Revel promotion sounds too good to be true

Quote: DRich

I am pretty sure that everyone will get a 100% of their losses returned up until the point they were excluded. That seems 100% fair to me.

Based on some posts here, that seems not to be the case

Very interesting discussion...

Three words to add:

Fraud.
Treble damages.

TX

Quote: Bhappy

OK Guys I give up. You are too smart for me. However, all this huffing and puffing has not generated any traction beyond this forum. This is like pi$$ing in a dark pant. It gives a warm feeling, but no one notices it.

UK, its not like you to give up. Revel still needs you to shill for them and float ideas out there to see what the reaction is going to be.

Quote: DRich

I don't understand what you are implying. It says in their rules that they can alter the promo, and that by playing the promotion you are agreeing to their rules.

It seems pretty straight forward to me. Don't play the promo if you don't agree to the rules.

Personally, I think it stinks that they are changing it. I doubt that I will make the trip from Vegas now to take advantage of it.

I feel like DRich has hit the nail on the head. Several years ago, just after I first moved to Vegas I played Terribles Casino's (now silver7) Loss rebate. Lost the required amount in the required 24 hour period and it was rebated. The next few times I played on separate days, I booked wins. Then a week or so later booked a significant loss and collected the rebate a second time. After some more winning days I booked another loss and that third time I tried to collect the rebate, I was denied. I complained up through a couple levels of management and finally, was shown the official rules, which of course made no mention of how often, nor how many times you could collect the rebate. But at the very bottom in small print, was some kind of wording that the rebate was up to the discretion of casino management. That kind of terminology or terminology stating the casino has the right to cancel at any time, is their legal 'escape' and most casino have smart enough legal departments to protect themselves in this matter. So while I hope those that got burned do successfully recoup, I think it unlikely.

But, in the case of Revel, the handling of this promotion once again, shows them to be very poorly managed. As a non-participant, just observing, it looks like they were caught with their pants down, had no idea just how much this promotion could cost them and when they were alerted by message board chatter, they just went into 'Keystone cop routine' and looked even more amateurish.

This is clearly a desperate casino, mismanaged from Day 1, spiraling down the drain. I can only hope that the publicity of this fiasco pushes them even closer.

Quote: kewlj

This is clearly a desperate casino, mismanaged from Day 1, spiraling down the drain. I can only hope that the publicity of this fiasco pushes them even closer.

I still don't get it. I like mismanaged casinos. Do you only want casino managed by really sharp people to survive? Who would you like to see taking over the corpse of Revel?

"We reserve the right" terms must be exercised in good faith. Those that pulled cards playing Ultimate X are going to have a hard time defending those actions. Players that were banned after losing due to being an AP by reputation (assuming that is the case here) will have a much better case showing good faith was not used when they were offered the promotion.

I saw what was going on with said machine. First, it's not fraud. The fact that all of these people can be beat over the head with it and still not get it means the information is way too valuable to discuss in public. The smart people were exercising discretion in not discussing it and the not so smart people are jumping to conclusions without seriously thinking about what happened.

Quote: Boz

UK, its not like you to give up. Revel still needs you to shill for them and float ideas out there to see what the reaction is going to be.

Boz, Boz, Boz.....trust me I am not UK.

....deleted.....

Quote: Bhappy

Boz, Boz, Boz.....trust me I am not UK.

OK, but you have to admit you sound like him defending Revel against common logic, just using many many many less words than he does.

Either way, having a winning weekend and dont waste too much time thinking about Revel. They just are not worth it.

Quote: Boz

OK, but you have to admit you sound like him defending Revel against common logic, just using many many many less words than he does.

Either way, having a winning weekend and dont waste too much time thinking about Revel. They just are not worth it.

Boz, I will tell you a secret. Since they allowed smoking, I want them to fail.

