Las Vegas A Las Vegas Legend Is Hanging On

Some of the readers here may know this name: Howard Schwartz. For many years, he was the tireless engine behind the infamous Gamblers Bookshop in LV.

He was also my book publisher, who unlike so many others with closed minds around that town, chose to listen to and understand what I had to say about video poker instead of simply cowering in a denial safe space.

He knew he'd face criticism and he just didn't care, instead focusing on the certainty of vigorous debate going forward. Plus he had me in his corner, which if you've been living on another planet the past 25 years, is no joke.

I've recently been informed that Howard is now in an assisted living facility in LV, and at 83 is still sharp as a tack but physically limited in many ways. I can still remember his unending smile, his drive, and his popular podcast interviews, of which I was a part of twice. He's out of the business he loved now, and to those involved in gambling in any way, that's what you call a loss.

I sent a message that I'll be stopping by to visit him on our way home from our summer stay up in the Tahoe area. To me, that stop will be worth far more than any of my most profitable video poker muggings anywhere in that city.

Let every knee bend for the man, even if you're some sour-life degenerate who hates your own life (jbjb, jbs, etc.) along with anyone who gambles successfully, and who is basically a failure at anything you do.

 

One of the problems with "Rob Singer's" post above is that at first it appears to be a heartfelt salute to Howard Schwartz, but then Singer corrupts the post and the thought with various asinine, corrosive, and combative comments sprinkled throughout, aimed at anyone who doesn't also salute "Rob Singer" and his fictional narratives.

I'll give you an example of how to put "Rob Singer" in a quandary. Schwartz was "Singer's" publisher, which meant "Singer" contracted with Schwartz to publish his books.

If you're going to salute the savvy and professional judgement of Howard Schwarz for being Singer's "book publisher," then one must also salute the savvy and professional judgement of Howard Schwarz for publishing 1984's "Who's Who in Sports Gambling," which, while published under the Rick Hall Publishing aegis, was actually published by Schwarz's operation with Rick Hall, as author, maintaining rights to the book. In other words, just as Singer contracted with Schwarz to publish Singer's books, Hall contracted with Schwarz to publish "Who's Who in Sports Gambling."

What "Who's Who in Sports Gambling" did was evaluate, interview, and then publish bios of sports handicappers with national reputations who went through a screening process. "Who's Who" reserved the right to report on any handicapper in the book who did not maintain squeaky clean reputations with clients and media. I was, I believe, the youngest person in "Who's Who in Sports Gambling."

I add my voice, saluting Howard Schwarz for what he did and attempted to do for all of those years. He gave a voice to writers and publishers who may not have had access to other means of getting their work published.

 

Of course the major difference is, Howard Schwartz respected me....

And still does.

Redietz? Who dat!?

 

LOL. That must be it.

That's why you find "Rob Singer" in all those "Who's Who in Video Poker" books and magazine articles on national newsstands.

 

Gotta wonder just how much the rise of the internet has hurt the gambling book publication and dissemination business?

 

This is a great, complicated topic. Book sales in general went up 10% during the pandemic but had previously been declining. People overall read less than 20 years ago, at least less non-internet.

What effects has the internet had on something like gambling? Well, you can no longer get away with nonsensical claims as existed, say, in 1991, when USA Today first began publishing. But the flip side of people being their own researchers is a massive Dunning-Kruger Effect. Everyone thinks they are their own experts. Plus the effects of vetting by editors and publishers goes largely out the window. So you have massive chunks of the population believing they know something about a topic like gambling via online "research" when they are actually a small step above ignorant.

Is the public more or less stupid than pre-internet regarding gambling? I'd say the floor has risen, but you get more Dunning Kruger folks who are very low and are unaware they are low. So I'm going to say that the overall civilian expertise may have risen a tad, but the civilians generally think they are more expert than they are, and they overestimate their expertise more than they did 30 years ago. So they may be worse gamblers than they were 30 years ago. Thirty years ago, people knew that they didn't know. Now they do not.

Recognizing that you are not expert at gambling is a huge, to use a word, advantage. Recognizing that expertise in one subset of gambling is little evidence for being expert in another subset -- that is also very valuable, to use a word, advantage.

What's gone to hell is knowing that you don't know.

 

Ditz, very humble of you to admit you aren't as good as you think you are.

 

I bought a lot of books from Schwartz.

 

“What effects has the internet had on something like gambling? Well, you can no longer get away with nonsensical claims as existed, say, in 1991, when USA Today first began publishing”

RED, you and I have discussed scammers going back 40 years, but I disagree with you on this claim.

I would say there are more gambling scammers today and they are making far more than they did in the 80’s. The internet and social media have allowed for the explosion of scammers, and brought them easier exposure to more suckers than years ago.

We can talk about the Laskeys, Feists, Horowitz’s, Feiners, D’Ambrosia‘s, Blacks, etc all day and night. But what they made with their crazy claims on sports handicapping is nothing like todays scammers are making. The scams have become more advanced and they have access to far more people than these guys did with newspaper, direct mail and cable infomercials. Add in the many ways to transact and the scam business is far bigger, even adjusting for inflation.

