Comments by whodey (page 9)

She's good looking but not to the point that she'd be worth the amounts she was talking about in today's money let alone in 90s money.

I very rarely run into overcounting of songs but that is probably do to my style of clubbing. Since the clubs in the places I frequent most are at $20/song and the vips are usually around $200/30 minutes I rarely do more than 2 or 3 regular dances before deciding whether we are going to vip or if I need to look for someone else. In fact I don't even remember the last time it took me 3 songs to decide. If she is worth $60 or more in regular dances she is worth $200 for a vip session where we have some real privacy. The only exception is usually if I happen to be in a particular club in Columbus on one of their $10/song nights. At that club the vip is no higher mileage than the regular dances so when they have their $10/song days you can get 30 minutes worth of dances for around $100 instead of the 30 minute vip that is $175 for the same value. In that case I just verbally confirm how many we've done every few songs, if she starts to overcount we're done.

"And I heard of a weird small town in Indiana that I want to try." Make sure you let me know which Indiana town and when. I don't get to the clubs in Indiana as often as I used to but I will gladly make an exception for a chance to see you.

Large, just like any guy that is nicknamed slim.

Depends on the girl, most of the time there's nothing they need to bring. There have been a few that I've asked them to bring a particular outfit of theirs because they do a really hot strip tease out of that outfit in the club and that is a great way to start out an OTC session. I have also asked a couple of girls to bring a nice dress so that we can go out for a nice meal between sessions. Others have asked if they should bring things like handcuffs, toys, particular costumes or other fetish iitems which I generally decline. I did have one ask if she should bring a video camera and I just responded that we could use mine.

"or Cincinnati 2+ million and no clubs. It's probably politics." Cincinnati used to have a few strip clubs but Jerry Falwell and his fellow Bible thumper ran them out of business around the same time they were going after Larry Flint and Hustler. There are a few strip clubs left in the Cincinnati metro area but they are across the state lines into either Northern Kentucky or Southeast Indiana. A couple of the NKY ones (Brass Ass and Brass Bull) are less than half of a mile from the downtown Cincinnati Riverfront in Newport Kentucky.

While his passing is sad, we can all hope to be so lucky to spend our last moments with a beautiful naked young woman having the type of fun where we need to get dressed after. I just hope he tipped the young lady before he collapsed. RIP!

I don't think that feature is currently available. @founder has said that previous features of the site will be brought back but it will take some time as he implements the changes he is doing. We just have to be patient.

If you want to find a different way to be entertained that is fine. I did that when I stopped watching basketball about 20 years ago because the players that I enjoyed watching when I was young had all retired and I just didn't enjoy the newer players as much. Same thing with NASCAR and Indy Car. But I can't understand how you think there was a prior agreement in place to allow people to watch the games without a subscription. Can you point me to any such agreement that was ever formalized? I know I never had cable or satellite tv until about 2010 because I always chose to spend my money on other forms of entertainment and because I wasn't paying for it I didn't have the chance to watch any games that were shown on cable networks and the only games I could watch were the few broadcast on over the air networks each week or the ones I bought tickets to watch in person. Do you believe the NFL or MLB owed me the right to watch those games that they chose to sell to ESPN or Fox Sports? How is selling them to a streaming service any different? Either way people have to choose if they want to see the game enough to get a subscription or not, just like it has been since before I was born.

Just because the public paid for something doesn't mean they get unconditional free use of that item. It was public funding that paid for the US Postal Service to build post offices and design postal routes, but people still have to pay to send a package through the mail. Public funding built many public transportation systems but people still need to pay to ride a bus or subway. The public paid to build airports and fund the FAA but people still need to pay to fly on a private airline out of those airports. Public funding built many parks, but those same parks charge a fee to reserve a campsite or a picnic area. Putting a football game on a paid streaming service or a pay cable network or a paid streaming service is no different.

As for "My point is simple the owners have no regard for the fans who actually pay the bills" how does a private citizen watching the game on tv from their home help the team pay the bills? The only way a team gets money from that is by companies like CBS, ESPN, Amazon or Peacock paying for the rights to broadcast the game. The fact is they always sell those rights to the highest bidder just like they have since they started showing live sports on TV, the only thing that has changed is which companies are bidding on them.