If you re-read my posts, it may come across as shilling for Revel, but they are actually against the people who try to take advantage of every nook and cranny, moan and groan as if casinos 'owe' them 'freebies'. I have no problem with people who play with strategies. Strategies that can pass the 'red face' test. However, if their strategies fall in grey areas they have no sympathy from me. You may say Revel also did that. It is true that they did deactivate people on the 'list'. however except for few people no-one is telling why were they shut off. A RNG did not produce that list. There has to be something. Revel being afraid of losing lots of money on those people might be one of the reason.

I know you were going to pass up their match play promotion. If you are still going to follows through with that, I admire you. There are still lots of posters who also depise Revel, but they will be first in line to get their match play, free food, and if they throw in free room they will be ecstatic. They will be as happy as pigs in a mud puddle.

Enjoy your wins.

Quote: Pokeraddict

"We reserve the right" terms must be exercised in good faith. Those that pulled cards playing Ultimate X are going to have a hard time defending those actions. Players that were banned after losing due to being an AP by reputation (assuming that is the case here) will have a much better case showing good faith was not used when they were offered the promotion.

Agreed. The "good faith" goes both ways. What those UX players were doing was fraudulent (yes, it's fraud to intentionally manipulate your win/loss to look different than what it actually is), and they absolutely deserve to have the promotion voided. But it looks as though Revel overreacted, and many of those playing the promo legitimately got swept up along with them. The promotion was very +EV as it was, there was no need for extra antics... but those UX players had to be unnecessarily greedy about it, and now look at what happened.

Quote: jc2286

Agreed. The "good faith" goes both ways. What those UX players were doing was fraudulent (yes, it's fraud to intentionally manipulate your win/loss to look different than what it actually is),

Few on this board seem to think it is SKILL not fraud.

Quote: Bhappy

Few on this board seem to think it is SKILL not fraud.

Slow down! I don't think it is fraud. It is a sequence of perfectly legal actions intended to deceive Revel's win/loss tracking system. Revel certainly doesn't need to prove fraud in order to avoid paying these rebates. After all, it is a loss-rebate promo.

Quote: LossRebate

actions intended to deceive

From: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/fraud

A false representation of a matter of fact—whether by words or by conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of what should have been disclosed—that deceives and is intended to deceive another so that the individual will act upon it to her or his legal injury.

Fraud must be proved by showing that the defendant's actions involved five separate elements: (1) a false statement of a material fact,(2) knowledge on the part of the defendant that the statement is untrue, (3) intent on the part of the defendant to deceive the alleged victim, (4) justifiable reliance by the alleged victim on the statement, and (5) injury to the alleged victim as a result.

1) My total loss for the month was $X
2) They pulled their card to intentionally deceive
3) They pulled their card to intentionally deceive
4) Revel obviously believes the p/l of people's cards
5) Loss rebate is money out of Revel's pocket

Quote: LossRebate

Slow down! I don't think it is fraud. It is a sequence of perfectly legal actions intended to deceive Revel's win/loss tracking system. Revel certainly doesn't need to prove fraud in order to avoid paying these rebates. After all, it is a loss-rebate promo.

(yes, it's fraud to intentionally manipulate your win/loss to look different than what it actually is),

The Revel suffers no injury unless they actually pay out the rebate in these cases, something they have apparently signaled that they will not do.

On the other hand, let's look at the "five fingers of fraud" for someone on the "list" who played the promo completely on the square:

(1) The Revel says come on down and have your losses up to $100K rebated.
(2) The Revel maintained a list of people whom they intended to freeroll.
(3) The Revel maintained a list of people whom they intended to freeroll.
(4) The victim assumed the offer by the Revel was made in good faith and the victim put funds at risk.
(5) Loss rebate not paid out. And furthermore, arguably, lost EV for not being given the opportunity to enjoy the promo for the full month.

Not a lawyer. Wish I was one. If I were, I would be signing up clients by the bushel...

