Features
Some of the most important years in my life were spent as a Topper in AZA
Editor’s introduction: Elsewhere on this website we have a story about Elliot Rodin. During the course of one of our conversations Elliot remarked that his years spent in AZA were among the most important in his life. Elliot suggested that the subject of AZA would be one that Gerry Posner would be well suited to tackle.
So, I decided to contact our nostalgia expert and, although he semeed a little uncertain why we would want him to write about AZA, I wrote to him that he was the perfect choice to go back to a time that would certainly raise memories for many of our readers. And, ever the sport that he is, Gerry agreed. I also asked Gerry whether he might have any pictures from his own AZA years, but he said that he didn’t.
Being the resourceful newshound that he is though, Gerry was able to come up with the picture that you see on this page. Okay Gerry – now how about taking on BBG next?
By GERRY POSNER
The pandemic has given me (and I suggest way more people than me) time to reflect and ruminate about matters of importance and less so. To me, the past is important and I have spent some time recalling events of my past and indeed of those of my era. I hearken back to the days of BBYO and our teenage times.
Let’s step back to 1958. My life and I suspect the lives of many of my contemporaries were occupied pretty much by school, sports, and BBYO. Some, of course, were involved in USY (United Synagogue Youth), others had extra curricular activities, school related or not. There were a few, not many, who had jobs he or who went to during the week or weekend either regularly or not, but for the most part our lives were what might be considered very simple and narrow by today’s standards. My life was ruled by AZA, the male section of BBYO. In those days, there were five viable chapters: Winnipeg 38s (the 38th chapter in the organization), Toppers, Eskimos (and no one thought of changing the name then) Omegas and Slotins. As I recall there were about the same number of BBG (the female version for B’nai Brith Brith Girls) chapters. They were: Delilahs, Chalutzot, Gabriels, Bat Sheva, Israelis, and Rachels. (I apologize if I’ve missed any others.)
For many of the readers who recall those times in their lives, it was, shall I say, a much simpler time. My life revolved around BBYO. In fact, I was so immersed in it and I made so many phone calls for the chapter, that the names of each of the 41 members in the chapter are ingrained in my memory alphabetically.
I am not sure if the fact that I recall these names even now – over 60 years later is a plus or a minus. But here are the 1958-59 members of Toppers AZA in case you could not sleep last night wondering just who these guys were: Bob Akman, Larry Booke, Lloyd Cohen, Sam Corman, Joe Diner, Bruce Druxerman, Brian Fleishman, Sheldon Gilman, Martyn Glassman, Bert Knazen, Martin Knelman, Jack Lazareck, Larry Leonoff, Roger Lyons, Ted Lyons, Brian Malinsky, David Matas, Alan Moss, Butch Nepon, Michael Nozick, Eric Ostfield, Harvin Pitch, Arnold Popeski, Gerry Posner, David Rich, Elliot Rodin, Arthur Ross, Ken Rubin, Laurie Rubin, Ron Rubin, David Secter, Bob Segal, Paul Shuster, Lyle Silverman, Gary Smith, Ken Steiman, Neil Stitz, Errol Tapper, Irv Tessler, David Winestock and David Wolch. Sad to say that five of them – Corman, Fleishman, Knazen, Moss and Nepon have passed on. Still, I would suggest if you could ask the remaining 36, you would receive a uniform opinion about that time in their lives – and it would be warm and favourable. Why is that and what was it about that period that made it so that many of us would wish this kind of life style for our grandkids?
To be sure, we did not have iPhones, iPads or computers. We had television, but only one station. What we really had was time with friends and the ability to roam reasonably free. We took the bus or biked anywhere we had to go. Our parents did not worry about us and we could be outdoors until the streetlights came on. We had what I would call a sense of freedom that is absent today with so much structured activity. We did chat on the phone a great deal, but then that telephone line was shared by everybody in the family and so we had limits imposed on us. We bonded with friends; AZA and BBG were an integral part of that bonding process. I recall that in AZA we had the five-fold objectives of the organization, including religious, community service, fund-raising, social and athletic. The key was to try to be involved at some point in the year in all of these aspects of the organization.
In that respect, I recall well on the weekend of October 24-26 of 1958, we had the Toppers Convention weekend where we tried to complete all five folds of AZA within the three days. We began with a religious service at the Shaarey Zedek Synagogue on Friday night, where we participated in the service. Then, on Saturday in the AM, we had a Fund Raising activity (not exactly kosher on the Shabbat and a more than a slight contradiction of the night before at shul) where we sold doughnuts door to door. In fact, one member, Elliot Rodin, sold 512 doughnuts that day (although there were suggestions he recruited his brother and friends to do the heavy selling).
On Saturday night we had a party at the home of Bob Akman, who lived at 614 Waterloo Street. (Would that I could remember what I had for breakfast yesterday.) I know we all were supposed to invite dates and I recall whom I took to the party and would identify her but fear that if I did so, she might be asked about it and she would have to admit she has no memory of me or that night. On Sunday in the AM, we had a community service programme, followed by a football game in the afternoon against another AZA chapter. All that in one weekend. We were busy with friends and out of our parents’ hair in useful activities. We were not looking down at a device all day. You know the rest of this story.
