Wednesday, October 04, 2017

Updates

Paddock's motives. In the preceding post, I speculated that Steve Paddock might have been motivated by a personal animosity toward Brian O'Connell ("BOC"), the impresario who heads up the Route 91 Harvest Festival as well as a number of similar ventures. That theory may or may not have to go into rewrite: The Daily Beast published a piece which argues -- not altogether convincingly -- that Paddock may have originally targeted an outdoor concert featuring Chance the Rapper.
Stephen Paddock rented multiple condos overlooking the annual Life Is Beautiful Festival, which this year was headlined by Lorde and Chance the Rapper, said the source, who is not directly involved in the investigation but has been briefed on its progress.

In an effort to confirm the report, The Daily Beast visited the Ogden, a 21-story luxury condominium tower with a line of sight to the concert-grounds.

“We're not in a position to confirm or deny anything about Mr. Paddock's dealings. I suggest you contact Metro [police]. As you know this is an on going investigation,” said Melissa Warren, public affairs officer for Fais Foley Warren, owner of the Ogden.
BOC had no involvement (that I can discern) with that event. If Paddock did intend to do harm there, then obviously he was motivated by a more generalized desire to commit mayhem, as opposed to a desire to injure Mr. O'Connell's livelihood. On the other hand, Paddock may have had other reasons for wanting to rent at the Ogden.

Nevertheless, there is a growing understanding that Paddock's life and livelihood simply do not make sense. In my previous piece, I argued that (despite what we've read in various reports) neither Paddock nor anyone else has ever played video poker professionally, since the odds always favor the House. The only sure way to make money from video poker is to write a book titled "How to Win at Video Poker."

But real poker -- against human opponents -- is a game of skill. Yesterday, Josh Marshall said much the same thing:
The Washington Post says “He liked to bet big, wagering tens of thousands of dollars in a sitting. He owned homes in four states but preferred staying in casino hotels, sometimes for weeks at a time, as he worked the gambling machines.” Card counters and professional card players can win over time at casinos. But most people don’t. And it doesn’t sound like Paddock did the kind of gambling where you can win, over time.

There’s also this new AP story which seems to suggest he hadn’t been employed in almost thirty years. According to this timeline, he worked for the post office from 1976 to 1978. He graduated college in 1977. He worked as an IRS agent from 1978 to 1984. He then worked for a defense auditing job for a year and a half. The AP also says he “worked for a defense contractor in the late 1980s.”

I haven’t seen any specific statement that he was not employed for the last 25 to 30 years. That Post article I mentioned above says that family members say he was worth more than $2 million, that “he made a small fortune from real estate deals and a business that he and Eric Paddock sold off.”

Here’s the thing though, the Post describes a gambling habit that seems hard to reconcile with being worth just two million dollars.
There are certain games with an element of skill where you can win. But on machines? That doesn’t sound right to me. Casinos roll out the red carpet for very rich people who like to gamble for high stakes. It sounds like Paddock was one of those people. But again, I think you need to be worth a lot more than $2 million to gamble like that for a long time.

Read through that Post article it sounds like Paddock gambled for high stakes a lot. He also had multiple residential properties around the country. There is apparently a huge amount of travel. As I said, this probably doesn’t have an immediate connection to the crime. And regardless of what Paddock did or how he got his money, it won’t bring anyone back to life. But something pretty substantial seems missing from this story.
Sorry to quote at such length, but these words speak to my own concerns. We're not being told the full truth about Stephen Paddock.

But that doesn't mean I have any tolerance for the nonsense spewed by professional liars like Alex Jones. We now have video of what the room looked like. Hey, Alex -- where's the "Antifa literature" which your unnamed source said was all over the place? Does Antifa actually produce any literature? Does any political group do that sort of thing in the digital age?

Trump speaks!
This presidency has normalized idiocy. If any previous president had said such ridiculous things while touring a disaster zone, the country would be discussing his marble-mouthed statements throughout the next week -- perhaps the next month. But with Trump, stupid remarks = situation normal. He will always react with boorishness, thoughtlessness, egomania and incomprehensibility. For Donald Trump, yesterday's exercise in absurdity was simply another Tuesday.

I honestly don't think he meant to imply that Hurricane Maria was not the "real" disaster that Katrina was. But that's Trump for you: Whenever he tries to talk, all the words come out misspelled. Trump is the new Palin. His intended meaning becomes hopelessly lost as garbled half-sentences collide and explode.

