"Holy Rollers" documentary, advantage play vs. religion

[DrewOnTilt]

Looks like this is a documentary about a group of Christian card counters trying to get an edge at blackjack.

I'm not quite sure what to make of the promo video since it does contain some degen-gambler-type themes, but it is the lead article on CNN.com at the moment.

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/0...ing/?hpt=hp_c1

[roundar]

Not sure why this is in poker legislation, but it's hilarious.

[DrewOnTilt]

Originally Posted by roundar

Not sure why this is in poker legislation, but it's hilarious.

Political groups with religious ideologies such as FoF have historically been opponents of ours. If the post needs to be moved that is fine.

[DjSkyy]

one of the more ridiculous things i've seen ever

[TBadr]

Paging Chaaaaaaad

[sba9630]

A Card-Counting Mix of Bibles, Blackjack and Cash [New York Times]

Until last year, he and his high school friend from Bible camp, Ben Crawford, ran a group of more than 30 religious card counters. Based in Seattle, the rotating cast of players says it won $3.2 million over five years — all while regularly attending church, leading youth groups and studying theology.

[Tarheel]

This American Life included their story as one of their segments on blackjack this week. One of the players said "As a card counter you go in there thinking theres no such thing as luck, only math. We're gonna sit down and work for 8 hours and make money..." as a rationalization on why what they were doing wasnt gambling.

[Alan C. Lawhon]

Originally Posted by sba9630

A Card-Counting Mix of Bibles, Blackjack and Cash [New York Times]

Until last year, he and his high school friend from Bible camp, Ben Crawford, ran a group of more than 30 religious card counters. Based in Seattle, the rotating cast of players says it won $3.2 million over five years — all while regularly attending church, leading youth groups and studying theology.

I don’t think these “Holy Rollers” are quiet as adept (and profitable) at playing blackjack as the New York Times article would have you believe. Take the purported gross amount they claim to have won over five years, (i.e. $3,200,000.00), and divide that by the 30 players who they claim were members of the team. That yields (roughly) $106,666.67 per team member. That would be a respectable annual income (in any job or profession) if earned over a one-year period, but this result was over five years. So, taking $106.666.67 and dividing by five yields an average (adjusted) income of $21,333.34 per team member per year. This “average” adjusted ROI (Return on Investment) is before adjusting for expenses – such as travel costs to the various gambling venues, cost for hotel rooms and lodging, food & beverages, taxes and other routine living expenses. Adjusting by fifty percent for living expenses, the average team member would have been lucky to net $10,000.00 (per year) playing blackjack. Dividing $10,666.67 by the 2,000 hours a year that a typical 40-hours-per-week wage slave works, the average “Holy Roller” team member earned somewhere in the neighborhood of $5.00 to $5.50 per hour. That’s not even minimum wage. Some of the team members did better than the average, but it’s doubtful that any of them consistently earned net income above $50,000.00 per year.

Of course, the dead giveaway that the “Holy Rollers” are not the great success that the article implies is what the founders of the group are doing now. They’re no longer playing blackjack themselves. No, they have started blackjack training sites and “instructional videos” where they teach others how to play the game – for a price. That’s where the real money is in blackjack and poker – writing and teaching about the game rather than actually playing the game. (Hmmm, seems like blackjack and poker have something in common …) Playing day in and day out is a real grind. Why do that when you can sell your knowledge and expertise for so much more? Heck, just ask Jamie Gold! That guy is selling his wisdom for a cool $1,000.00 per hour.

[sba9630]

Originally Posted by Alan C. Lawhon

...and divide that by the 30 players who they claim were members of the team...

Your analysis assumes that all "30 players" were there from the beginning to the end.

From other teams I've read about and the following quotes from the article, I seriously doubt that was the case.

"...the rotating cast of players..."


"...worked on the church team, sometimes full time..."


"...Some members failed their exams on their card-counting skills, resulting in being fired from the team..."

[Alan C. Lawhon]

Originally Posted by sba9630

Your analysis assumes that all "30 players" were there from the beginning to the end.

From other teams I've read about and the following quotes from the article, I seriously doubt that was the case.

"...the rotating cast of players..."


"...worked on the church team, sometimes full time..."


"...Some members failed their exams on their card-counting skills, resulting in being fired from the team..."

Thanks for the correction sba. Given all the factors you have cited, I still doubt if more than five or six of the team members made substantially more than 100K per annum. (If any of them were making real money at blackjack, they wouldn't have blown their cover by "going public" - they would still be playing.)