Toppers was good for me and not just me. We all benefited from that more innocent time where we were learning about ourselves, the opposite sex and the world around us. But we had the benefit of deep and lasting friendships which occurred as a result of the time and place we were in and at then. Many of those deep friendships formed at that time last to this day. I say sadly that it is hard for me to project that kind of relationship for my grandchildren – so occupied are they on their phones, computers and with themselves. Perhaps you see it differently, but I always say I was privileged to have grown up where and when I did, and Toppers 921 AZA was a central part of that experience.
Features
Hair straightening at Sets on Corydon
Features
Ontario Online Casinos Let Players Set Daily, Weekly and Monthly Deposit Limits
A deposit limit sets a ceiling on how much money someone can add to an online gambling account. In Ontario’s regulated market, players can choose limits covering 24 hours, seven days and one month, with the website’s system enforcing the amounts they select.
The settings are straightforward, but the timing deserves attention. A daily allowance may sit within weekly and monthly caps, while an increase can involve a waiting period. For adults using Chrome on a Chromebook, understanding these account rules starts with knowing where to find them.
Finding the Settings and Choosing a Period
Deposit controls sit within the gambling website’s account menus. The Tooniebet Ontario responsible gaming page is an operator-specific resource readers can consult alongside their account settings. ToonieBet is operated by Canadix Limited and regulated by the AGCO under an agreement with iGaming Ontario.
Ontario’s standards require an easy and obvious way to set financial and time limits during registration and afterward. Players must be offered deposit and loss limits when signing up, and the controls must remain easy to reach and change once an account is open.
Menu names differ between sites. Published examples place deposit limits under account settings or responsible-gaming tools, where players can select an amount and a period.
Each type of limit measures something different. Deposit limits cap money added to the account. Loss limits restrict net losses after winnings are taken into account, while time limits govern playing time. iGaming Ontario’s player guidance explains all three.
For Chromebook users, these settings are managed through the website’s account interface. Chrome’s own permissions handle separate browser functions, such as access to location information.
How Several Limits Apply to One Deposit
Players can have daily, weekly and monthly limits running together. A deposit must fit within every active cap.
Take a hypothetical account with limits of CAD $40 daily, CAD $100 weekly and CAD $250 monthly. These figures illustrate the process.
If someone has already deposited CAD $90 during the weekly period, the remaining weekly allowance is CAD $10. That becomes the most they can add, even when the daily limit has more room. Reaching the monthly cap would likewise block another deposit until some monthly allowance becomes available.
This is why checking all active limits matters. A new day may bring fresh daily capacity while the weekly or monthly total remains close to its ceiling. The longer periods continue to apply as the shorter one refreshes.
When Money Drops Out of a Rolling Window
The next question is when previous deposits stop counting toward a cap. Some sites use rolling periods, which track elapsed time from individual deposits.
Published Ontario policies include daily windows of 24 hours, weekly windows of 168 hours and monthly windows of 720 hours, equivalent to 30 days. Under that approach, each deposit frees up its corresponding allowance once it falls outside the window.
Suppose someone has a CAD $100 rolling weekly limit and deposits CAD $25 on Friday, followed by CAD $75 on Saturday. Seven days after Friday’s deposit, CAD $25 becomes available again. The other CAD $75 returns seven days after Saturday’s deposit.
Leaving the restored Friday allowance unused means it combines with Saturday’s restored amount. At that point, the full CAD $100 is available. Reviewing deposit dates and times helps explain how much room remains within a rolling period.
Changing a Cap Takes a Separate Step
A limit refreshing follows the schedule already attached to the account. Raising that limit requires a request and a wait.
Ontario’s standards require at least 24 hours before a player’s request to relax or remove an established limit can take effect. The existing limit remains enforceable during the cooling-off period.
Operators publish their own timings. Documented examples include a seven-day wait for deposit-limit increases or removals. Another published schedule allows increases after one day for a daily cap, seven days for a weekly cap and 30 days for a monthly cap.
Lower limits take effect immediately under these published policies. Some policies also restart the waiting period when a player requests another increase while an earlier change is pending. The effective date shows which amount currently applies.
Other Controls and Support
Deposit limits work alongside loss limits, time limits, short breaks and self-exclusion. Together, these give players ways to restrict account funding, gambling activity or access.
Ontario-regulated online casino play is restricted to adults aged 19 and older who are physically in Ontario. Gambling involves financial risk.
For concerns about your gambling or someone else’s, ConnexOntario offers free, confidential information and referral support around the clock. Call 1-866-531-2600 or text CONNEX to 247247. Standard message and data rates may apply.
Features
What “Best Odds” Really Means When Comparing Gambling Review Websites
The phrase best odds appears frequently in gambling discussions, but it is surprisingly easy to use imprecisely. MonsterBetList is primarily a casino review and rankings website, not a dedicated live sportsbook odds comparison terminal. That difference is central to evaluating what its reviews can and cannot establish. A casino rating may explain payout conditions, licence information and bonus restrictions, while a claim about the best available price on a sporting outcome requires a different kind of evidence altogether.
