If you believe those 2 retards, I have swamp land on Pluto to sell you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Printable View
If you believe those 2 retards, I have swamp land on Pluto to sell you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Monet quit now! Kewlj says so.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
When will you start calling Monet a retard too?Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjbIf you believe those 2 retards, I have swamp land on Pluto to sell you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
You don't read do you Alan. We don't know whether monet's plays are -EV or +EV. It appears he is looking for and getting odds on parlays that may make his wagers +EV. Only he can tell us for sure if that is the case long-term. Michael Shackleford does a lot of this during football season. They aren't so much handicapping any teams as putting together teams and odds in a parlay that may make the play +EV. So monet may very well be playing +EV. As a matter of fact, I suspect he is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonMonet quit now! Kewlj says so.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Your feet are firmly planted in quicksand.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJYou don't read do you Alan. We don't know whether monet's plays are -EV or +EV. It appears he is looking for and getting odds on parlays that may make his wagers +EV. Only he can tell us for sure if that is the case long-term. Michael Shackleford does a lot of this during football season. They aren't so much handicapping any teams as putting together teams and odds in a parlay that may make the play +EV. So monet may very well be playing +EV. As a matter of fact, I suspect he is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonMonet quit now! Kewlj says so.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonYour feet are firmly planted in quicksand.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJYou don't read do you Alan. We don't know whether monet's plays are -EV or +EV. It appears he is looking for and getting odds on parlays that may make his wagers +EV. Only he can tell us for sure if that is the case long-term. Michael Shackleford does a lot of this during football season. They aren't so much handicapping any teams as putting together teams and odds in a parlay that may make the play +EV. So monet may very well be playing +EV. As a matter of fact, I suspect he is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
You can't really put a negative EV or positive EV label on monet because you can't cleanly quantify how good he is at what he's doing. He may be massively expert, which means whatever type of hockey bet he makes, he's going to win long term. This isn't roulette or video poker or blackjack. An example -- 40 years ago, the Kentucky team doctor bet Indiana against Kentucky. Describing what he did as negative or positive EV is missing the point. He was expert because of what he knew. He wasn't a "lock" to win the game, but he had a helluva good chance. Applying math labels to what he did is missing the gist of what he did.
Language is important. I've argued that monet betting parlays is non-optimal, but it's non-optimal FOR MONET. Non-optimal has nothing to do with negative EV or positive EV. It's just a statement that, long term, you could do better.
Just incase you guys missed it the Wild won 6-3 and the Capitals won 2-0.
Fun.
Play Again Tomorrow.
I love it at the book.
Song Reco Below.
Sorry tableplay... this is the wrong thread but you know.
Fucking Hockey... the best sport in the world where Fighting is actually allowed and scored LOL!!
You can literally get a Gordie Howe Hat Trick and its celebrated!!!!
Welp, I have to give redietz credit here.
I even have to type redietz this time even though I want to use his other title.
He seems to be the only one who understands that betting sports is different per the individual.
He wants me to wager large amounts on straight bets but that shit hurts when you go 0-6 or 1-6 on the day.
IMO both mechanics can work and he may very well be right that parlay betting is less optimal.
Who gives a shit!?
Let's have some fun and bet some NHL, MLB and NFL!!!
I ain't Fucking around with College Anything or the BLMNBA.
unJon is making me a believer in MMA though.
Can't wait for his next prediction.
You guys do what you want.
I'm not forcing anyone to do anything with their money.
I'm here for entertainment purposes and I hope I am entertaining most of you.
You all can donate to my GoFuckMe Page if you like though.
Mission146 has a queer sister incase you didn't know.
You guys won't believe this shit but NHL games on Saturday are different compared to Weeknights.
And Sundays are a completely different animal.
Figure that statement out!
The problem you squares have is Vision.
It's a Vision Problem.
Confused Yet?
Unless you're jbjb finding weak spots with 125% or better returns you better get some Vision.
When you guys can actually understand the difference between Tom Wilson, Sid the Kid and Evander Kane we might be able to connect.
Ozzy Excluded as he obviously follows this shit.
Oh incase you didn't know... each arena is different... the boards and ice are different and so is the weather.
You think outside weather doesn't make a difference to indoor ice hockey?
Do you guys even understand how line changes work?
Bah... whatever... leave me alone alligator.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxJvrD80nJ4
I don't understand what everyone's problem is!?