TX

I just read through this thread, and I have to ask: was this promotion even good at the start before the shenanigans? The promotion in its original form only gave free play over 20 weeks based on losses in July. Perhaps that was good for locals, but would it make sense for anyone else? And why would you try to lose?

Two posts sticks out in my mind:

Quote: pew

Imagine playing this promo but you end up ahead for the month. That would suck!

Wow, do you really think the goal for going to a casino is to lose? If I were at the Revel I wouldn't care about the loss rebate, I'd only care about winning.

And then this comment:

Quote: LossRebate

Why do people have to put so much information out in the public domain? This thread has cost a lot of people a chance to participate in a legitimate freeroll.

It's not a free roll and it never was a free roll. It was giving you back free play for real cash that you lost. It was free play and NOT a rebate.

Sorry, I don't even understand how anyone thought this was something special.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Sorry, I don't even understand how anyone thought this was something special.

...and let's just keep it that way, everyone :)

Quote: TXLouder

On the other hand, let's look at the "five fingers of fraud" for someone on the "list" who played the promo completely on the square:

The difference is intent to defraud.

Assuming the posts here are reliable evidence, then people who pulled their cards to mask winnings were attempting to defraud.

Even assuming this mysterious list exists, there is still no evidence the people on it won't be rebated the losses they incurred before they were informed/had cards pulled.

Quote: TXLouder

And furthermore, arguably, lost EV for not being given the opportunity to enjoy the promo for the full month.

Sorry, but you have no claim (legal or moral) to some potential enjoyment. If you did you could sue over bad movies ;)

Quote: AlanMendelson

I just read through this thread, and I have to ask: was this promotion even good at the start before the shenanigans? The promotion in its original form only gave free play over 20 weeks based on losses in July. Perhaps that was good for locals, but would it make sense for anyone else? And why would you try to lose?


Sorry, I don't even understand how anyone thought this was something special.

You clearly don't understand. You do not try to lose. You try to win. If you win you keep your winnings and go home a happy man.
If you unfortunately do lose, then you can recoup your losses in free play.
I 100% agree with you that if you do not live close enough to make having to show up once a week for 20 consecutive weeks not an issue, then it is not worth doing.

My take on this mess is that the Revel tried a bold move, didn't do the homework needed (They SHOULD have hired the Wiz BEFORE starting the promotion), and after all the promotion and advertising, read the analysis here on WoV, and soiled their undergarments. Their pathetic attempts to mitigate their error is laughable, unless you are one of the unlucky ones who lost and will never see that free play....

Quote: AlanMendelson

It's not a free roll and it never was a free roll. It was giving you back free play for real cash that you lost. It was free play and NOT a rebate.

Sorry, I don't even understand how anyone thought this was something special.

I thought the definition of freeroll was that you might win but could not lose? The freeplay loss rebate is not a true freeroll in that sense but, come on.... close enough for gubment work.

I wish the Wiz would run some math on this:

Say the Rev did pay out the free play, then:

1. What percentage of the free play would be used? (I think most free play offers are for a fixed period of time, perhaps for one week.)
2. What would the return be on the free play?
3. Compare the return on the free play to the initial amounts lost to get a net return for the Rev?

Even if you lost $100,000 and got 20 weeks of $5,000 free play each week -- would you return each week if you weren't already living in the NY-NJ-PA area? Someone from LA or LV certainly would not be making twenty trips over twenty weeks just for $5K of free play. They might make a few trips, but all 20?

Again, it's different for "local players."

Quote: AlanMendelson

I wish the Wiz would run some math on this:

Say the Rev did pay out the free play, then:

1. What percentage of the free play would be used? (I think most free play offers are for a fixed period of time, perhaps for one week.)
2. What would the return be on the free play?
3. Compare the return on the free play to the initial amounts lost to get a net return for the Rev?

