Bob Dancer LasVegasAdvisor 10-6-2015 Article

[BobDancer]

Bob Dancer is NOT.....repeat, NOT  "gambling"......he has said so, more or less, many times and in many different ways.I don't know if my self-imposed 30-day exile is over or not. I didn't record the exact starting date. If it's been less than 30 days and this bothers you, I suggest you try to get over it.I strongly disagree with DB here. It might just be a difference in semantics.To quote a good title for a radio show, I believe "Gambling with an Edge" is still gambling. DB seems to want to redefine the notion of gambling so that if you have the edge you're not gambling. That might be his definition, but it's one that isn't widely accepted.The definition of gambling includes wagering on an event with an uncertain outcome. If I had a 100% chance of winning somehow, that wouldn't be gambling because the outcome wasn't uncertain.If I had a 10% advantage (which I almost never have), that would still be gambling. I COULD lose over any particular interval, even with that mythical 10% edge. If the interval is long enough, I probably won't lose. But it would still be possible.With a more-typical-for-me quarter-to-half percent edge, I regularly lose. I have more losing sessions than winning ones --- but the average winning sessions are larger. I expect to be ahead at the end of this year, and I will bet you that this will be the case and suggest you'd be a fool to bet against me on this, but it's not a guarantee.I enjoy my life of gambling with an edge. As DB notes, it can definitely be a grind. It has been very rewarding in terms of money and experience. I enjoy the dining, travel, entertainment, and other amenities that come with it. (You can keep most of the low-level casino crap that is regularly foisted on us to try to get us to make one more trip to the casino.) But it's still gambling.

[DaBurglar]

Fine.....semantics then, whatever   (and who cares if your 30 day period is up or not, people want you here posting no matter what, and that includes me.)For instance, "you STRONGLY" disagree with my definition of gambling as it applies to you and your methods......why must you STRONGLY disagree?    Can't you simply just plain "disagree"?     Moderately Disagree?      You must have missed it, I was actually paying you a subtle, complicated and cryptic  COMPLIMENT when I said you are not gambling......I see it as a testament to the prep work and research and strategic analysis that goes in to all your activity BEFORE YOU even set foot in the casino.But now, after reading this LATEST semantically ambiguous response from you ....I mean REALLY reading it and trying to comprehend what you are saying (or NOT saying as the case may be).......you really are painting yourself to be a G A M B L E R!!!!    I find this disconcerting, but not for the reasons Floridaphil does (Phil wants to chastise and blame you for the misfortune of other VP players who flameout "Chasing" some vision of VP nirvana Phil claims YOU, Bob Dancer, foist upon unsuspecting innocent casino patrons......I totally disagree with this notion, as everyone is responsible for themselves in the long run.)        Nay, what I now find unnerving is that in this latest post of yours you leave open a possible scenario where you COULD possibly LOSE and LOSE Big or badly......I know I know, your "advantage system" is supposed to work in the long run, but if you are also at the mercy of the forces of chance, you very well COULD fail, and fail badly.      I thought you had set yourself up insulated from the typical forces of chaos most VP players experience in their pursuit of "FUN"  and  "HAVING a GOOD time" in their casino of choice,;  I thought in your whole research and selection process that precedes each session you identify and digest all the factors (like promotional angles and comps, freebies, etc) to select the place that gives you A DECISIVE EDGE.......if in fact you are merely playing with a modest, or even small edge when factoring everything in, then I guess it is closer to gambling than "PLAYING"!To (quickly) put it one more way:   A chess player (like myself) enters a tournament and  pays the $500 entry fee for the chance to compete for the top prize of $25,000 (as well as several lesser prizes that still fall in the $3,000-10,000 range)....I practice Chess, and have deeply honed, bonafide skills that may or may not give me an ADVANTAGE against the player(s) I meet in the tourney;     But is this also a form of "Gambling"???   I do not think so......same goes for Golf tournaments,  Bowling, Darts  etc etc etc/      I always saw what Bob dancer does as fitting the model of my chessplayer analogy.       And when I play in POKER tournaments (where you pay a flat fee in the beginning and that is IT, and where the PAYOFF is known in advance), I do NOT consider this to be GAMBLING!    

[FloridaPhil]

[quote=BobDancer]But it's still gambling.[/quote]This is the most truthful and enlightening statement Bob Dancer has ever said on this forum. I'm impressed. You can tilt the odds in your favor, but you can never guarantee any strategy will make you a winner. Conversely, even a few "No Nothings" win at this game. That's why it's called gambling. 

[alpax]

[quote=BobDancer]But it's still gambling.This is the most truthful and enlightening statement Bob Dancer has ever said on this forum. I'm impressed. You can tilt the odds in your favor, but you can never guarantee any strategy will make you a winner. Conversely, even some "No Nothings" win. That's why it's called gambling. 



[/QUOTE]

The casino can win against the advantage player, thus it is gambling to me.