of the consumer to not be a dullard?
Of course. Just don't maintain the casino
is something it isn't. If you ask a car
dealer if buying a new corvette will make
you an instant babe magnet, he'll probably
admit it won't. If you ask the average pit
person if they're tying to take advantage
of a mostly uninformed public with games
that are fixed in favor of the casino, not
one of them will admit to it.
Why would any man want 20% larger testicles? Aren't they big and annoying enough already? Just a brace of sitting ducks, waiting to be stilettoed by the next angry girlfriend, shnozzed by the bicycle horizontal bar, or seized in the teeth of your commando jeans. Wincing yet?
Chisel jawed; yeah, that's a knee weakener. Hairy chested...meh. But, really? I'm SO glad I don't have them.
Quote: beachbumbabsQuote: FACE ...Buying a Silverado doesn't leave you hairy chested and chisel jawed with 20% larger testicles...
Why would any man want 20% larger testicles? Aren't they big and annoying enough already? Just a brace of sitting ducks, waiting to be stilettoed by the next angry girlfriend, shnozzed by the bicycle horizontal bar, or seized in the teeth of your commando jeans. Wincing yet?
Chisel jawed; yeah, that's a knee weakener. Hairy chested...meh. But, really? I'm SO glad I don't have them.
If there's any steroid abusing members of the forum, I'd say they're all very happy to read this
Quote: michael99000they don't show Jodi Meeks shooting a free throw
lol
Quote: EvenBobOf course. Just don't maintain the casino
is something it isn't. If you ask a car
dealer if buying a new corvette will make
you an instant babe magnet, he'll probably
admit it won't. If you ask the average pit
person if they're tying to take advantage
of a mostly uninformed public with games
that are fixed in favor of the casino, not
one of them will admit to it.
I disagree. Car dealers will jump down your throat with illusions "chicks will love this car" "this car will make you look professional" etc.... Every industry tries to bolster its image.
Quote: beachbumbabsQuote: FACE ...Buying a Silverado doesn't leave you hairy chested and chisel jawed with 20% larger testicles...
.
This is called obsfuscation, beclouding the real subject,
that casinos are dishonest in their approach to customers.
We can discuss cute commercials all day, doesn't change
the fact that casinos are not what the public perceives
them to be. WE all know it, the casino employee's know
it, the general public is mostly in the dark.
Car salespeople are the sleaziest people that you will ever meet. They will lie to you about anything and everything. Going to buy a car without doing your homework first is about as costly as going to play a new casino game without checking WoO first. Let the buyer beware...
Quote: EvenBobThis is called obsfuscation, beclouding the real subject,
that casinos are dishonest in their approach to customers.
We can discuss cute commercials all day, doesn't change
the fact that casinos are not what the public perceives
them to be. WE all know it, the casino employee's know
it, the general public is mostly in the dark.
The public, including me to some extent, has voluntarily entered into a willing suspension of disbelief. Sure, they're encouraged to do so. But it's a game of CHANCE. SOMEONE is paying for the "free" drinks, "free" rooms, billion dollar building, dealers, all the rest. Who does anyone of any intelligence think is paying for that? If the answer is "somebody else", perhaps gamblers should have to pass a common sense test before they are admitted. Caveat emptor.
Quote: beachbumbabsThe public, including me to some extent, has voluntarily entered into a willing suspension of disbelief.
Absolutely wrong. The public doesn't know enough to
suspend disbelief. They really truly believe if they
play long enough, they have a chance of getting ahead
and staying ahead. To suspend disbelief, you have to
have a good grasp of reality. They do not. Don't believe
me? ASK THEM. You'll find out in a hurry they have no
idea what the truth is. They also believe they could all
become pro gamblers if they just put their minds to it.
Of course people here think they are indicative of the
general public. They are not. Reminds me of when I
had the cab co. My fave question to ask black riders
was how much of the US is black, what %. They never
got it even close to right. It's 12%, but they always
guessed 35% to 50%. That's because in their neighborhoods
all they see is black people. When I wised them up, they
often said I was lying because 12% was way too low.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI find that the opposite is true. Most people say that "the house always wins" .