Even if you lost $100,000 and got 20 weeks of $5,000 free play each week -- would you return each week if you weren't already living in the NY-NJ-PA area? Someone from LA or LV certainly would not be making twenty trips over twenty weeks just for $5K of free play. They might make a few trips, but all 20?

Again, it's different for "local players."

I think if you were going to play through $100K, you would absolutely be making plans to collect the 20 weeks. If not, there would be no reason to play to that loss. But obviously the goal is to not lose.

To Wizard, Mission, JB, and any other admin., official or not:

Thank you for your continued efforts to keep an open forum for everyone's use AND as devoid of personal attacks as can be. "You cannot keep all of the people happy all of the time, but you can keep some of the people happy some of the time." And you all do the best that you can, so I commend each of you sincerely!

Keep your heads up and please do not stray from your path - you are appreciated by most!


To those of you who piped up to their defense:

Kudos! As I was reading through the last couple of weeks of this thread for the first time last night, it was all I could do not to jump in. I wished I had been keeping up as it went along, but last night it would have been premature, as the "weather" changed quite drastically come July. I think you know what I mean...


To those of you who collaborate, assist with information, aid with calculation, etc.:

Keep it coming, and thank you for your continued efforts to keep it positive ...most of the time! (Nobody likes a perfectionist!)


To those who like to point fingers:

See the four pointed back at you? (I always hated that saying - aren't there only three?) You know who you are... I would like each of you to consider what part you played in this. If you have contended that the information divulged in this thread caused the Revel to remove or disable certain machines (and that is a BIG IF!), then what affect did your own posts have? When I read each of your pleas to cease and desist, my first thought was, "Why don't you lead by example?" (Read: shut up and quit posting yourselves!) I'll admit that it was a facetious thought, at least in part, but perhaps it has relevance after all...

What is the probability that (A) your collective posts indicating that there are AP's intending to take the house for all its worth caused (B) the Revel creating a blacklist for this promotion? Did the management at Revel somehow not read these as well? No, you shot yourselves (and any other AP's who showed up on the 1st) in the foot, didn't you? Not to mention those who had travel plans later this the month.


To those of you who disrespect a man in his own home and expect not to get smacked!:

This happened in two ways. Those who provide us with this forum have been very gracious throughout the life of this thread. As this is an open forum, they allowed you to point, and pout, and stomp, and accuse, until at least one of you got too personal. Then, they let you come back to lick your wounds, and whine, and point fingers (at other players and personalities and the Revel this time) about the host who did smack some of you but good! If you kick a dying man while he's down, and somehow he's able to get up and kick your butt, then take your licks and take the losses. If you did not see the changes on the floor at the end of June as a warning then perhaps it is time for you to find other "employment."

Furthermore, if the Revel had not stopped you and you had come out a winner, would you have come back later this year when they filed bankruptcy and refunded your winnings on behalf of their legitimate creditors? Of course not! You are mad because you got AP'ed by a casino. A casino that you may not have liked or respected in the first place! All is fair in love and war, and the relationship between parasite and host is not the former but the latter.

As was disclosed on this forum, the Revel is in financial trouble. Whether you like this casino or its management or not, any plan to take them for so much money with little risk is unethical. Just because you can does not mean you always should. Is it too much to ask for a little professionalism from professional gamblers as a collective?


For what it's worth, I have no problem with AP's. In fact, I wish I had the guts to leave my 30K-a-year "sure thing" to pursue what I love - taking money from casinos. But whether I do it part-time or as a way to make a living, I will continue to act professionally and responsibly. I stay away from the ones that drastically cut back on promos, not only because of a reduced value to me, but because I see that they are not healthy. Even more so with the ones laying off their staff in droves. I know that if I kill the host, my opportunity will go away. Even as a part-time parasite, I prefer my hosts to be healthy!

OK, I'll get off my soapbox now. Next!

Quote: camapl

As was disclosed on this forum, the Revel is in financial trouble. Whether you like this casino or its management or not, any plan to take them for so much money with little risk is unethical. Just because you can does not mean you always should. Is it too much to ask for a little professionalism from professional gamblers as a collective?

