On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:27:05 -0800, "Steve B"
wrote:

Casinos use facial recognition software to photograph
people coming in the door and compare them to a database of cheats and
counters.

To a casino a "cheat" is someone who manages to leave with more money
than they came in with.

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:27:05 -0800, "Steve B"
wrote:

Casinos use facial recognition software to photograph
people coming in the door and compare them to a database of cheats and
counters.

To a casino a "cheat" is someone who manages to leave with more money
than they came in with.

The governments foster this belief because they lose tax revenue when
you leave with more than you came in with.

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
says...

On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:27:05 -0800, "Steve B"
wrote:

Casinos use facial recognition software to photograph
people coming in the door and compare them to a database of cheats and
counters.

To a casino a "cheat" is someone who manages to leave with more money
than they came in with.

The governments foster this belief because they lose tax revenue when
you leave with more than you came in with.

Yet you have to turn inside out to deduct losses. We had an old guy who
came into the Hilton when they started the $100 slot machines. $300 a pull
if you played all three lines. He lost big time, yet along the way, he'd
win $10k here and $50k there, every time having to fill out an IRS form for
winnings over $1,000. Ended up, he lost all his money, and had a hefty IRS
bill, and could not deduct the losings. He was about 80, and his attitude
was, "What they gonna do, throw me in jail for the rest of my life?" Papers
got ahold of it, and it died a quiet death shortly after that. He probably
did, too.

Steve

In article ,
says...

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
says...

On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:27:05 -0800, "Steve B"
wrote:

Casinos use facial recognition software to photograph
people coming in the door and compare them to a database of cheats and
counters.

To a casino a "cheat" is someone who manages to leave with more money
than they came in with.

The governments foster this belief because they lose tax revenue when
you leave with more than you came in with.

Yet you have to turn inside out to deduct losses. We had an old guy who
came into the Hilton when they started the $100 slot machines. $300 a pull
if you played all three lines. He lost big time, yet along the way, he'd
win $10k here and $50k there, every time having to fill out an IRS form for
winnings over $1,000. Ended up, he lost all his money, and had a hefty IRS
bill, and could not deduct the losings. He was about 80, and his attitude
was, "What they gonna do, throw me in jail for the rest of my life?" Papers
got ahold of it, and it died a quiet death shortly after that. He probably
did, too.

Reminds me of the "day traders" of about 10 years or so ago. Big article
printed in the local paper in early April of 2000. There was a guy whose
brokerage account had about $10,000 in it yet he owed the IRS about
$250,000 in taxes from the profits that he made in 1999 on his day
trading. He would make a huge profit on one trade and then lose it all
on the next trade. But, the government didn't care. Profit is profit and
you could only claim $30,000 in losses at that time.

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
says...

"BAR" wrote in message
. ..
In article ,
says...

On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:27:05 -0800, "Steve B"
wrote:

Casinos use facial recognition software to photograph
people coming in the door and compare them to a database of cheats
and
counters.

To a casino a "cheat" is someone who manages to leave with more money
than they came in with.

The governments foster this belief because they lose tax revenue when
you leave with more than you came in with.

Yet you have to turn inside out to deduct losses. We had an old guy who
came into the Hilton when they started the $100 slot machines. $300 a
pull
if you played all three lines. He lost big time, yet along the way, he'd
win $10k here and $50k there, every time having to fill out an IRS form
for
winnings over $1,000. Ended up, he lost all his money, and had a hefty
IRS
bill, and could not deduct the losings. He was about 80, and his
attitude
was, "What they gonna do, throw me in jail for the rest of my life?"
Papers
got ahold of it, and it died a quiet death shortly after that. He
probably
did, too.

Reminds me of the "day traders" of about 10 years or so ago. Big article
printed in the local paper in early April of 2000. There was a guy whose
brokerage account had about $10,000 in it yet he owed the IRS about
$250,000 in taxes from the profits that he made in 1999 on his day
trading. He would make a huge profit on one trade and then lose it all
on the next trade. But, the government didn't care. Profit is profit and
you could only claim $30,000 in losses at that time.




The limit on losses is long term losses. I remember the case of the casino
slot machine winner and the IRS problems.

On Dec 9, 9:21*pm, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:27:05 -0800, "Steve B"


To a casino a "cheat" is someone who manages to leave with more money
than they came in with.


This guy obviously didn't "cheat"

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n5924641.shtml

On Dec 9, 9:29*pm, Tim wrote:
On Dec 9, 9:21*pm, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:27:05 -0800, "Steve B"

To a casino a "cheat" is someone who manages to leave with more money
than they came in with.

This guy obviously didn't "cheat"

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n5924641.shtml

"Now he has filed a civil suit, claiming casino staff regularly plied
him with alcohol and painkillers in order to keep him gambling. Casino
rules and state law both say anyone who is visibly intoxicated should
not be allowed to gamble."

And it seems like it's always somebody elses fault.

"Tim" wrote in message
...
On Dec 9, 9:29 pm, Tim wrote:
On Dec 9, 9:21 pm, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:27:05 -0800, "Steve B"

To a casino a "cheat" is someone who manages to leave with more money
than they came in with.

This guy obviously didn't "cheat"

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n5924641.shtml

"Now he has filed a civil suit, claiming casino staff regularly plied
him with alcohol and painkillers in order to keep him gambling. Casino
rules and state law both say anyone who is visibly intoxicated should
not be allowed to gamble."

And it seems like it's always somebody elses fault.

reply: Check your snippage there, Sparky. I didn't post any of this.

SteveB

On Dec 9, 11:20*pm, "Steve B" wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message

...
On Dec 9, 9:29 pm, Tim wrote:

On Dec 9, 9:21 pm, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:27:05 -0800, "Steve B"

To a casino a "cheat" is someone who manages to leave with more money
than they came in with.

This guy obviously didn't "cheat"

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n5924641.shtml

"Now he has filed a civil suit, claiming casino staff regularly plied
him with alcohol and painkillers in order to keep him gambling. Casino
rules and state law both say anyone who is visibly intoxicated should
not be allowed to gamble."

And it seems like it's always somebody elses fault.

reply: *Check your snippage there, Sparky. *I didn't post any of this..

SteveB

I know. look at the secession of the headers. i posted on my post. You
and Wayne B. happen to be in there though.

On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 19:34:32 -0800, Tim wrote:

On Dec 9, 9:29Â*pm, Tim wrote:
On Dec 9, 9:21Â*pm, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:27:05 -0800, "Steve B"

To a casino a "cheat" is someone who manages to leave with more money
than they came in with.

This guy obviously didn't "cheat"

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n5924641.shtml

"Now he has filed a civil suit, claiming casino staff regularly plied
him with alcohol and painkillers in order to keep him gambling. Casino
rules and state law both say anyone who is visibly intoxicated should
not be allowed to gamble."

And it seems like it's always somebody elses fault.

*If* Harrah's broke the law, there isn't much difference between them and
a conman swindling some little old lady. You'll note Wynn's banned him
because of compulsive drinking and gambling. That's a responsible
business. Harrah's, on the other hand, intimidated their employees into
breaking the law. I doubt Watanabe will win the case, but IMO he does
have a case that should be heard by a judge.