Why didn't he realize that this was not the occasion for endless self-praise? Trump, not Mayor Cruz, is the one who politicized disaster. Trump makes everything about him.
It's the opposite of empathy. Instead of mourning with and for those who lost their lives, Trump is using those who lost their lives as a way to make a broader argument that the media's criticism of him is unfair and biased.

See, I told you I was doing a great job, Trump was saying. Everyone here thinks so! Me, me, me, me.
Trump would shout "Me me me me" in the face of the Apocalypse itself. Think of the most self-absorbed person you've ever met: That guy's narcissism compares to Trump's narcissism the way orange juice compares to orange juice concentrate.

Trump must know that people consider him an egomaniac. He must understand that a display of humility, even fake humility, would help his cause. We're not asking for much: Just the occasional "I'm sorry." The occasional "Perhaps I'm wrong." The occasional self-deprecatory joke. Other presidents have offered as much. Trump must know that these small stylistic touches would make him less despised -- would, in fact, go a long ways toward repairing his image.

But he can't do it. His brain is wired the way it is wired, and nothing can change it.

15 comments:

Alessandro Machi said...

The Sarah Palin comparison is classic.

A theory on how Paddock could have won at the slot machines. Paddock sets up a couple of covert cameras to cover the slot machine gambling area, then goes back to his hotel room and watches to learn the winning patterns. The machines probably have some type of winning pattern. I'm not talking the poker machines, i'm talking the slot machines. He studies how often the slot machines on average push out a "win", then when a machine is within the 10% range of a win, he plays the machine until he wins on it. What was a perhaps 55% to the house and 45% to the player suddenly becomes an unknown but significant advantage to the player if they know a particular slot machine has been "cold" for a while. What I am not sure about is how much a slot machine pure probability and how much is the machine knows it needs to make someone a winner. Perhaps as the machine amasses a certain amount of coin it releases a win, with the appropriate house portion going down some other hatch rather into the arms of the person playing the slot. So the casinos need to have the slots pay out every so often so their portion of the winnings can be allocated at the same time.
Paddock did have cameras set up in the hallway outside of his door. Maybe he figured out how to place cameras on the floor of the gambling casinos and then wait until a slot machine was ripe for the taking.

Anonymous said...

I stand by a theory I (pulled out of my ass and) posted earlier. Paddock was a drug trafficker and CIA asset who went completely nuts.

If my theory -- well, hypothesis -- is correct, substantiation might come from his hazy aviation background. See here for discussion of one of his planes. (He reportedly had a second one, but I haven't found a tail number yet.)

https://www.gunandgame.com/threads/vegas-shooters-plane.182701/

Anonymous said...

A Reddit user puts it well:

"Used to work at Lock-Heed Martin (their predecessor). He's also being called an 'retired accountant.'

This man had his past scrubbed and has extensive training in special ops. That is my belief."

https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/73yxmi/stephen_paddocks_airplanes/

Joseph Cannon said...

Alessandro, in order to prove what I said about video poker being unwinnable in the long run (because the odds favor the house) I went to this site...

https://www.freeslots.com/poker.htm

Understand, I had not gambled in about fifteen years, not even for pretend money. After about an hour of play -- guided only by a hazy and imperfect recollection of Oscar's Grind -- I had doubled my stake.

Damned computer. It just had to prove me wrong.

In principle, though, the house always wins.

nemdam said...

It's been awhile since I've gambled as well, but if I recall, my understanding is that you actually can win at some video poker machines. The problem is that winning all comes down to maximizing your chance to get a royal flush since on most machines a royal flush pays disproportionate to the odds of getting it. But to do this requires tremendous discipline to play every hand correctly and to take repeated losses until you finally get the once-in-a-blue-moon hand. And even if you can, the rate you can win at is very small.

In short, even if you "win" at video poker, you can't win much and it takes a level of discipline that is borderline inhuman. The reason they allow this game to be won is because it attracts people who think they can beat it and then inevitably lose big.

Unknown said...

Donald Trump is as humorless as a human being comes. He will never fake what he doesn't feel because he doesn't think he should have to. It's that very "authenticity" his supporters like about him - however repugnant he is to normal people.

Anonymous said...

People who are able to make money in Vegas have special connections to the owners of the Casino that give them access I have heard to special rooms where they get better odds. Money laundering of course is one reason they would do this for these favoured customers. 9/11 hijackers allegedly did something similar on Sun Cruz Casino boats in Florida.