LOL. This is, of course, why Revel conducts detailed interviews with prospective customers, making sure that they aren't in financial trouble before taking their money. That is what they do, right?

Quote:

In fact, I wish I had the guts to leave my 30K-a-year "sure thing" to pursue what I love - taking money from casinos. But whether I do it part-time or as a way to make a living, I will continue to act professionally and responsibly. I stay away from the ones that drastically cut back on promos, not only because of a reduced value to me, but because I see that they are not healthy.

That's an excellent point! I'll take your advice. The moment I see that the few hundred thousand a year I take out of casinos threatens the viability of the hundred-billion-dollar American gaming industry, I will cut back and start going easy on them.

Seriously, what is it with so many people in this forum treating billion-dollar corporations like they were helpless baby bunnies that must be nurtured and protected? Rest assured, they do not feel the same towards you.

Quote: fivespot

Quote: camapl

As was disclosed on this forum, the Revel is in financial trouble. Whether you like this casino or its management or not, any plan to take them for so much money with little risk is unethical. Just because you can does not mean you always should. Is it too much to ask for a little professionalism from professional gamblers as a collective?

LOL. This is, of course, why Revel conducts detailed interviews with prospective customers, making sure that they aren't in financial trouble before taking their money. That is what they do, right?

+1

Quote: fivespot

This is, of course, why Revel conducts detailed interviews with prospective customers, making sure that they aren't in financial trouble before taking their money.

More finger pointing? I might have known! Is anyone capable of owning his or her actions? I almost brought this up in my first post, but I thought people might actually read and think.

I am not asking people to consider the casino's actions. This is not intended as an omission, as there is plenty of evidence that this has already been done! I was hoping some of the players might be men or women enough to take their own part. Are you?

Quote: fivespot

... the viability of the hundred-billion-dollar American gaming industry ... billion-dollar corporations ...

Are there only 100 casinos nationwide? Is each one of them above the billion dollar mark?

I think you may be confusing the collective market with each individual participant in that market, big and small, flush and failing. Is Revel part of a chain?

Quote: AlanMendelson

I wish the Wiz would run some math on this:

Where were you on page 10? LOL

At that time Revel offered 9/6 DDB for $125/hand, Playing the loss rebate optimally yielded over a $40,000 average opportunity per person.

Quote: aceofspades

+1

Good point - I had not considered that! Very "positive" of you! :) <== sincere smile

Quote: camapl

To Wizard, Mission, JB, and any other admin., official or not:

Thank you for your continued efforts to keep an open forum for everyone's use AND as devoid of personal attacks as can be.

Thank you!

Quote:

As was disclosed on this forum, the Revel is in financial trouble. Whether you like this casino or its management or not, any plan to take them for so much money with little risk is unethical. Just because you can does not mean you always should.

That would be like asking a pack of hungry lions to take it easy on a wounded zebra.

Quote:

Is it too much to ask for a little professionalism from professional gamblers as a collective?

Way too much.

Quote: tringlomane

At that time Revel offered 9/6 DDB for $125/hand, Playing the loss rebate optimally yielded over a $40,000 average opportunity per person.

Now that any analysis of $125 hands is irrelevant for this promotion, I have a what-if request for someone with an aptitude for simulation...

How would Royal Aces fare in comparison? How about Pick 'Em Nines? Joker 2P? Double Joker?

I am not looking for analysis on the full pay versions. I have chosen the games above, as they have a very distinct attribute. That they all have a probability of loss between 60% and 70% distinguishes them from the field.

Even though DDB has a much higher variance than JOB, the higher return of JOB seemed to allow it to (slightly) beat out DDB in the race. Added: Perhaps this is due to the ratio of rebate to bet size ($100K vs. $125?) I estimate that the probability of loss of a game is a more important metric than variance or return. If we could find one of the games above with a lower return than FP JOB and see how it compares, I think we might find something of interest for future promotions like this one. If need be, we could use TDB 9/7 for a control, as it has a comparable return and probability of loss as and a much greater variance than FP JOB.