Look at a Christopher Mitchell, a Vegas Dave, a D-Lucky and many more. They are making hundreds of thousands by putting their bullshit claims out there daily. Add in the expansion of legal sports betting and again, a much bigger customer base that can easily place wagers. Not just the guys like you and I who had a “guy” to take our bets. When betting became mainstream you added millions of potential victims.

And you probably made a mistake but USA Today came out in 1982. Of course you remember their first sports betting “expert”, one Danny Sheridan.

So I would say YES, you can easily get away with the claims today, just like you could years ago. And for some time after we are gone, people will be making unbelievable and unverifiable claims that defy logic.

 

You are absolutely correct on the USA Today date, Boz. Don't know where I came up with 1991. The reason I mentioned USA Today was when it first started publishing, they had two pages full of sports service ads in their Friday editions, with everyone claiming records like 109-15 and 83-9 ATS and all that. I called them multiple times and wrote them that they needed to get their act together, but they said it wasn't their job, basically, to verify every ad that came their way. About four months later, they cut almost all of those ads because reader complaints had skyrocketed and people were getting inundated by telemarketers.

I actually agree that things are worse now, Boz. I just don't think the end-of-the-bell curve nonsense flies, like those USA Today ads. For sports betting, the nonsense is gussied up in stock market jargon and everybody who can do freshman college math thinks they've solved it all.

I got a kick out of Shackleford with his parlay calculator spiels, as if they are a useful tool. LOL. Hell, some of the offshores are putting parlay calculators on their sites to "help" everyone out.

More later -- having dinner and working on some Gangster Chronicles scripts tonight at the local Mexican restaurant.

Bottom line -- I agree with you. Things are worse now even though I think the floor of naivete is a bit higher than 30-40 years ago. People thinking they can evaluate things makes it all worse.

And Danny Sheridan -- what that guy did still drives me nuts. Complete fake ass nonsense that started his career.

 

Back from dinner. Unbelievably, one friend of the guys I'm working with is hanging with Merlino today. John Stamos would be great to play him in a film.

Dan Sheridan (actually, Shachter) rose to fame from a Sports Illustrated full page article at the back of the magazine. It was all garbage. Sheridan didn't even know which Texas college teams were in what conferences at the time. A year later, SI published a full page retraction after monitoring Sheridan's plays for a year. Sheridan went from an alleged 80% dude to 47%. Pretty funny. But a retraction was too late. The man had gotten wealthy from a year backed by the original SI piece.

And on we go. The latest nonsense is folks with YouTube channels and cute nicknames making 2K or 3K bets and acting as if (1) that's a big deal and (2) nothing is edited. I mean, it's just ridiculous.

I read some of the stuff at VCT from Axelwolf and mickey and account, and it's a truly odd mix of knowing a little and missing the picture regarding the entire context of what sports betting is. Missing the forest for the trees stuff.

 

It's always inspiring to hear about individuals who have had a significant impact on their field, and it's clear that Howard Schwartz was one such person in the world of gambling and book publishing. It's heartening to hear that he chose to listen to new and unconventional ideas about video poker, rather than dismissing them out of hand. His willingness to engage in debate and consider new perspectives is an admirable quality, and it's no wonder that he was such an influential figure in the gambling community.

It's sad to hear that Howard is now in an assisted living facility, but it's heartening to know that he is still mentally sharp despite his physical limitations. It's wonderful that the author plans to visit him on their way home from their summer stay in the Tahoe area, and it's clear that this visit will hold great personal significance for them. It's a reminder that even in the fast-paced and often cut-throat world of gambling, there is still room for empathy and compassion.

In a field that can be so focused on profit and success, it's important to remember the human element of the industry, and the individuals like Howard Schwartz who have made a lasting impact on it.

 

Ditz continues to overrate himself. Hilarious how he likes to talk down to people. Classic Dunning-Krueger. He just doesn't realize how stupid he is.

 

Yessiree, Bob. Forty-five years of sports handicapping. Documented. Monitored. At worst, the second best Wise Guys record over 30 years of two games a week ATS. Three McCusker Report college football profit titles in five years, the only handicapper to do it. Not a single complaint regarding treatment of clients made to any of the documenting agencies -- Handicappers' Report Card, The Sports Monitor, Tipster or Gypsters?, The Buffalo Satellite Handicap, Playbook magazine and newsletter (available on newsstands for decades). Published in The Humanist, presented at The National Conference on Gambling and Risk-Taking, published op ed as counterpoint to Penn State President Graham Spanier's published pieces trying to end college sports gambling in Las Vegas.

But no cute nickname.

I clearly do not know how stupid I am.

Not only that, I predicted more than five years ago that "APs" would decide, as casino opportunities shrank and sports betting spread, you would have an immigration of "APs" claiming to have solved sports betting with Wall Street lingo, parlay calculators, and tales of perpetual bonuses and spanking new (that's me being facetious) arbitrage programs.

