Alan Mendelson as Neutral Journalist

I swore off posting here, but Mr. Mendelson's act deserves some rebuttal.

I posted here for the last two years that (1) I was in the invitation-only Wise Guys Contest, (2) I was one of the best reviewed handicappers listed in Mike McCusker's annually published "Tipsters or Gypsters?" for a period of a dozen years in the 80's and 90's, and (3) I was in the 1984 Who's Who in Sports Gambling (Hall Publishing).

Now understand that I repeated this stuff (ad nauseum) for two years to rebut Rob Singer.

Mr. Mendelson then said he was shocked, shocked he told us, to discover that I had clients, and that he had no idea I was a professional. Now this could be construed, I suppose, as suggesting I had always refrained from recruiting clients. But no, Mr. Mendelson stated baldly that I had misled him and everyone on the site because I was a professional and I was manipulating him.

Never mind that no one without a monster reputation is in The Wise Guys, or that no non-professional was ever monitored by "Tipsters or Gypsters?," or that civilians weren't listed in "Who's Who in Sports Gambling." Mr. Mendelson baldly stated I had misled him and everyone on the forum.

I don't have a problem with people making mistakes. I have a problem with people "making mistakes" and making public reputation-affecting comments without bothering to read with fifth grade comprehension skills. Mr. Mendelson, who was a consumer advocate before adopting his "Best Buys" schtick, basically shot off his mouth to my detriment without considering or caring about the consequences to me. And he was wrong.

The latest garbled criticisms on the "Start of 2018" thread regarding mickeycrimm's once every 36 spins debate, or kewlJ's one-day loss are just more of the same. I seriously do not think anyone would have interpreted mickeycrimm's post as suggesting a $900 an hour gig, and certainly not after reading it twice.

If one were to substitute "casino exec" for "Alan Mendelson," the posts make a lot of sense, motivationally.


Note: This doesn't even touch on the whole "package" nonsense. Mr. Mendelson actually had copies of the "Tipsters or Gypsters?" annual issues sitting in his office, and summaries of what the "Wise Guys Contest" is and the results, but didn't bother to read them before posting that I had misled him and everyone. He was under no obligation to read them, of course, but one would think before blatantly stating that I had misled him and the forum, he might have checked first. You know, in case he wanted to ensure that he wasn't completely wrong.

Alan is anything but neutral or objective. And because he is completely lacking these qualities, I won't call him a journalist. That is not fair to real journalists.

I am going to quote an observation made today by The Boz, who hasn't been here long, so it didn't take him long to figure this out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Boz

I find it hard to believe someone that has found a way to be successful in life like you appear to be is this dense. You have to be acting this way to just f with people and get off on it.

But consider me guilty of playing your games now too.

---

I think many of us have reached this conclusion at different times. And like The Boz, many of us are guilty of giving in and playing Alan's games. I know I have on numerous occasions found myself wanting to give Alan the benefit of the doubt. But time after time....dozens of times of the same crap really boils down to this: Alan is either the biggest idiot, I have encountered in my time on earth or the biggest troll. There can be no in between.

Let me be clear: I'm not neutral at all. I'm giving my opinions as a forum member.

Do your own research first. Find another real journalist to arbitrate it. Mendelson is the only one here with those degrees and work experiences?

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/oct...media-20101006

Looks like he and the others there performed their consumer journalism duties too well. The sponsors for their shows dried up. There are no online complaints directed at Mendelson, let alone of the natures of yours above.

If you want to make claims about gambling income, prowess, etc, here, you had better be prepared to back it up with substantial visible and concurrent proofs, or write your own successful name books to make more money than you ever dreamed of. Unless this site is going the way of the other dinosaurs. Why wither away ad nauseuam on some two-bit gambling forum?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Yung

If you want to make claims about gambling income, prowess, etc, here, you had better be prepared to back it up with substantial visible and concurrent proofs

---

Here we go again. This is asinine! This is an internet message board. No one is on trial. No one has to prove anything! You are free to believe what you like. You are not free to require proof of anything. And you shouldn't need "proof". You should be able to figure out who knows what they are talking about and who is just talking. If you can't....that's your issue.

And quite frankly it is this very mentality that keeps many successful players from participating on these kinds of sites. We are finally getting some good successful AP's joining. Let's not go backwards with this kangaroo court mentality demand proof of everything they share.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

We are finally getting some good successful AP's joining.

---

To talk about stuff they can't or shouldn't talk about? Stuff everyone knows in form or degree in casinos. Don't ask me to prove it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Yung

Do your own research first. Find another real journalist to arbitrate it. Mendelson is the only one here with those degrees and work experiences?

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/oct...media-20101006

Looks like he and the others there performed their consumer journalism duties too well. The sponsors for their shows dried up. There are no online complaints directed at Mendelson, let alone of the natures of yours above.