Quote: camapl

As was disclosed on this forum, the Revel is in financial trouble. Whether you like this casino or its management or not, any plan to take them for so much money with little risk is unethical. Just because you can does not mean you always should.

This isn't a flashing dealer. This isn't a countable game. This isn't even triple up. None of the situations where you could seriously claim you haven't seen a potential player advantage. You don't need to be the Wizard to see it. You don't need to be an AP. You don't even need to think; the casino tells you about this advantage itself.

The PA in loss rebates is extremely obvious. It's upon the one offering it to make sure it's not exploitable. And they even tried. It's just that their protection measure was a failure.

I'm sure even the casino execs are blaming one another, but not the gamblers. You can't run an industry built around the notion of easy money and then blame your customers for - wait - taking the easy money.

Quote: AlanMendelson

Sorry, I don't even understand how anyone thought this was something special.

I get a bit lost with loss rebates, too. I need to reduce the math and jargon to terms I can understand. Pretty much I'm down to "You get to gamble the same money twice (more or less)." In other words, you're gambling at a discount. As a half-appropriate analogy, suppose a clothing store gave you a 100% rebate in store credit. At first it sounds great. If it were to be spent over time, then it would depend on the merchandise available. But it might still be a good deal.

Seeing as these promos are all the rage these days, it would be a good idea for an article explaining them and how to take advantage, if any exists. Pretty much "loss rebate," free play or not, is almost a casino game all by itself.

Quote: camapl

More finger pointing? I might have known! Is anyone capable of owning his or her actions?

Who's not owning their actions? I'm in no way ashamed of beating casinos for as much money as I can. I certainly hope no one else here is.

Quote:

I think you may be confusing the collective market with each individual participant in that market, big and small, flush and failing. Is Revel part of a chain?

I'm not ignoring the difference. I don't care about the difference. If AC is a profitable market to offer gambling, companies will offer gambling. I couldn't care less if Revel is one of the ones offering it, or if someone else does. In fact, given recent actions, it appears very much like everyone would be better off if it were someone else.

However, this is irrelevant in this case, because all the APs in the world couldn't make a difference to the ongoing trainwreck that is Revel. Revel gave their outgoing CEO, the one who ran them into the ground, a $8M exit bonus - but losing a few million to APs is going to break them? Revel lost $60M on operations in Q1 2013 - anything they'd lose to APs this month is a rounding error in comparison. Not that cheating the customers would be justified even if it weren't.

I believe that Revel management handled this situation poorly from a PR point of view. However, would anyone who was familiar with the casino have expected anything different? I have not set foot in the place, yet what I read in this thread alone would have made me leery of digging in, especially on the first day, bankrolled or not. Why would I trust a casino that "has been mismanaged from day one" and is on the brink of bankruptcy, again, without waiting and seeing how it went?

That being said, I could care less whether the casino execs are blaming each other, the players, the staff, the community, or the sun, the moon and the stars. They are in the business of making money by providing a venue for entertainment. And, yes, it is an industry built around the notion of easy money. So how is it not OK for a casino to play their own game? Especially with those who broadcast their intentions in a public forum that is suspected to be watched by those same execs or an agent on their behalf? The casino got to take the easy money this time from some players who obviously failed to protect themselves by heeding some obvious warnings. Is this not the standard to which you hold the casinos? What is good for the goose is good for the gander, no?

If you go blindly forth to take from a business whether "by their rules" or not, do not act surprised when they reject your business, especially when you do not really partake in the product that they are selling. How many AP's truly gamble for the entertainment value or purchase their booze (if they drink at all)?

Quote: camapl

I believe that Revel management handled this situation poorly from a PR point of view. However, would anyone who was familiar with the casino have expected anything different?