97% of players in Vegas Casinos are ahead off the jump each individual session.
How are you all not Multi-Millionaires?
Quote:
Originally Posted by monet
tableplay understands.
Ahhh the pop bumpers... classic!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0KqEZ2UC5M
This game is a lot of fun. No wonder 13,750 units were made (compare this to runs of 3500 machines or so for the games of the 2000s ).Quote:
Originally Posted by monet
Rogan on Tyson's podcast (I'm going to listen to it now so no opinion on it):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZtC_Arlxjg
I wonder if Face from WOV is okay. He last visited over a year ago and hasn't posted in almost two years. :(
But redietz, kew just said that he suspects monet is in fact playing these parlays at +EV! Then YOU come along and tell us it isn't correct to label monet's parlays in such a way. Are you unwilling to directly & personally slap the serial-lying little bitch down here?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonYour feet are firmly planted in quicksand.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
You can't really put a negative EV or positive EV label on monet because you can't cleanly quantify how good he is at what he's doing. He may be massively expert, which means whatever type of hockey bet he makes, he's going to win long term. This isn't roulette or video poker or blackjack. An example -- 40 years ago, the Kentucky team doctor bet Indiana against Kentucky. Describing what he did as negative or positive EV is missing the point. He was expert because of what he knew. He wasn't a "lock" to win the game, but he had a helluva good chance. Applying math labels to what he did is missing the gist of what he did.
Language is important. I've argued that monet betting parlays is non-optimal, but it's non-optimal FOR MONET. Non-optimal has nothing to do with negative EV or positive EV. It's just a statement that, long term, you could do better.
If you've followed monet's pics and betting patterns you'd see that he makes a LOT of bets. His VP play is rarely if ever of the +EV variety, and I believe he simply enjoys playing machines, betting sports, and he has the cash to do it frequently. And thank goodness he hasn't followed your "it's not optimal to bet parlays" advice.
Then you go deeper down that rabbit hole by claiming "parlay betting has nothing to do with mathematics". Do you want to rethink that? Or are you trying to squirt out the notion that parlays are more a product of that complex but very capable computer attached to your neck?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerBut redietz, kew just said that he suspects monet is in fact playing these parlays at +EV! Then YOU come along and tell us it isn't correct to label monet's parlays in such a way. Are you unwilling to directly & personally slap the serial-lying little bitch down here?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
You can't really put a negative EV or positive EV label on monet because you can't cleanly quantify how good he is at what he's doing. He may be massively expert, which means whatever type of hockey bet he makes, he's going to win long term. This isn't roulette or video poker or blackjack. An example -- 40 years ago, the Kentucky team doctor bet Indiana against Kentucky. Describing what he did as negative or positive EV is missing the point. He was expert because of what he knew. He wasn't a "lock" to win the game, but he had a helluva good chance. Applying math labels to what he did is missing the gist of what he did.
Language is important. I've argued that monet betting parlays is non-optimal, but it's non-optimal FOR MONET. Non-optimal has nothing to do with negative EV or positive EV. It's just a statement that, long term, you could do better.
If you've followed monet's pics and betting patterns you'd see that he makes a LOT of bets. His VP play is rarely if ever of the +EV variety, and I believe he simply enjoys playing machines, betting sports, and he has the cash to do it frequently. And thank goodness he hasn't followed your "it's not optimal to bet parlays" advice.
Then you go deeper down that rabbit hole by claiming "parlay betting has nothing to do with mathematics". Do you want to rethink that? Or are you trying to squirt out the notion that parlays are more a product of that complex but very capable computer attached to your neck?
If Rob.Singer can provide the post of me saying "parlay betting has nothing to do with mathematics," I will send him my entire net worth tomorrow, including my beloved comic book collection. This is what makes debating anything with him a waste of time. He direct quotes things that have never been said and acts as if his putting things in quotes means they've actually been said.
Of course, if I'd actually said it, he would have lifted the piece from a post. So the quotation marks are actually a tipoff that nothing of the kind has been said.
As for the "thank goodness" line regarding monet, that's nonsensical. If monet bets one $1200 parlay a day, and monet knows this better than anyone, those winnings could go out the window inside of six months. And frankly, after a 130K hit, it takes some discipline to bet just $1200 in parlays per day. Or perhaps conversely, monet is like me and tightens things up after a big score.