And you've talked what, 3 people? In the last 30
years I've talked to hundreds and hundreds. Maybe
20% of them know what's going on. Just last Fri
the wife of guy who was winning told me she looked
forward to the day when they'd won enough to
cover all future losses. You can't wise them up,
either, they get very angry. Like telling a religious
fanatic there in no god.
It makes me laugh that people like Axiom think 'most'
people in the casino know what's going on. It's funny
because it's so wrong.
Quote: rainmanJust don't pee down my back and tell me it's raining.
I would think YOU of all people would know the difference. And BTW, that scam doesn't even work here in Vegas, because we don't get rain. :-)
Quote: EvenBobAnd you've talked what, 3 people? In the last 30
years I've talked to hundreds and hundreds. Maybe
20% of them know what's going on. Just last Fri
the wife of guy who was winning told me she looked
forward to the day when they'd won enough to
cover all future losses. You can't wise them up,
either, they get very angry. Like telling a religious
fanatic there in no god.
It makes me laugh that people like Axiom think 'most'
people in the casino know what's going on. It's funny
because it's so wrong.
Most people in a casino are NOT most of your family, friends, coworkers, etc. Those are just regular people.
Most in a casino are the degenerates who have been lured in.
Yes. Casinos share similar advertising as others, by bending the truth (aka lying). However, it's common knowledge that buying a truck won't give you big hairy nuts. It isn't necessarily common knowledge or just "simply understood" that casinos not only have a tremendous edge or they prey on the weak, but once you get sucked in it can get very hard to leave. Not to mention, they say it's a game of chance. When it's simply not a game of chance because you cannot win.
Its like jumping off a building because "there's a chance I can fly".
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceThis is exactly how I feel about it. I have never once gotten a big mac that looks like the one in the picture.
Quote: EvenBobAnd you've talked what, 3 people? In the last 30
years I've talked to hundreds and hundreds. Maybe
20% of them know what's going on. Just last Fri
the wife of guy who was winning told me she looked
forward to the day when they'd won enough to
cover all future losses. You can't wise them up,
either, they get very angry. Like telling a religious
fanatic there in no god.
It makes me laugh that people like Axiom think 'most'
people in the casino know what's going on. It's funny
because it's so wrong.
They don't have a clue what's going on, but they believe that "the house always wins". Are you saying that with all the people you've talked to over the years, you've never heard that saying? That makes me think that you are the one who has only talked to 3 people.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceThey don't have a clue what's going on, but they believe that "the house always wins". .
A few people believe that, most don't. They believe
if they play long enough they will get ahead and
stay ahead. If they really thought the house always wins,
they wouldn't believe they can get ahead. Like I
keep saying, just ask them, you'll be amazed at
what they really think.
Quote: EvenBobA few people believe that, most don't. They believe
if they play long enough they will get ahead and
stay ahead. If they really thought the house always wins,
they wouldn't believe they can get ahead. Like I
keep saying, just ask them, you'll be amazed at
what they really think.
I have asked them. They tend to say things like "the house always wins" or "Look how nice this place is! It wasn't built by winners".
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI find that the opposite is true. Most people say that "the house always wins" and don't believe you when you say that you can make money in a casino (eg, though advantage play).
Oddly, both things may be true. People absolutely know "the house has an edge". But now I wonder just what kind of percentage believe they can beat the edge, now that they know a betting system.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI have asked them..
Sure you have. What a coincidence.
Quote: EvenBobSure you have. What a coincidence.
Yes, what a coincidence that I'm active on a gambling forum, I enjoy gambling, I spend time in casinos, and I talk to people in casinos. No correlation there at all.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceYes, what a coincidence .
Yes, quite the coincidence. I have a suspicion
that if I said I was thinking of the number
6, why, you were thinking that too.
Coincidence.
Quote: EvenBobYes, quite the coincidence. I have a suspicion
that if I said I was thinking of the number
6, why, you were thinking that too.
Coincidence.
This is pitiful trolling by your standards. You should try a little harder; you're usually better at it.