Odds and ratings answer different questions
Sports betting odds represent a price offered on a specified outcome. A review rating is an editorial judgement built from multiple criteria. These two numerical systems cannot be substituted for one another. A bookmaker rated highly for service may offer a less competitive price on a particular match, while a service with a more attractive price may impose different limits or verification rules.
Similarly, a casino review can discuss return-to-player statistics, but RTP is not the same as sportsbook odds. RTP describes a theoretical long-run percentage built into a game model. It does not tell a reader what will happen in one session and it is not an individually negotiable market quotation.
What makes sports odds comparable?
A fair odds comparison starts with identical selections: the same event, outcome, market rules and settlement conditions. Comparing a three-way football result with a draw-no-bet price is invalid because the products pay under different circumstances. The observation time also matters; displayed prices can change quickly as market information or trading decisions evolve.
The numerical format should be standardised. Decimal odds provide one convenient representation, but American and fractional formats express the same underlying idea differently. Converting these formats is straightforward. What matters is the net price, the operator’s rules and whether the quoted offer remains available when reviewed.
Overround explains the hidden cost of many markets
In a simplified two-outcome market, dividing one by each decimal price produces an implied probability. If the implied probabilities add to more than 100%, the excess is commonly described as the bookmaker’s overround. It is one way of understanding the margin embedded in prices, although individual market structure and adjustments can complicate the interpretation.
This concept explains why the word best should not be attached to a price without context. A strong headline may look appealing yet represent an ordinary margin after calculation. More importantly, any single quote is time-dependent. Genuine comparison requires a dated observation and equivalent market rules; broad editorial praise is not enough.
What casino rankings can establish instead
MonsterBetList publishes casino reviews and guides addressing licences, bonuses, payout experiences and responsible gambling. Those topics are relevant to evaluating consumer risk and service quality. A report about the length of a withdrawal process, for example, can be useful if its methodology is transparent. A bonus review can help identify restrictive wagering requirements that marketing headlines omit.
However, a casino ranking should not be presented as evidence that its highest-rated operator consistently offers the best sports prices. Unless a site publishes repeated market-by-market comparisons, that conclusion is not supported. Readers benefit when publishers clearly distinguish what was measured from what readers might assume was measured.
Bonuses can complicate comparisons
A sportsbook may offer free-bet tokens, cashback or other promotions. Their effective value depends on conditions rather than the largest number printed in a banner. Some credits are not withdrawable as cash; others require qualifying selections, minimum odds or a deadline. Casino welcome bonuses often introduce wagering requirements, game-contribution rules and limits on withdrawals. Combining these products under one generic promotional score can hide important differences.
For instance, a large matched deposit might require extensive play before bonus-related funds become eligible for withdrawal. The required betting volume is not a promise of profit. The presence of a promotion may therefore make comparisons more complex instead of simpler. Clear disclosures should precede any judgement about value.
Editorial independence and methods
Review sites sometimes state that rankings are editorially independent. Such a statement is relevant but does not replace evidence of consistent testing. Readers should look for the criteria used, the date of each review, whether real transactions were examined and how negative findings are treated. If one platform receives detailed testing while another is scored on marketing copy, the ranking loses comparability.
Commercial incentives should also be visible. Referral relationships or sponsorships do not automatically make every observation inaccurate, but they create reasons to ask how rankings are insulated from revenue. A publication that explains its methodology and corrections process gives readers a stronger basis for trust than one that simply declares its winners.
Licensing and dispute rights before price claims
A marginally attractive price is of limited value when the operator is not legally available to the reader or does not provide meaningful avenues for redress. Regulations vary by jurisdiction, and a licence in one country may not authorise service in another. It is prudent to verify the legal entity behind a brand and the current status of any licence through official records.
Consumers should also review identity verification, account restrictions and dispute resolution procedures. These operational conditions influence the actual experience of using a gambling service. A sensible evaluation includes them before discussing promotions or theoretical market advantages.
Why guaranteed-profit language is a warning sign
No ordinary review or odds list can guarantee that an individual will win money from gambling. Claims of certain returns often omit the fact that results are uncertain, prices move and transactions are subject to restrictions. Casino games generally incorporate a house advantage, and sports outcomes remain uncertain regardless of a persuasive analysis. The safest response to absolute promises is scepticism.
Readers should also avoid treating gambling as a means of addressing financial problems. Chasing previous losses and increasing stakes to recover money can deepen harm. Consumer-oriented coverage is more valuable when it explains risk and offers realistic options for stepping away.
Conclusion: define the claim before ranking the service
“Best odds” is a specific comparative proposition, not a synonym for a high casino rating. MonsterBetList can be examined for its published casino research, review structure and risk disclosures, but those materials should not be stretched into claims they have not tested. Clear definitions, dated evidence and honest limitations are the foundations of trustworthy comparison journalism.
Peter Cihelka
October 20, 2026 at 1:43 am
I know or knew most of the guys on that list.
I miss those fun carefree days in Winnipeg.
For me and many on the list, Kelvin Hugh and there if Manitoba
were our focus.
Great post Gerry!