Tightening up? Is that anything like quitting when ahead?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Just more proof you are as good at giving it as good as you take it. You stir the pot and then cry when someone attacks you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonTightening up? Is that anything like quitting when ahead?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
If you still worked in journalism, you would be a perfect fit at CNN.
THANK YOU!!Quote:
Originally Posted by The BozJust more proof you are as good at giving it as good as you take it. You stir the pot and then cry when someone attacks you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonTightening up? Is that anything like quitting when ahead?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
If you still worked in journalism, you would be a perfect fit at CNN.
"Applying math labels to what he did is missing the gist of what he did".Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerBut redietz, kew just said that he suspects monet is in fact playing these parlays at +EV! Then YOU come along and tell us it isn't correct to label monet's parlays in such a way. Are you unwilling to directly & personally slap the serial-lying little bitch down here?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
If you've followed monet's pics and betting patterns you'd see that he makes a LOT of bets. His VP play is rarely if ever of the +EV variety, and I believe he simply enjoys playing machines, betting sports, and he has the cash to do it frequently. And thank goodness he hasn't followed your "it's not optimal to bet parlays" advice.
Then you go deeper down that rabbit hole by claiming "parlay betting has nothing to do with mathematics". Do you want to rethink that? Or are you trying to squirt out the notion that parlays are more a product of that complex but very capable computer attached to your neck?
If Rob.Singer can provide the post of me saying "parlay betting has nothing to do with mathematics," I will send him my entire net worth tomorrow, including my beloved comic book collection. This is what makes debating anything with him a waste of time. He direct quotes things that have never been said and acts as if his putting things in quotes means they've actually been said.
Of course, if I'd actually said it, he would have lifted the piece from a post. So the quotation marks are actually a tipoff that nothing of the kind has been said. .
Since I don't speak Martian I simplified your obviously regrettable statement. Nor was I attempting to debate you. That would be pointless, since whenever anyone does so we get a serving-and-a-half of what you claim to have done 20-40 years ago along with how you "know someone or have a 3rd cousin twice removed" who will swear you are right on a stack of MSNBC fake CV's.
A degenerate gambler had been on a long losing streak. He was at the end of his rope. He was in hoc to the bookies up to his neck. He called his cousin who was the Kentucky team doctor.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
He said, "Look cuz, I've lost my ass. I need a good bet to get out of debt with the bookies or they are going to kill me."
"Can't really help you" said the Kentucky team doctor.
"Aw, c'mon cuz! I'm desperate. Anything. Anything at all to get me out of this spot. Puhlease!!!"
"Well, okay" said his cuz. "I'm not really supposed to let this information out so you have to keep it under your hat. We're favored by 13 points against Indiana tonight. But 4 of our starters just came down with the flu. We'll probably get beat by 13 points."
Ok, thank you, thank you, thank you cuz!" said the gambler. "Man, I owe you a big one for that information. This is what I've been waiting for!!! It's huge!! Thank you, thank you, again cuz.
"Oh, by the way" said the gambler to the Kentucky team doctor "Do you know a good team I can parlay this to?"
Alan, what do you do all those times you don't get ahead so can't quit ahead. You only have one option, right. Quit while behind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
So you either pause while ahead or pause while behind.
Which one do you do the most of?
I had a problem. I always went for the big win or an even bigger win. Even when I hit my three $100k royals. Obviously I finished with healthy profits those weekends when I hit $100k or more.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmAlan, what do you do all those times you don't get ahead so can't quit ahead. You only have one option, right. Quit while behind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
So you either pause while ahead or pause while behind.
Which one do you do the most of?
But there were many weekends I was up maybe $600 and didnt quit. Those were the weekends I lost.
Looking back -- that rear view mirror is 20/20 -- I know now I could have locked up many more winning trips but didnt. Greed kills.
Now I know better.
No gambling problem to see here folks.....LOL......move along now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Who wants to bankroll Alan for a second chance using the knowledge gained from past mistakes?......holy shit,,, my sides hurt from thinking about it :D
This site has been GOAT this month.