Yes. Many of us. Dancer, also; he made and lost a bet on the matter. It is rare for a mismanaged casino to resort to cheating.

Quote:

And, yes, it is an industry built around the notion of easy money. So how is it not OK for a casino to play their own game?

False advertising and fraud are not supposed to be part of the game. I would have expected Gaming Enforcement to smack them down immediately, but hopefully they'll do so within 30 days. I would be shocked and amazed if they let Revel cheat the players and did not intervene at all, if what we've heard in this thread is anywhere close to accurate.

Quote: camapl

So how is it not OK for a casino to play their own game?

No. This is not the game advertised.

This is the exact equivalent of a player taking out a $50,000 marker, then telling the casino to fuck off, he isn't paying it, and made sure you can't collect by force.

That's a different game, and if players and casinos were playing it, they wouldn't need house edge; it would all be "I'm afraid we don't cash chips from winning players, sir".

Quote: camapl

How many AP's truly gamble for the entertainment value or purchase their booze (if they drink at all)?

None. I figure they think if they enjoy the games, they're doing something wrong ;)

Quote: fivespot

I'm in no way ashamed of beating casinos for as much money as I can.

When a power company issues a check to a consumer whose solar cells generated more power than were consumed, at least the power company is getting something in return.

When Coors and Company went from tin to aluminum cans and offered a rebate for the empties, at least they were getting something in return.

What puts a casino in a different light? Or do you expect something for nothing from other entertainment venues, such as movie theaters, concert halls, sports venues, bars, clubs, etc., as well? Why stop there? Most would agree that oil companies gouge the general public - why not find a way to take them for all they are worth?

Quote: fivespot

I don't care about the difference.

I have no idea how old you are. However, I cringe at the thought of the younger generation having this sentiment reinforced any more than it is by society as a whole. Such entitlement and apathy is neither good for the individual nor the community. It is a sickness that is spreading globally, and it is moving faster than any communicable disease that I know of. I care.

But, hey, as long as you get yours, right?

Quote: fivespot

However, this is irrelevant in this case, because all the APs in the world are not going to make a difference to the ongoing trainwreck that is Revel.

Hey, we agree, at least for the rest of the month. (The AP's were banned, remember?)

Quote: camapl

Now that any analysis of $125 hands is irrelevant for this promotion, I have a what-if request for someone with an aptitude for simulation...

How would Royal Aces fare in comparison? How about Pick 'Em Nines? Joker 2P? Double Joker?

I am not looking for analysis on the full pay versions. I have chosen the games above, as they have a very distinct attribute. That they all have a probability of loss between 60% and 70% distinguishes them from the field.

Even though DDB has a much higher variance than JOB, the higher return of JOB seemed to allow it to (slightly) beat out DDB in the race. Added: Perhaps this is due to the ratio of rebate to bet size ($100K vs. $125?) I estimate that the probability of loss of a game is a more important metric than variance or return. If we could find one of the games above with a lower return than FP JOB and see how it compares, I think we might find something of interest for future promotions like this one. If need be, we could use TDB 9/7 for a control, as it has a comparable return and probability of loss as and a much greater variance than FP JOB.

Bump...

Quote: Wizard

Quote: camapl

Is it too much to ask for a little professionalism from professional gamblers as a collective?

Way too much.

In my experience, most professional APs show professionalism in numerous ways. For instance, they usually avoid endangering other people's action by drawing excessive attention to it.

You acknowledged this earlier, and called it "selfish". I call it not being naive, and learning from experience. I respect you, and I respect your work; but despite your extensive experience in gaming math, AFAIK you are a less experienced AP than many others here.

If your goal was to increase the EV of the player community, I believe you made a mistake, both in this case and in the case of Mohegan Sun triple down. MS worked out well, this didn't - which might be related to this thread and the radio show, or might not - but as you so often observe, it's not whether you win or lose, it's whether you had a good bet. I don't think this was a good bet, given your stated goal.

