Hey, at least Jerry Springer thinks BO is doing a good job....

Learn how to read! I have already explained away your apparent contradiction in post #27 (see quoted red text above). Since you still want to refer to it as a contradiction, that makes it contrived. Simply re-posting your original point after ignoring my explanation does not make you right. It makes you look foolish.

Let me know if you need help understanding the phrases "short term" and "long run"!

 

BTW, my bad. Since you have decided to deny that Springer humiliates his guests, then I did actually call you crazy. I forgot that I did that and apologize for claiming I never said it, thanks for the correction. However, your posts in this thread have confirmed one thing, you are crazy, completely certifiable.

 

Yep and whats your excuse LOL and of course it is a contradiction when I said they leave nothing to chance you sir told me I did not know what I was talking about then a few posts later you sir say the same thing! Hence it is a contradiction and not contrived nor Sir am I a liar
How you can deny what you yourself wrote is actualy beyond comprehension Now a simple yes or no, did you in fact write

Furthermore, you don't have a damn clue as to what you are talking about. "Nothing is left to chance about how they work" (My words) That is your quote.

And then go on to say in a later post

There is no element of chance in the long run, the house edge will always prevail

Now if you Did not then I will humbly apologise

 

What part of my explanation don't you understand?

 

You told me I was wrong, then said the same thing yourself, now I know you are not stupid so why keep avoiding it? now it is there for you to see You contradicted yourself It realy is that simple

"Nothing is left to chance about how they work" this is were you told me I did not have a Damn clue

There is no element of chance in the long run, the house edge will always prevail, and this is your contradiction of the earlier post

Dont try saying that I am nitpicking I am simply pointing out what you said and what you have called me a liar over!! There is no explanation required you made two statements that contradict each other now simply be a Man and admit it.

 

Again, do I need to define the phrases "short term" and "long run". If you stop, take a step back, and look at my comments objectively, you will see the logic, and the contradiction will fade from your view.

 

You said I was wrong now tell me exactly were I was wrong, I made no mention of long or short term gains or losses those are your words. I simply said Nothing is left to chance about how they work" You told me that was wrong yet use the same argument yourself
You have called me a liar now prove it or back down

 

I don't remember calling you a liar. I remember saying you don't know what you are talking about. If you don't recognize that there is short term risk for the casinos that are left to chance, then my statement was accurate, you don't know what you are talking about. I have clarified my statements several times at this point. Are you claiming that you intended your statement only to be applied to the long run.

I have had enough of your stupid games in this thread. This is the last time I am going to state my point. Read it carefully! Hire someone who understands English if you need to!

Again, it is not a contradiction to clarify that the casinos hold and insurmountable house edge in the long run but are exposed to risk in the short term.

 

I said it in post #11 nothing was mentioned about short term losses/long term or any other thing till you brought it up in post #34 having allready told me I was wrong in post #17? (you realy do need to keep track of what you are saying)

And to top it all you are now saying that Casinos do not factor in the possibility of making a loss into there calculations be it long or short term!!

So Sir I would sugest that you actualy take the time to learn english yourself rather than simply using bluster and insults
it was impossible for you to clarify something I did not actualy say!

These are your words in post #39
Stop lying, be a man, and grow up!

 

Are you two trying out for the Jerry Springer show? Your game of canis mach macho seems more fit for his show than here.

 

Lol

 

How dense are you? You do the TomC clown routine very well. I told you that you were wrong because you were and still are. The "short term" and "long run" discussion was simply to explain away your contrived contradiction.

I never said that casinos do not factor in the possibility of a loss into there calculations. I said the corporate entities don't care to hear it as an excuse. Those are two entirely different things. But my prediction is that this will become your new red herring for this thread. Anything to distract away from the fact that Jerry Springer is a clown who humiliates his guests for profit.

 

Speaking of your party's favorite clown....

 

Tell me were did I mention Short term loss or long term loss prior to your bringing it up in post 34? you say you were explaining away a contrived contradiction???? How exactly is it possible for you to explain away something I never said? would you care to show me the post were I made such a statement?
Come on now you keep saying I did so show me?
the only person here who is continualy contradicting themselfs is you
Here we go another
If you don't recognize that there is short term risk for the casinos that are left to chance, then my statement was accurate,

You state that short term losses are left to chance, now if something is left to chance it can not have been factored into anything but then in a following post say and again I quote
I never said that casinos do not factor in the possibility of a loss into there calculations.

Now which is it exactly they factor it in or they dont? do make up your mind

As for Mr Springer that is simply your rather biased opinion of the man and means not a great deal in reality
And try loosing the rudeness or is that too much to ask?

 

Tom,

That is awesome. Where did you find that? I think you should make that your avatar. Simply hysterical! Thanks for the laugh.

 

What rudeness? I am from the Northeast US, it comes naturally.

You didn't mention the terms "short term" or "long run", I did. In fact, I stated that there is no chance of beating the casino house advantage in the "long term" before you even accused me of contradicting myself. By doing so, it implied that being beaten by a high roller on any given night was a short term risk. That is why your accusation of contradiction was contrived. So let me get this straight. I use the terms "short term" and "long run" to exlplain away your contradiction and now you are accusing me of putting words in your mouth. Of course you didn't use those terms, they are the concept that I have been trying to explain to you for the better part of this thread. Furthermore, I believe that you understand my point completely but are being deliberately obtuse in order to prevent having to admit that you are wrong.