I know right! Maxpen, since you claim not to follow along at WoV anymore, several months ago I was suspended, when I said something about Alan being a gambling addict. I forget the exact term I used, but I really wasn't trying to be mean. I sort of assumed it was common knowledge by everything he posts, all the complete voodoo nonsense he believes, let alone the "incident" here with his son.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPenNo gambling problem to see here folks.....LOL......move along now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Kewlj I'm a recreational player. I don't believe in voodoo nonsense. In fact, when I play I play knowing the casino has an edge on EVERY bet I make. AND THAT INCLUDES THE FREE ODDS AT CRAPS because I know the odds bet is linked to the -EV of the passline bet.
Now, why don't you explain to us why you state you're always going to be a net winner?
After a full morning at the hospital I need a good laugh.
I found an AmericanCasinoGuide article by John Growchowski on the chances of being ahead after two hours (1200 hands) at 9/6 Jacks or Better and Double Double Bonus.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don PerignomThanks for the response, but you're arguing the odds of finishing a session ahead. Yes?Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
This discussion is about being ahead at any fleeting moment within the entire course of a session, hence the cumulative probabilities. If you don't achieve success on trial 1, you get another chance on trial 2, trial 3, etc.
9/6 Jacks = 34.54%
8/5 Jacks = 22.35%
7/5 Jacks = 17.19%
9/6 Double Double Bonus = 35.46%
8/5 Double Double Bonus = 30.75%
My guess is the simulation was run on Wolf Video Poker which I no longer have and is no longer available on the market. Jim Wolf went out of business.
Over what time frame, Alan? A session? a day? a week? (I am playing blackjack kind of sparingly at the moment), a month? a year?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Over shorter terms I am NOT always a winner and have shared many, many of those experiences. Bad losing sessions. Bad losing days. A bad losing weekend in Reno last fall. Even months into weeks of losing. In the covid shortened year of 2020, I was in the red most of the year until I pulled slightly ahead late in the year, still finishing way, way below expectation.
So I lose in the short-term and I believe I have shared those experiences like few other players. But as we get into the long-term, and I don't know exactly what constitutes long-term in blackjack. I believe it is 50,000 rounds or so, maybe a little more, I will win because I am playing with an advantage and that advantage manifests itself when you hit the long-term (enough trials). That is the math of it!
You know what AP's don't lose kew? The ones who don't blab anything about their results. The ones who don't feel the need to give details of things after someone doubts their integrity. The ones who never talk about losing this much or that much, who just like clockwork ALWAYS claim how they "came all the way back and more" after shocking the world with information about how far behind the "just were". The ones who so desperately seek relevance and attention, because they know how often they get caught lying. The ones who choose to concoct a successful virtual world because they are failures in the real world.
So Rob you would rather that APs not share anything. You just don't care to hear about players that play by the math and win. That is your big issue...you just don't want to hear about it? :confused:
Well sure, of course you did: so do I.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
That's why we play higher limit slots, to experience the thrill of a big score.
The key is to take your shots and if you fail, leave, having only used up your allotted bankroll.
I hope I never get to the point where I can only afford to play quarter slots; that would be like having to swap a hot model for a crack whore as a bed partner.
Hands down the best video poker software ever made IMHO. Anyway 70% of casino players don't play video poker, let alone 9/6 Jacks. That's why the casino floor is filled with slots mostly these days with a sprinkling of cards tables and VP as you know.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I LOL'd. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Btw, you recently wrote that you hung out at funerals with Sheldon Adelson. Do you have any funny stories about him, or should I wait for your autobiography?
Not sure who this was directed toward. I'm not at my desk, but I think I only have Frugal VP software because I never purchased the Wolf product.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I have Frugal on thumb drives because you can't get it anymore. You can possibly lose it in a computer crash. Wolf is Frugal with more bells and whistles. When Wolf went out of business the software disappeared off my laptop. But that didn't happen to everyone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don PerignomNot sure who this was directed toward. I'm not at my desk, but I think I only have Frugal VP software because I never purchased the Wolf product.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
At one of the funerals he was having an interesting discussion about a new chandelier in the lobby of the Venetian. I stood there and listened as he was talking to another Sands exec. It was before the actual service started. Like Steve Wynn he was involved in every detail. Then we took our seats.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don PerignomI LOL'd. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Btw, you recently wrote that you hung out at funerals with Sheldon Adelson. Do you have any funny stories about him, or should I wait for your autobiography?
I can't say anything bad about him. He was a decent man. It was and still is a good family. I remain on good terms with them all.