Meanwhile, mickey can explain once again how Fezzik was the guy who invented parlay card wagering with time-staggered middle shots on crystalline lines. Anybody who bought that is an unbelievable maroon.

What A Maroon! - YouTube

Woe is me. I better catch up.

 

Ditz, if your past record is so great how come no one has ever heard of you? GWAE has interviewed everyone who is anyone in gambling. They left no stone unturned. Hundreds of people. They simply ran out of people to interview. Yet they didn't think you were of any significance or they would have had you on.

Your narrative that AP opportunites are drying up is a false premise. It's just gotten better and better over the years.

Your continual knocks against AP's is really stupid because sports bettors are not excluded from the term. If you think AP's are stupid then you are saying that you yourself are stupid. But I think your rap against AP's comes down to an inferiority complex on your part.

Your narrative that people like Axel can't make money betting sports is also false. No one said sports betting promotions would last forever. Another of your false premises to make strawman arguments. The equation is X money to be made....how much of it can I make? If you make $100K in a year....then it dries up....so what, you made 100K in a year. Move on to something else. Do you know how much moving on from plays I've done in 27 years? Hundreds of times. When it dries up you find something else. I've always adapted. I'm amazed you don't know that shit.

Your presentation that you are an elite sports bettor is Dunning-Krueger at it's worst. You way overrate yourself.

 

Catch us up...with a resume like that, then why are you broke...and not wealthy?

You've shown us where you live, we know about your delinquent taxes, and the necessity to rent rooms to boarders.

You've shared tales of your pompous frugality, low-budget travel, home haircuts, and the beater that you drive.

What has all that monitoring gotten you? Aren't you overrating yourself?

You never had any kids to tap into your roll...so what's up, deadbeat?

 

The past two years since online sports-betting has been legal from Az. I've been taking as much advantage as possible of all the new sign-up bonuses available from places like BetMGM, FanDuel, Caesar's, etc. The first year I opened accounts for myself and my wife, no problem. This past year I was able to open accounts in my children and their spouses names to further "AP" the bonuses. All have residences in Az. I've used multiple ISP's in the process just in case. Once the bonuses are used up I bet no more. I've netted over $20k, and that's AFTER paying the young folks $2k each for their assistance.

This is just what someone like myself--an inexperienced sportsbettor--has done in an arena redietz says is closed to AP's. And then I look at what someone like Axel would have been able to accomplish with all of his knowledge and skills compared to me, and I find it outrageous that red continually puts people like that down when they dabble in "their" field.

I know we're now gonna get another thesaurus-interjected lecture about "longevity", Wiseguys/Hipsters & Gypsters/McClusker or whatever, etc. with a side of Fezzik.....all from the famous handicapper no one's ever heard of before the non-stop shameless forums self-promotion and the solicitations I've received to become "an investor".

It stands to reason: kew came up with his highly embellished "SP Incident Report" to help take the heat off red.

It didn't work.

 

What's your point? What is it you think you did that I can't or haven't done? These are short term gimmicks for small amounts of money.

They'll likely always be available. No particular hurry to exploit any of them. Handicappers have been exploiting bonuses for decades. Many of the offshore bonuses have dwarfed the brick-and-mortar one-time bonuses currently offered.

In other words, what exactly is the point of stating what Rob stated? Anybody can do it. Everybody has been doing it for decades. If you want to recruit all your neighbors and friends to enrich yourself a tad because you're into selling Tupperware to family and friends, good for you. More gas for the camper, I guess. I'd just TELL the family and friends how to do it, then let them do it for the full amounts.

I mean, Jesus, how crass is it to not just tell your kids how to do it and just let them do it? A second-grader can do it.

Let me guess...Rob will now say, oh yeah, of course I gave my kids the money. LOL. What nonsense. Get a life, boys. Doing something everyone can do, and stiffing your kids in the process, is hardly reason to brag.

Now what is it Rob thinks he's done that every handicapper hasn't done for the last 30 years?

 

I gotta tell you -- when the bonuses became available in Virginia and other states, I just explained to all of my friends and acquaintances how to use them properly. I assume most of my friends and acquaintances have sufficient cash available to max exploit them. There are a couple of nuances one should check that most-but-not-all second graders would likely miss, so I clued them in.

But organizing family and friends so I could guide them and make money for myself? LOL. Who does that?

This is what blows my mind. The "APs" think what? Everyone else is dumb as a rock? They have some secret "AP math" that no one else can grasp? It's comical. Anyone can do this. Every handicapper has been doing these things for decades.

Just like the time-staggered parlay card stuff. It's so obvious, you'd have to be mentally challenged to miss it.

This stuff is Handicapping Remedial; it's not even Handicapping 101.

 

Reading Randomness works for anything that equates to a balanced result. Example a coin flip or playing sections of a wheel. In the case of playing the double dozens you must win twice to balance for every lost bet.

So it works for Craps, Baccarat, and Blackjack. It is worthless for Poker, Horse racing, and sports betting.