Prowlerzee said...

Love all the legit intrigue here, wow. I have to differ on the Donald musings,however. Puny Paws would not benefit even slightly by consideration for others. In fact, it would be a departure from his brand, which is what matters most to him.

And, sorry, guys, the Palin comparison lacks. Dubya would be a closer match for verbal gaffes.

The only thing I have to add to the gambling wins scenario is a while back someone figured a way to hack certain scratch tickets and that had to be amended. Someone with better memory and/or ability to research will have to look up the details. Alas, I'm again bereft of my computer.

Mr Mike said...

Your sources are the Washington Post and AP two news media outlets that along with the New York Times have a less than sterling record for accurate reporting.

Tom said...

So many myths of gambling, "hot machines," "winning patterns," luck that can be exploited.

There are no patterns that could be made to produce consistent winnings on machine play. If there were a flaw in the programming that did allow too many wins, it would be detected and fixed, fast. When playing cards against humans, winning too much will be tolerated to a point (extravagant winners are great advertising), but a card counter will be invited to leave.

But that is all beside the point of this story.

The "gambling" could have been a money laundering scheme. Buy chips, play, cash out. Buy more chips, play, cash out. Repeat. Claim to be a winner, see all this money I'm walking away with.

He doesn't mind losing some money in such a scheme. Losing to the house is the commission paid for walking out with fresh, clean money, even reported to the IRS. Plus he gets treated like a bigshot VIP.

Anonymous said...

There's a million reasons/excuses for Trump's bizarre and despicable behavior but in the end the simplest explanation might be the truest: he's simply a miserable, greedy jerk who has spent a lifetime lying to himself and everyone else. What really nice person needs to say "I'm a really nice person." Or what fabulously wealthly guy needs to repeatedly claim "I'm really, really rich." Do we hear that coming out of William Buffett's mouth? Or Gates or Bezos or any of the gazillionaires out there?

Nope. Only Trump, Primo Liar-in-Chief.

Trump's obnoxious behavior in Puerto Rico made me wince--Let them eat paper towels (per Krugman). The man is totally clueless and shameless. This morning before taking off for Las Vegas, he had to tell everyone 'how upset he really was." Because it's always about Trump and his mega-ego.

As for Paddock? We'll probably find out that he was another white guy with a grievance. One of the few things the Trumpster might understand.

Peggysue

b said...

Oscar's Grind is a suicidal system and so are all other kinds of martingale, and the fact that a person won once even after staking a large number of bets is no counterargument. Eventually you get wiped out. The house doesn't give a shit whether a punter bets according to a martingale or any other system because they are all crap. There's always a vig, overround, bookie's or house take, and in the long run you lose, whatever "system" you use. It's not like playing poker against human players, or like betting on outcomes of events you have studied to the point of knowing where there is "value" - which comes down to knowing where a lot of mug money is going - where if you are skilled enough to establish an edge then in the long run both you and the house or bookie will clean up: in other words, you take money from the mugs and the house or bookie still gets their take.

Paddock a professional gambler, gambling "professionally" against machines? My arse!

"(Using hidden cameras) (h)e studies how often the slot machines on average push out a 'win', then when a machine is within the 10% range of a win, he plays the machine until he wins on it."

Alessandro, this is a fantasy.

Joseph Cannon said...

"Oscar's Grind is a suicidal system..."

Nah. It's a system that helps you lose money slow. As long as you force yourself to give up on a sequence once you've tripled your usual bet, you'll find that you lose money slower with this system than with any other. You have to think of it as a per-hour payment for entertainment, sorta like going to the movies.

But in the end, web-surfing is much more entertaining than gambling, and it's a lot cheaper. So that's why I don't gamble.

Weirdly, I kept winning and winning at that free online video poker game! I presume that the Vegas versions are programmed differently.

CambridgeKnitter said...

The fact that you were winning at a free game with no stakes reminded me of Tom Lehrer's "The Old Dope Peddler": "He gives the kids free samples/Because he knows full well/That today's young innocent faces/Will be tomorrow's clientele." Or did I misunderstand? I've been sick for several days, which has taken quite a toll on my cognitive abilities.

http://www.covertbookreport.com/ said...

Gun running, money laundering. I found a report that he had room service for two guests delivered. (bottom of article)

http://www.covertbookreport.com/did-woman-warn-about-vegas-shooter-mass-killing-updates/