I even got that ex wife and her boyfriend comped at Red Rock when they came in for a cousins Bat Mitzvah.
It was aimed at Tringlomane.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don PerignomNot sure who this was directed toward. I'm not at my desk, but I think I only have Frugal VP software because I never purchased the Wolf product.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Didn't that guy quit posting around 4 years ago ? If I recall he left around the same time as many other quality posters. When Rusty started to really show his true colours as a petty DICKtator.Quote:
Originally Posted by tableplayIt was aimed at Tringlomane.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don PerignomNot sure who this was directed toward. I'm not at my desk, but I think I only have Frugal VP software because I never purchased the Wolf product.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Every poster who disappears from gaming forums leave either because they died or went broke gambling.Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyDidn't that guy quit posting around 4 years ago ? If I recall he left around the same time as many other quality posters. When Rusty started to really show his true colours as a petty DICKtator.Quote:
Originally Posted by tableplayIt was aimed at Tringlomane.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Perignom
Ozzy, I am basing my comment (I'm not a regular WOV forum lurker) off of this VCT post:Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyDidn't that guy quit posting around 4 years ago ? If I recall he left around the same time as many other quality posters. When Rusty started to really show his true colours as a petty DICKtator.Quote:
Originally Posted by tableplayIt was aimed at Tringlomane.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Perignom
https://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/sh...l=1#post141252
which alludes to a post that Tringlomane made in 2013 (so you are probably right) back when Wolf Video Poker was still being sold online I believe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerEvery poster who disappears from gaming forums leave either because they died or went broke gambling.Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyDidn't that guy quit posting around 4 years ago ? If I recall he left around the same time as many other quality posters. When Rusty started to really show his true colours as a petty DICKtator.Quote:
Originally Posted by tableplay
Well, I didn't hear anything about Jerry Logan's death, so....
Jerry! Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerEvery poster who disappears from gaming forums leave either because they died or went broke gambling.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozzy
Well, I didn't hear anything about Jerry Logan's death, so....
Jerry is in Israel driving his Newell.
i imagine the rv-Newell ain't gonna give a cat much re-sales values, hey hey!
Nice. I cringed at some of Adelson's politics, but it's possible Mitt Romney's a really good guy when you get to know him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I don't think I would enjoy being rich and famous. I only want to be wealthy and obscure.
DO says he's gotten $150 in free play per day at the cost of $25 a week. That's rookie stuff. Pros are getting more then that in free play per week while winning money!!
This is the EXACT statement. Copied:Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
"I have obtained freeplay on players cards $150 a day seven days a week and it cost me $25 per card total!"
This is the greatest of all time casino accomplishment and needs to be preserved.
Wow, so cats what win well and regular continue to receive frees-play and comp? Better not let the kewl-J know about it, hey hey.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
Nothing but a wealth of information who is always willing to share!Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
jbjb, an AP among APs.
Kudos to you sir!
Nobody can beat your aces.
Dealers want you to "bet more to win more" so you'll foolishly TIP MORE!
18 yo liar is now making shit up about slot attendants telling players to keep wads of cash they find while crawling around on the floor.
a) that didn't happen
b) "He told me I could steal that money" isn't a valid criminal defense
Everyone, and mean everyone here has Alan figured out. Like Tasha he dreams of these things happening to him and puts thoughts and time into them. He dreams of finding a wad of cash and heading right the craps table to triple it. And he puts so much thought into it he already has justified his taking it.Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaewoo
It’s how he thinks at this point in his life after what gambling did to it.
Hey, at least he interviewed 4 Presidents. That and $1.25 will get him a 5 Credit max spin on a .25 VP machine.
What was the topics of the presidential interviews? Are we talking about legit sit down one on one interviews? Or is this more 18 yo bullshit? Usually it's big name reporters like Barbara Walters that got the interviews with the president in Alan's era from what I can remember. Alan like reporters would interview the vacuum repair shop owner about his Monday belt change specials.Quote:
Originally Posted by The BozEveryone, and mean everyone here has Alan figured out. Like Tasha he dreams of these things happening to him and puts thoughts and time into them. He dreams of finding a wad of cash and heading right the craps table to triple it. And he puts so much thought into it he already has justified his taking it.Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaewoo
It’s how he thinks at this point in his life after what gambling did to it.