Now I knew that you would create a new "red herring" as that is your MO. So you don't understand how the casinos can factor in something that is left to chance, in other words, a variable. It is pretty easy to predict what your casino drop will be for any given day, week, or month based on historical data and current market conditions. What you can't do is predict your hold % which is a variable based on the luck on the casino floor. Almost every casino will make future projections using different hold percentages. Once the projected period comes to and end, you compare the results to the projection with the appropriate hold % to evaluate your performance. Now here is the tricky part. The corporate entities who control these mega resorts don't allow you to submit several revenue projection reports. You can only submit one and you are committed to meeting those numbers. As a result, the projection submitted will always have the average hold %. That means if your hold % drops, the corporate management will not be happy. At this point, most casino executives will attempt to explain the poor numbers using hold % as an excuse and may even use the original projections with the lower hold percentage to bolster their case, but in the end, none of that may help them keep their jobs.

How is my opinion of Jerry Springer biased? Every person I have asked about this subject thinks that Springer absolutely humiliates the guests of his show. In addition, about half think that the casinos also exploit their patrons and number includes other casino employees. Do you think that Jerry Springer is a man of character?

 

This is what you said Lehigh

Furthermore, you don't have a damn clue as to what you are talking about. "Nothing is left to chance about how they work" That is your quote.
I had made no mention of any time frame of loss or gain but you decided I did not know what I was talking about. Do you deny saying this? Then in a later post you go on to say this

There is no element of chance in the long run, the house edge will always prevail.

Now having told me that I do not have a clue when I say they do not leave anything to chance you then say that they do not!

In the very next post I said this is what I said Do you deny I said it?

You then said you were not contradicting me but agreeing on certain points This after you had told me I Did not have a Damn clue to what I was talking about!!

You then strat going on in other posts talking about getting fired for a bad hold % and it is not a contradiction to clarify that the casinos hold and insurmountable house edge in the long run but are exposed to risk in the short term. then on to calling me crazy following up with telling me to be a man and stop lying!! and again talking about short and long term NON of which I had mentioned at all, and on and on ignoring my initial point

"Nothing is left to chance about how they work" You stated I didnt have a damn clue when I said it
Now Sir what in that statement is wrong?
What part of a casino opperation do they not factor in to there calculations?

 

NO, that is not my quote. It is your quote and you even admit so in your last paragraph of this post (see green text).

No, but in a post later in the thread I amended by statement to read "If you don't recognize that there is short term risk for the casinos that are left to chance, then my statement was accurate, you don't know what you are talking about.."

That is correct!

Without the qualifier "in the long run" your statement is technically incorrect. My original statement included the phrase "in the long run" Look it up! Oh Wait! You don't need to, you have quoted at least 10 times during this thread.

Contradicting you? You accused me of contradicting myself! I have proved over and over again using a logical explanation that the apparent contradiction was contrived. Furthermore, if you are not being deliberately obtuse, then you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

You accused me of contradicting myself for a second time in this thread. My talk about hold % was intended to dispel that accusation. Now it seems you want to accuse me of trying to dodge your points or change the subject by using my answers to your own direct questions. This is a tactic lower than any I have ever seen used by any member or this forum. Not even Craig or TomC would stoop that low. Grow Up!

The part that is missing! Let me fix it for you!

We have already established that the casinos make multiple revenue projections to attempt to factor in the hold % variable. Which projection proves to be useful is still based on chance.

CHECKMATE!

 

Here it is in it's enirety post number 17 which you have just said you did not write and I have just highlighted the relevent bit, want to deny writing it again?

"Casinos (like every other business) are in business to make money. You did attack the casino industry when you compared it to the Jerry Springer show. Furthermore, you don't have a damn clue as to what you are talking about. "Nothing is left to chance about how they work" That is your quote. Guess what! My casino actually lost money last weekend. A high roller cleaned our clock. I guess we intended that to happen huh?

Regarding the Springer show, every guest is humiliated. It makes no difference that they know what is coming, that they are paid to do it, they are still humiliated so that Springer and the network can get rich."

Yes you are as I had made no mention of long or short term anything for you to clarify! or am I lying again

Ah so now I am technicaly incorrect how is that as I made no mention of the Long run

Now answer the question what part of my statement was incorrect? which part of "Nothing is left to chance about how they work"

And you talk about people nitpicking!

I never mentioned in the LONG RUN Lehigh YOU DID and you have admitied doing so, therfore stop with all the smoke and mirrors and bull and answer the question
what part of my statement "Nothing is left to chance about how they work" is wrong
You told me I did not have a clue when I made it so come on back your words up

 

So now you have resorted to quoting sections of my posts in which I have quoted your posts for ultimate confusion. It would be easier if you would use the quote feature Mr. moderator.

In that post I specifically referred to what happend over a single weekend at the casino. Short term was implied even if I didn't use the exact terminology. Why are you being deliberately obtuse again? I would like an answer!

Your failure to include the phrase "in the long run" is what makes your statement incorrect.

Your failure to include the phrase "in the long run" is what makes your statement incorrect.

Nitpicking huh? Now I will state without a doubt that you don't know what the hell you are talking about. This principle is the absolute key to running a successful casino.

We know you didn't mention "in the long run", that is what makes your statement wrong. I have answered your question over and over and over and will answer it again.

Your failure to include the phrase "in the long run" is what makes your statement incorrect.

Why do casinos have table limits?