If you want to make claims about gambling income, prowess, etc, here, you had better be prepared to back it up with substantial visible and concurrent proofs, or write your own successful name books to make more money than you ever dreamed of. Unless this site is going the way of the other dinosaurs. Why wither away ad nauseuam on some two-bit gambling forum?

---

Then take your own advice and leave.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Yung

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

We are finally getting some good successful AP's joining.

---

To talk about stuff they can't or shouldn't talk about? Stuff everyone knows in form or degree in casinos. Don't ask me to prove it.

---

Then don't ask anyone else to prove anthing.

Redietz, sorry to hear you left this forum. I always enjoyed reading your posts and we had some discussions in the past about old scamdicappers.

Hopefully you return and don’t let someone ruin your experience posting.

Thanks, Boz. I have some issues with both Mr. Mendelson, who basically implied that I was a scamdicapper in multiple posts, which is okay except for the fact I sent him reading material demonstrating the opposite, which of course he failed to read. I also have issues with LarryS and his holier than thou subjective proclamations regarding world and personal values, which I find comical.

If I uncover anything to report of value, I'll PM and try to keep you informed. I managed a Georgia to win the SEC at 9-1 and to win the whole shebang at 45-1 this year. In the interests of fair and balanced reporting, I blew a smaller wager on Washington State at 115-1 to win the whole shebang, also. Finished tied for third in the Wise Guys, which would have been a good thing if I hadn't led it for two months. Had Alabama covered in the title game, I would have won. Anyway, I'll PM if anything good comes up. We already have some ideas for next college season, but we'll sit on those awhile.

Thanks for the kind words.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Yung

Do your own research first. Find another real journalist to arbitrate it. Mendelson is the only one here with those degrees and work experiences?

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/oct...media-20101006

Looks like he and the others there performed their consumer journalism duties too well. The sponsors for their shows dried up. There are no online complaints directed at Mendelson, let alone of the natures of yours above.

If you want to make claims about gambling income, prowess, etc, here, you had better be prepared to back it up with substantial visible and concurrent proofs, or write your own successful name books to make more money than you ever dreamed of. Unless this site is going the way of the other dinosaurs. Why wither away ad nauseuam on some two-bit gambling forum?

---

Then take your own advice and leave.

---

That you interpret my words to ask or demand people to leave is quite strange. You don't seem to be able to take a joke either. You.

People can post up all the great results in the world, but that means even less than (theoretical) positive expectation. No-proof equates well with a bunch of BS, assuming the worst even if hoping for the best. Best left to PM's.

I'm a little confused over proving things on this forum. I keep reading criticisms over those who ask for proof saying how no one has to prove anything because we can all make up our own minds, but in another thread the same person saying this says the APs here have proven that they are winners. I'd be interested in where I can go to view this.

I consider myself a blackjack ap who only plays with an edge. I'm ahead, but I can't prove that I am and I wouldn't even know how to do that even if I chose to. How have others here provided proof?

I looked up Alan M. and find he is a real person. Is anyone else here posting under a real name? That alone suggests he would have much more credibility than he seems to be getting credit for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by girlfriday

I consider myself a blackjack ap who only plays with an edge. I'm ahead, but I can't prove that I am and I wouldn't even know how to do that even if I chose to.

---

Post screenshots of your win/loss statements for the years that you played.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by girlfriday

I looked up Alan M. and find he is a real person. Is anyone else here posting under a real name? That alone suggests he would have much more credibility than he seems to be getting credit for.

---

Really?

Why is that, pray tell?

When the contents of one's posts make him seem like a complete bozo should we disregard this because we know their identity?

You obviously haven't met many narcissists, girlfriday.

Hang around, and educate yourself.

MisterV has been battling me since the days of rec.gambling.craps in the late 1990s. I expect nothing less than his continued attacks and criticisms.

Who has the problem?

Perhaps Alan, but there is no hatred involved, at least on my end.

I look at you as the goofy little brother who ate cereal with a fork.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by girlfriday

I looked up Alan M. and find he is a real person. Is anyone else here posting under a real name? That alone suggests he would have much more credibility than he seems to be getting credit for.

---

Really?

Why is that, pray tell?

When the contents of one's posts make him seem like a complete bozo should we disregard this because we know their identity?

You obviously haven't met many narcissists, girlfriday.

Hang around, and educate yourself.

---

A lot of psychology in this post. On the surface, say, without knowing its author, it doesn't look that different from johno's stuff. If we dig a bit deeper, consider some of his other posts, it appears to me that MisterV has a disliking for a particular type of person. And that would be others who seek justice in more outright and simple ways than he. Versus, of course, the free-wheeling potential baloney of the advantage players (AP's). Just my guess, as there isn't anything to prove here. Could have something to do with his simplistically overbearing stance on atheism. Could.