Representative from Gambler Anonymous on BBC Radio 5 yesterday...

[mackthefork]

...talking about the float of Party, he says;

"no-one ever wins, I mean sure some win in the short term, but in the long run it isn't possible to win, thats why Party Poker is open everyday."

Whats this guys angle, I would have thought at least some knowledge of the subject would be a minimum requirement before you go on national radio to talk about something.

Mack

[axioma]

bleh, i hate ignorant journalism like this. the guy obviously hasnt even the basic idea about online poker.

its people like him that add to the general negativity surounding poker (in least in the UK).

[mackthefork]

Yeah, thats why its so annoying we need to get more players from 7pm-12pm over here in Europe, my win rate doubles at midnight when the US guys come to play. GA are saying they are neutral on gambling, I doubt that is true, they certainly don't know much about it, or if they do they won't come clean.

Mack

[MrTrik]

I think sometimes it's the guys that proclaim: "I'm an expert in XXXX" that get interviewed. They can claim expertise and there is no checking on that, ever.

[Subby]

With Party's ass-reaming rake structure, he may be right /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[primetime32]

i think the reasoning is that if they ever admit that some people actually make money it will lead to some people saying "well if this guy can win, why can't i?"

To reasonable gamblers it sounds foolish, but to the vast majority of people out there that are less than brilliant it may serve a purpose.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
i think the reasoning is that if they ever admit that some people actually make money it will lead to some people saying "well if this guy can win, why can't i?"

To reasonable gamblers it sounds foolish, but to the vast majority of people out there that are less than brilliant it may serve a purpose.

[/ QUOTE ]

If thats true then they are patronising people who don't ask for their help, they say they are neither pro nor anti-gambling this is obviously untrue. Also the people who say 'if he can win, why can't i' well it's simple they can win, if they put in the work, the same as anything else.

Mack

[grimel]

[ QUOTE ]

Whats this guys angle, I would have thought at least some knowledge of the subject would be a minimum requirement before you go on national radio to talk about something.

Mack

[/ QUOTE ]

1) don't be so naive. Knowlege about a subject is last thing they want on a talk show.

2) he is from GAMBLERS ANONYMOUS - what do you think his angle is? Gambling is EVIL. It's just like AA, NA, or any other 12 step program. They might say they aren't against it, but THEY can't control themselves, ergo NOBODY can control themselves. So, if they find out you do X, they will try to convert you to their belief, thus saving you from the evil gambling.

For HIM he is right - he can NEVER win at gambling, because that is exactly what he does - gamble. Does he count cards/play basic strategy at BJ - NO, that takes the thrill out of it. He's the moron that goes to a sportsbetting place and picks 10 100:1 or better longshots.

[Blackjack]

I was at Foxwoods the other day with a member of 2+2 who was on that show as one of the pro poker players they interviewed.

her name was Vanessa? i think. Posts here as FyslexicDuck and she said that the guy kept trying to convince her that she was a compulsive gambler. LOL. Meanwhile, she raked in about 1500$ at the 5/5 table.

Blackjack

[lorinda]

You become immune to it eventually.

Every time they try to allow some new form of gambling, one of these people finds their way into the media and starts talking utter twaddle in an attempt to scare everyone.

Lori

[grimel]

This is how they work it (I'm using AA because via the USN alcohol & drug safety awareness program, supervisors version):
1) you really have a problem it will work, BUT, it will go a long way towards taking your addicitve personality and making you addicted to IT.

2) if you don't have a problem, going to the meetins will make you an alcoholic (I have never heard more pure depressing tales in such volume).

3) everyone that does X has a problem - if you admitt to the problem, you obviously have a problem; but, if you deny having a problem and are doing X, obviously you are in denial, thus have a problem. If anyone ever questioned/has concerns about you doing X, you have a problem. If someone "qualified" (that's a member of the group, medical staffing, and/or a friend, supervisor, or family member) thinks you have a problem, you have a problem.


The party line is everyone here has a problem with compulsive gambling. We lose, yet keep playing "thinking" we will turn the corner and get even/ahead. This isn't possible because the house has the edge (notice how all forms of gambling are put into a casino game perspective showing a fundamental lack of understanding). Trying to explain the theory of large numbers, probability, and BR managment is just a long list of excuses/justifications. After all, they have lost combined millions playing casino games and sports betting. They have no understanding of the math behind the games, thus see keno, roulette, blackjack, slots, poker, sports betting, and billiards as the same probabilities. Craps is a prime example, betting pass/don't pass and come/don't come with free odds bets and it's almost even money, but gamble on the field bets and it's just an expensive short session of thrills. Blackjack, play some random crap calling/standing on lucky feelings and you go broke, count cards, play basic strategy, and adjust your bets according to the deck long term you will win. Nothing can be done to stop you except booting you from the casino.

They have no self discipline, thus you can't explain it to them.

[Fiddler]

[ QUOTE ]

Whats this guys angle, I would have thought at least some knowledge of the subject would be a minimum requirement before you go on national radio to talk about something.


[/ QUOTE ]

Now think about all the other stuff they talk about on radio and tv that we don't know anything about... /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[Mike Haven]

You can listen to a recording of the programme here. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/noscript.shtml?/radio/aod/fivelive_aod.shtml?fivelive/drive_thu)

The relevant section of the programme starts just before the 45th minute, so you can use the 15 minutes fast forward button to get to it quickly.