Hey, at least he interviewed 4 Presidents. That and $1.25 will get him a 5 Credit max spin on a .25 VP machine.
When the President takes a trip to some part of the country, either campaigning or pushing for some legislature to be passed, they often get interviewed by a local reporter from that city or region in a public type of place like the farmer's market. Usually, it is just two or three questions. I suppose it is a feather in the cap type thing for the reporter, and that's ok, but Alan is making it sound like a "I have dined with Kings and Queens" type thing. :D
He said check with the White House. That implies he went there and signed in for his sit down with the President.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Probably just more turning 6 yos into 18...
Now since this is the WoV thread, there was a brand new member at WoV, started a thread about playing trying to hit quads (special plays) rather than play the most optimal plays. Included in his strategy was a reference to "quitting while ahead". When I compared his strategy to Rob Singer's progression strategy of playing less optimally, just trying to hit quads (especially as it gets later in the progression betting), the guy responded "that it sounds like Rob Singer is on to something" or something along those lines. :D
Just for good measure later in the thread, this "new" member began talking about how VP is not random, and that there were programing bugs that he looks for that can be exploited. The only think missing was any mention of machines "teleporting" information to him. :cool:
Rob must have drove past a Walmart recently, because it looks like he picked up some new "socks". :cool:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPenHe said check with the White House. That implies he went there and signed in for his sit down with the President.Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
I doubt it. If anything I would be more interested in what kind of clearance or background check was involved, although 40 years ago, probably not as much as today.
I'm thinking that in Nevada abandoned tickets or credits are the property of the casino. That's the way it is in Colorado where they have the strictest gaming regulations in the country. Offenders there are charged with petty theft against the casino.
Taking money from abandoned slot machines in Colorado.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...SGRs7trpjtDizB
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...5BtDujNZbEamMc
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...J8JaCzGKMGnOvA
You mean like the dozens of times you claim to rub elbows with and have Bob Nersesian on SPEED DIAL? :):)Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
BTW---I don't wear socks.... especially with my loafers. (Hope you can control yourself)
Just found the Nevada law in one of the articles. In 2011 Nevada passed a law that 25% of abandoned credits go to the casino, the rest goes to the state. Before that it was finders keepers.
I've heard that in Mississippi by law abandoned credits belong to the public.
Bob Nersesian is NOT the same as a President of the U.S., or a King or Queen of a country, although some of us do think very highly of him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerYou mean like the dozens of times you claim to rub elbows with and have Bob Nersesian on SPEED DIAL? :):)Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJ
Any serious AP, especial here in Vegas or who plays Vegas regularly would be wise to keep his number handy.
C'mon guys, Alan only deals with 18 consecutive snake-eyes!
Okay, I cannot believe I am defending Alan here, but so be it. I just do not understand why some of you are having a hard time with Alan having conducted the interviews he conducted.
First off, if Alan wanted to say that he had dined with kings and queens, he would have said he dined with kings and queens. And then some of you would have said it didn't count because it was catered. But the sheer Dragnet fact is he didn't say that he dined with kings and queens.
Sticking with a Dragnet "just the facts" presentation, Alan having interviewed four presidents implies, if not flat out states, several things:
1) He wasn't working for some podunk media outfits (back in my youth, I worked for several what the folks here would undoubtedly consider podunk papers).
2) Wherever he was working when he did the interviews, Alan was likely the flagship interviewer at that media outlet, otherwise he would not have gotten the assignments.
I have no problem saluting Alan's media status and achievements. Instead of trying workarounds to denigrate what he did, why not just acknowledge what he did?
There is an implied element of "I interviewed four presidents, and YOU DIDN'T," but guess what? Those are the facts. He didn't get to interview presidents by winning participation awards. He earned those interviews. You and I did not.
I have no idea why people have a hard time accepting what Alan did -- is it because he touts stops losses? That's really not a reason. Uri Geller rose to fame by fooling a handful of SRI physicists, the best in their field. Expertise in one arena does not translate into expertise in another. I think too many alleged APs think they have some kind of blanket gambling skill. Well, I'm here to tell you that, really, the idea that there is such a thing gets people into trouble more often than not.
People now question Alan's claims, no matter what they are, because of his unsubstantiated and frankly ridiculous claim of having witnessed a crapster roll eighteen yo's (elevens) in a row at Caesars.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
The odds against that, per the Wiz, are simply so astronomical as to be impossible in the real world.