"When these sports franchises come to town they promise to provide certain services in return for access to publicly owned channels to share their product" When exactly did the sports franchises promise to allow people to watch their product on publicly owned channels? ESPN is certainly a privately owned channel as are Fox, CBS and ABC all of whom have profited from showing sports over the years just like the sports leagues and individual teams have profited from having their games shown. For years local fans have had to deal with games being blacked out in their home market due to the games not being a sellout when it comes to tickets. How is Peacock paying for the right to show one regular season and one playoff game any different than ESPN paying for the right to show last night's College Football Championship game? Neither are publicly owned channels that people can watch without paying for a subscription. If anything ESPN being allowed exclusive broadcast rights is worse because that game was between two public universities that each receive more public funding than any two NFL teams. The fact is Peacock offered to pay $110 million for the exclusive rights to one regular season and one playoff game this season. So out of 285 total NFL games this season (not counting pressing games) they bought the rights to 0.7% of the NFL games this year. Is there anyone here that wouldn't have gladly sold 0.7% of your work for this year to Peacock for $110 million? In the end, all that the public gets in exchange for tax payer funding is a professional sports team in their city. That brings along the millions in tourism dollars, millions in taxes on the tickets sold, millions in state income taxes (depending on the state) that the athletes and team employees pay. Home games of a professional sports teams also drive a lot of money to other businesses in the region like hotels, restaurants, bars and transportation. It also brings along a lot of clout when competing against other cities for things like major conventions and other events that also bring a lot of money into the local economy. Those are the reasons that local governments and voters give professional teams tax money to either lure them to or keep them in their city, not because they think it will allow them to watch games for free. Besides, the local fans whose tax money goes to either the Miami Dolphins or Kansas City Chiefs will be able to watch the game for free on their local NBC affiliates. That means even if the taxpayer contributions entitled tax payers to watch for free like 25 argues, the tax payers that contributed to those teams do get to watch for free. Surely you can't be trying to say that tax payers who contribute to the Arizona Cardinals or Cincinnati Bengals or even tax payers who don't live in a city like Nashville that contributes any tax money to NFL teams somehow have a right to watch the game for free, right?

As a Buckeye fan I hate that team up north, but they clearly deserved to win that game. Just watching how dominant their run game was in the first quarter showed that they were a better team than UW on that particular day. Congrats to them on playing a great game and good luck to whoever their coach is next year after Big Jim rides that championship to an NFL gig. I do wonder what effect the game will have on Penix's draft stock. He looked like an elite QB all season and put up great numbers, but in a big pressure game he had his worst game of the season going 27 for 51 with 2 interceptions and a QB rating below 100. He seemed to miss some wide open passes that you wouldn't expect an elite NFL ready QB to miss.

@motorhead - how is figuring out which streaming service a game is on any different than when games started being shown on cable and they had to look through a TV Guide and figure out which channel the game was on when they were used to only having 3 channels before that. As for compassion for the elderly who don't have multiple streaming services I can only go so far with that. How many NFL, MLB, NBA, ETC games are they able to watch each week today compared to 30, 40 or 50 years ago? They are able to watch a lot more games now without a single streaming service than they were ever able to watch back in the 70s, 80s or 90s even if they had a full cable package at the time which was the way to watch as much as possible. If you want to talk about them making it unfair for the elderly to watch games, let talk about how unfair the major networks are to some elderly fans during the regular season. Each week the Sunday 1pm and 4pm rounds of games are split between just 2 networks (CBS and Fox) meaning multiple games are not available to fans to watch based on their location because the networks have decided to show a different game instead. If the NFL would allow streaming services to show the games each viewer would be able to decide between which of the 4 games that CBS had the rights to that they want to watch by logging into the Paramount app and choosing. Instead CBS chooses for them based on where they live. My elderly father has been a huge Green Bay fan since the 1950s but since he lives in Cincinnati those Packers games are only available on local channels about 3-5 times per year. That is why for several years now I have bought him the Sunday Ticket package which is way more expensive than Amazon Prime and Peacock combines so he can watch his team play. So how is it more fair to seniors for networks to decide which games are available in an area instead of having all of the games available on a streaming service? How is it better for seniors to have to buy the more expensive Sunday Ticket package to be able to watch the games they want instead of cheaper alternatives such as streaming services?

Never been, but I have to ask since I am a little confused. Is this place even still considered a strip club if they no longer offer lap dances or a stage show? Do the girls just go table to table flashing people for tips or how does it work?

How is this any different from various sports broadcasting games on cable networks like ESPN or FoxSports? This is just a modern version of that. The only difference is that Peacock offers non-subscribers a free trial so they can watch it at no cost which is something cable/satellite never offered to non-subscribers. In the end choosing to sell the rights to a game to a streaming service like Amazon or Peacock is no different than selling the rights to a game to ESPN or Fox Sports. Either way non-subscribers won't be able to watch it (legally) at home without signing up for either the streaming service or cable network that bought the rights. The only people that see the two scenarios differently are ludites that refuse to accept that the entertainment industry is changing much like their parents resisted getting cable/satellite because they didn't think you should have to pay to watch tv or how their grandparents resisted the change from radio broadcasts to tv. Either adapt with the changing entertainment landscape or get left behind, the choice is yours. If you are willing to adapt to the change you may even be able to do it for free. In addition to the free trial from Peacock there sre other ways to get it for free. I know I signed up for 12 months of free Peacock access through my cable provider (Spectrum) and that other major cable companies like Xfinity and Comcast have similar deals. Some cell phone carriers also offer free Peacock subscriptions. Even certaint Instacart memberships include free access to Peacock.