"To listen you will need to have a programme called RealPlayer installed on your computer. Download it for FREE from our audio help page - http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/audiohelp.shtml "

[47outs]

Although this guy is off his rocker, he is doing nothing more than explaining how regular casinos rape people. His comments are uneducated but far from damaging. As everyone is well aware that you can't beat a casino, most people can't win at poker. At least he admits there is a short term and he gives the fish some hope.


outs

[MicroBob]

It's not just people who have been brain-washed by GA who spew this idiotic stuff.
I understand why they think this....to get out of the gambling rut they HAVE to program themselves this way.
They obviously weren't that mathematically competent to begin with so the concept of 'the long-run' is still confusing to them.


But I have also read articles that had quotes from guys with PhD's....'gambling expert Dr. so-and-so from Impressive U.' who says, "the online-poker games can't be beaten. if they could how would the house make a profit? Anyone who thinks they can beat the house is kidding themselves. They take too much out of each hand and the robots that are on each site are too good for any human being to win in the long-term."

I have specifically seen quotes from PhD's talk about the 'bots' that are on the sites.
They are clearly talking out of their ass and just making it up as they go along....and don't know that there is such a thing as 2+2 publishing with expert authors who strive to find the most profitable way to play the game (nor the web-site).


With all due respect to all learned folks out there with some special letters in front of their name such as PhD or Dr (my Dad and my sister are both included in this group) it has become painfully obvious to me that some 'experts' in their field, even those who have studied a specific field for several years, are just plain stupid and have zero ability to analyze anything objectively.


The information on whether online-poker is beatable in the long-term IS out there and is not hard to come by. There's no need to make up ridiculous stuff like, "Well...I don't play on these sites...but it's pretty 'well known' that you're not even playing other humans there."

[iggy]

I've worked as a producer on a number of cable television shows in the US and much of my job has been booking "expert talent" for shows. For television, the most important thing is that they look good. We hope that they are extensively versed in the subject, but since many times we as producers are not, we have to take their word for it.

Most TV "experts" are anything but.

[grimel]

You might be suprized by just how good some of the GA people are at math and how well they understand the math they just want the excitement of the big risk.

[MicroBob]

I suppose this is true too.

But obviously many of those in GA don't understand it.
Examples include the guy referred to in this thread as well as the GA guy in the Daily Show with Jon Stewart story on poker.

[J_B]

[ QUOTE ]

"To listen you will need to have a programme called RealPlayer installed on your computer. "

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't install that POS on my machine. Use real alternative http://www.free-codecs.com/download/Real_Alternative.htm

[o0mr_bill0o]

ugh, these guys really annoy me sometimes. In high school (well before i started actually getting into poker seriously), i went to one of those forums that you go to when you do well and your teacher likes you and it looks good on your resume. anyway, they had this section on economics of sports gambling and such, so i thought "sounds interesting". It ended up just being some guy from GA talking about how evil gambling was and how we shouldn't do it. The one part that really cracked me up at the time was he illustrated how addicted he was by saying, "i actually bet on rugby games in australia and new zealand!!! can you believe i would keep track of rugby? no one follows rugby, do any of you?" he of course, was fully expecting everyone to say no. however, me, being a jackass high schooler and avid rugby fan and player, popped up and asked him if he had a good line on the reds/brumbies match that night. i don't think he appreciated it.

[grimel]

Would you get up on national radio and say:

I know the math behind this says if you play smart and count cards you can beat blackjack; if you play smart you can win at poker; if you know all the bets and use free odds bets you can make craps almost even money - BUT, I won't do that because it takes the thrill out of it, I just want the big shot of adrenaline from having it all on the line on a bet I KNOW hasn't much of a chance of hitting?

Of course not, you they get up and say - I lost everything gambling! You can NOT win long term. Stop now, it's evil!

The people that make money aren't "gambling" they are playing odds for financial gain.

[Synergistic Explosions]

Let them say what they want about poker because it doesn't matter to those of us who play. We know better.

If you are a loser playing poker, then you can always say it's impossible to win because of the rake. If that makes them feel better about their losses, great!

[grimel]

Normally, I'd agree, but, in this case, we have only one side of the story being told, thus, when time for legislatation comes only one non-casino voice will be on record and it will be anti.

[Cubswin]

I think sometimes it's the guys that proclaim: "I'm an expert in XXXX" that get interviewed. They can claim expertise and there is no checking on that, ever.

Have you read Freakonomics? This sounds strikingly familiar to what i was said at one point in book... are you sure you not a university of Chicago economics professor? /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

cubs

[obsidian]

He says he knows tens and tens of thousands of gamblers and none are long term winners. Seriously, how ignorant can some people be? Anyways, at least he admited that for 98% of gamblers, gambling isn't a big deal.

[StacysMom]

You guys should realy stop representing yourselves as winning players. Sure u may have gotten lucky a couple times, but this guy is and EXPERT! Online Poker Cannont be beatin. Im with drawing all my shorterm thousands from this past year right now. Gotta lock up the win while u can.