The real problem with blackjack is that skilled (highly profitable) card counters have a limited lifetime at the tables. Sooner or later, (usually sooner), the really good ones wind up in the Griffin book and are blacklisted by nearly all of the casinos. It was true of the late Ken Uston and it was true of the MIT Blackjack Team. For the most part casinos don't care about poker players since they're going to collect the rake regardless of which player scoops the pot. With blackjack players (winning blackjack players) it's different. Since they're playing for the house's money, they get heat. If they win too much of the house's money, they get backroomed - and sometimes worse. (I've seen pictures of Ken Uston in Arnold Snyder's [now defunct] "Blackjack Forum" where Uston was backroomed and his face was beaten into a bloody mess.) If you keep trying to play after you've been flagged as a skilled player, that's eventually what happens to you. But, alas, all is not lost. Once your playing "career" is over, you can always fall back on writing a book, starting a training site, making "instructional" DVDs, and doing one-on-one tutoring for a nice tidy profit. Failing all that, you can give poker a try.

[TeflonDawg]

who gives a **** what each player made per annum? casinos lost $3.2 million dollars from a group of religious people via GAMBLING

this should be shoved in FoF's face over and over and over and over again in every argument they try to make trolling to the nth level to expose their hypocrisy like the bare naked ass that it is.

[repulse]

I listened to the recent This American Life segment which included a discussion of this team, and if I recall correctly, it was said that the entry-level members were getting paid something around $40k-$50k/yr.

[zerosum79]

Originally Posted by Alan C. Lawhon

I don’t think these “Holy Rollers” are quiet as adept (and profitable) at playing blackjack as the New York Times article would have you believe. Take the purported gross amount they claim to have won over five years, (i.e. $3,200,000.00), and divide that by the 30 players who they claim were members of the team. That yields (roughly) $106,666.67 per team member. That would be a respectable annual income (in any job or profession) if earned over a one-year period, but this result was over five years. So, taking $106.666.67 and dividing by five yields an average (adjusted) income of $21,333.34 per team member per year. This “average” adjusted ROI (Return on Investment) is before adjusting for expenses – such as travel costs to the various gambling venues, cost for hotel rooms and lodging, food & beverages, taxes and other routine living expenses. Adjusting by fifty percent for living expenses, the average team member would have been lucky to net $10,000.00 (per year) playing blackjack. Dividing $10,666.67 by the 2,000 hours a year that a typical 40-hours-per-week wage slave works, the average “Holy Roller” team member earned somewhere in the neighborhood of $5.00 to $5.50 per hour. That’s not even minimum wage. Some of the team members did better than the average, but it’s doubtful that any of them consistently earned net income above $50,000.00 per year.

Of course, the dead giveaway that the “Holy Rollers” are not the great success that the article implies is what the founders of the group are doing now. They’re no longer playing blackjack themselves. No, they have started blackjack training sites and “instructional videos” where they teach others how to play the game – for a price. That’s where the real money is in blackjack and poker – writing and teaching about the game rather than actually playing the game. (Hmmm, seems like blackjack and poker have something in common …) Playing day in and day out is a real grind. Why do that when you can sell your knowledge and expertise for so much more? Heck, just ask Jamie Gold! That guy is selling his wisdom for a cool $1,000.00 per hour.

Article claims players worked 10h per week.

zero

[Doc T River]

Originally Posted by TeflonDawg

who gives a **** what each player made per annum? casinos lost $3.2 million dollars from a group of religious people via GAMBLING

this should be shoved in FoF's face over and over and over and over again in every argument they try to make trolling to the nth level to expose their hypocrisy like the bare naked ass that it is.

I don't think it's valid or fair to label FoF or Chad Hills as hypocrits on the basis of this story as we have no evidence that they support people playing blackjack or were involved in any capacity with the team.

What is fair is to point out their hypocrisy when Chad Hills takes issue with the positive results of a gambling study on the basis of who funded it when CitizenLink doesn't have the same issue with a conservative funded study on children of gay couples that had negative results.

I don't think you should take issue with who funds studies and what should be at issue is the methodology, but if Hills takes issue with funding source for one study, he should do it for all studies.

[TeflonDawg]

Chad Hills likes to manipulate words and information to suit his arguments and it's massively hypocritical, disingenuous, and sometimes flat out lying. An article like this just exposes his hypocrisy further and in more ways than one, and should be kept in mind the next time he wants to make **** up in order to serve the FoF's agenda.