Let it go man :) Wizard does gaming math, Some people requested he do some for the revel promo and he did. He is not on team AP..
You win some you lose some. There will be other opportunities.

Quote: camapl

Such entitlement and apathy is neither good for the individual nor the community. It is a sickness that is spreading globally, and it is moving faster than any communicable disease that I know of. I care. But, hey, as long as you get yours, right?

That is precisely what the AP's and their partisans express here regularly. The effort is to control and limit strictly the "entitlement" to a very small self-appointed "elite" group. And no one else should even discuss it, despite the fact that it is widely broadcast, even with an aspect of national reach.

Quote: fivespot

If your goal was to increase the EV of the player community, I believe you made a mistake, both in this case and in the case of Mohegan Sun triple down. MS worked out well, this didn't - which might be related to this thread and the radio show, or might not -

Tough shit! wizard is under no obligtion to keep his mouth shut. People asked him, he did his analysis and that's it. He made no mistake.

Quote: tringlomane

Where were you on page 10? LOL

I don't know?? Is what the Wiz figured on page 10 the same as what the casino expects to win? Or is it what the chances of an individual player are?

Quote: fivespot

You acknowledged this earlier, and called it "selfish". I call it not being naive, and learning from experience. I respect you, and I respect your work; but despite your extensive experience in gaming math, AFAIK you are a less experienced AP than many others here.

Thanks for the compliment on my work. I admit that many here are much more experienced APs than myself. I've never said I was a world-class AP.

While your opinion is duly noted, mine is still that I helped more people beat the Mohegan Sun and my input on Revel didn't make much difference, as that promotion had abject disaster written all over it. Nevertheless, maybe I'll do things differently next time.

Quote: Feanor

So, this brings up a question I have sometimes thought about, but never tried to answer. What could I get for defecting? There is actually a casino I know of right now that has some pretty bad leaks. They are not widely known yet, but a few APs have been hitting them. I thought, "What if went to the casino and asked 'What will you give me to show you these problems that are probably costing you 3k/day and could start to cost you a lot more?'"

Ask Eliot Jacobson. He doesn't look like he's living the high life.

Why do things differently next time? Do you think you'll benefit in some way by keeping quiet? I don't think so. You're not making money from playing the promo, you're making money (indirectly) by discussing it here. Keep it up Wiz.

Quote: fivespot

Quote: camapl

As was disclosed on this forum, the Revel is in financial trouble. Whether you like this casino or its management or not, any plan to take them for so much money with little risk is unethical. Just because you can does not mean you always should. Is it too much to ask for a little professionalism from professional gamblers as a collective?

LOL. This is, of course, why Revel conducts detailed interviews with prospective customers, making sure that they aren't in financial trouble before taking their money. That is what they do, right?


That's an excellent point! I'll take your advice. The moment I see that the few hundred thousand a year I take out of casinos threatens the viability of the hundred-billion-dollar American gaming industry, I will cut back and start going easy on them.

Seriously, what is it with so many people in this forum treating billion-dollar corporations like they were helpless baby bunnies that must be nurtured and protected? Rest assured, they do not feel the same towards you.

Son, there's an old saying in Texas that my grandpappy used to tell me...

You can shear a sheep many times, but skin 'em only once. Casinos know their best "customers" like camapl here, and they prefer to shear 'em, keepin 'em comin' back for more time and again. People campl that aren't much more than children who think they're gettin' away with a fast one by tellin' their mama that the dog ate their ice cream to try to get a freebie, they're the perfect target for the casinos. The casino goes "oh, really? The dog got it? well here, have another" and they laugh all the way to the bank.

When a buncha smart fellers started hittin' up the revel, they knew it was more than an ice cream cone on the line this time, so they tried to skin 'em. Looks like they might've found a wolf in sheep's clothing, though...