Who says you can't go out just because it has snowed? I can't tell you the number of times I went to help a friend/relative/coworker/whoever clear their driveway or sidewalk because they couldn't because of a bad back/shoulder/knee or they were sick or just too old to do it themselves. For longer trips I have also had to go pick a buddy up from the hospital after getting checked out and to take him to wherever his car was towed to after sliding into a ditch. If you are extra handy you can also go help a friend figure out why his furnace isn't working. Once I used the excuse that I had to go help my sister teach her teenage son how to drive in the snow since she was nervous about driving in the snow and her husband was out of town on business.

Sums this place up pretty well. Not a high energy place with a great atmosphere but good private dances with decent girls at a reasonable price.

I collect vintage video games. Last count I had 28 different consoles starting back at the Magnavox Odyssey from 1972 up until the Nintendo GameCube in 2001 and about 2000ish games. I also have 20 different arcade games.

Not a lot of good strip clubs along the way for your trip in my experience. Like stainglass mentioned Akron has a lot of options for full nude but they are mostly dive bars without much of a stage show that focus mainly on extras in the private dances. The talent level also leaves a lot to be desired. If you are going to detour through NE Ohio I would suggest Palace in the Pines instead of the Akron clubs, but I'm not sure either are worth the detour. If you do go to Palace in the Pines you'll want to go around back to the Royalty Room since the front club is full alcohol but not fully nude while the Royalty Room around back is full nude with no alcohol. Wheeling, West Virginia - only clubbed here a few times. I know Jill's was full nude in the private dances with good mileage but I don't remember much as far as the stage show so I'm not sure if it was full nude or if it was any good. If you want an interesting stage show in WV check out Lil Vegas where they do a stage show where you rub lotion all over the dancers before sticking dollar bills on them. I think it was about an hour or hour and a half from the Wheeling area so it may be too far out of the way for your trip. Columbus, OH - The only full nude club in Columbus is RoadHouse Revue which is a dive bar. The dancers get full nude on stage, but it isn't a high energy party vibe at all. The stage show basically consists of the girls going up to each tipper and spreading for them up close and personal. The timed vip dances are pretty good with nice mileage but no extras. They do keep odd hours so check their website for their hours before you go for a visit. Overall I would recommend Columbus Gold or Vanity as better options, but neither are full nude. Dayton, OH - only full nude club I know of is Diamonds and they do a great high energy stage show with a party vibe to the club. The downsides are they are a members only club so you have to buy a membership (fill out a form with your info and I'd check along with membership fee) and they use fake Diamond Bucks for tips and as change at the bar. While it isn't full nude I would recommend Cheeks as an overall better club, it still isn't a great club but it is the best left in Dayton after several better clubs have shut down over the past decade. Indianapolis, IN - haven't been since around 2019 so things may have changed. I don't recall any of the clubs being full nude, best clubs in my opinion would be Brad's Brass Flamingo and Club Rio, but again my info may be outdated here.

I am not a fan of tying girls to extras like this, but there is no rule against it on this site. It is entirely up to the vip members that read the unpublished reviews to decide if a review is appropriate to publish or not. I would prefer that people reject these types of reviews because they put the club and more importantly the girl at risk of something bad happening when some messed up PL wants the same thing for the same price and gets denied for whatever reason. However, that is just my opinion and each vip member reading the unpublished reviews has to decide for themselves what types of reviews they will or will not approve.

I've been to 4 of them: #4 The Godfather in Louisville, #21 Lucky Corner and #24 Lusty Adventure in Akron and #38 Mouse's Ear in Knoxville. Lucky Corner and Lusty Adventure definitely belong on the list as complete trashy dive bars. I like a good dive bar, but these are terrible dive bars with the only redeeming feature being that basically anything goes but unfortunately 99% of the time the girls that are there aren't ones you want to do extras with no matter how cheap. Mouse's Ear is certainly not a good club, but I wouldn't consider it among the worst. In my limited experience there were typically some decent looking girls, the problem is absolutely nothing but air dances typically. To be fair I haven't been since 2019 so it could've gotten worse. Godfather should not be on the list. Is it a good to great club? No, I wouldn't go that far. Is it a terrible club? Absolutely not. It is just about an average club experience with a better than average alcohol selection. You aren't getting anywhere near extras but they give some pretty decent mileage lap dances from girls that are generallyin the 7-8+ range. Prices are a bit high for Louisville but not as bad as PTs.

It could also get confusing when different clubs mean different things by a vip room. The clubs I typically go to it means a private room that you spend time alone with a dancer in for a certain amount of time. I have also been to clubs where the vip room was a large lap dance room that offers slightly more privacy than the floor dances but there are multiple couches or booths for lapdances that are sold by the song and there are typically multiple customers/dancers in there at the same time. While info about the vip rooms can be among the most helpful info about a club to some people, I think it is best off including as part of the reviews where more descriptions can be provided other than just the number of rooms or couches.

How many 65 year old TV shows from countries that you didn't grow up in are you familiar with? If you can't say that you are familiar with the biggest telenovelas from the 1950s why would you be shocked that a Cuban dancer wouldn't be familiar with an American sitcom from that era?

It wasn't in strip clubs, but I hung out in some pretty rough bars when I was young and dumb.