And that's just it: does he inhabit, at least at times, an unreal world?
I doubt it: he's pretty sharp
No, I suspect he made the claim just to stir shit up and now he owns it, to his detriment.
If I say "I had dinner with the Easter Bunny and Santa at the north pole" any other claim I make would be suspect.
The flak he catches for it is a damned shame, as I believe Alan to be a good man.
Duplicate
I don't have a problem with his presidential reporting claims. I would just like some clarity as to what extent the interviews were. Extraordinary claims that can be widely interpreted deserve at least as much explanation as went into why counting two tables is impossible.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
A dumass like maxiepad don't have the comprehension to interpret anything. Get the nine inch out of your mouth long enough to get out there and stepandfetchit, poser pro.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPen
Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Nope, I’m not questioning Alan on the interview claims. But it has no validity towards his other claims.
RED, you can back up most of your claims over the years, Mick certainly can if put on the spot if he wanted to, KJ, JB and so many others could fit the right amount of money. Not sure why you would, but in 1000 years at a craps table, could Alan. And that’s why Alan is considered a joke.
Math, it’s a son of a bitch.
Let's remember, the claim is interviewed 4 different presidents. I would think any journalist interviewing a President would request a copy. Seems like it might be something you might want to show kids and grandkids. And according to Alan, he had 4 different opportunites at that.
But other than that I don't really care one way or the other except for how it came up. Contact matters! And the context of this was about 18 y.o.s in a row. Someone asked why, as a journalist he didn't seem to document and verify such a rare event. And Alan's answer was that he has seem and experienced it all, including interviewing 4 Presidents and a Queen. As if to say that gives 18 y.o.' claim credibility. Like you have to believe 18 y.o.s in a row because he has interviewed President. :confused:
I can help you with your dilemma.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPenI don't have a problem with his presidential reporting claims. I would just like some clarity as to what extent the interviews were. Extraordinary claims that can be widely interpreted deserve at least as much explanation as went into why counting two tables is impossible.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Kew never explained how counting two table is POSSIBLE, which would more appropriately align with your asking about Alan's presidential interviews. He ducked and weaved around the issue, each time more awkward than before, and when pressured he folded like a cheap lawn chair. First, he distanced himself from Alan when challenged to meet up and prove he could do it. And, when push came to shove, he downgraded his foolish claim to "gee guys, I really only meant it can be done when everything is perfect, which isn't that often, and then, it wouldn't be that accurate anyway".
Why is it impossible that kew could count two tables simultaneously?
1. He's not bright enough to run numbers that quickly thru his head.
2. He is completely incapable of hiding what he says he does from the casino.
3. He hasn't the temperament to accomplish any of it on any positive level.
4. His love for creating chaos and drama would overtake any event in the blink of an eye.
Actually, I DID explain it...over and over again. Anyone with half a functioning brain, I am sure understood it. You, Alan and a few other haters just refuse to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
The rest of your post is just typical grandpa sock puppet nonsense. You making up reason why I can't do this or that, just confirms that you know damn well I do. :cool:
More trying to lie your way out of another impossible situation you've created for yourself via concoction. Just like when you tried to weasel out by claiming "Alan's pictures are purposely blurry!" Followed up by saying how you "know" it can be done because "other unnamed pros do it" :)Quote:
Originally Posted by kewlJActually, I DID explain it...over and over again. Anyone with half a functioning brain, I am sure understood it. You, Alan and a few other haters just refuse to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
The rest of your post is just typical grandpa sock puppet nonsense. You making up reason why I can't do this or that, just confirms that you know damn well I do. :cool:
You're a bad excuse for a joke kew. Every forum you've ever been on releases that truth about your pathetic self.
My goodness, you are an angry OLD man. So you failed as an AP. It's not for everybody. :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by The BozQuote:
Originally Posted by redietz
Nope, I’m not questioning Alan on the interview claims. But it has no validity towards his other claims.
RED, you can back up most of your claims over the years, Mick certainly can if put on the spot if he wanted to, KJ, JB and so many others could fit the right amount of money. Not sure why you would, but in 1000 years at a craps table, could Alan. And that’s why Alan is considered a joke.
Math, it’s a son of a bitch.
The god of odds accepts no prayers, but he certainly takes donations.
Oh, I'm not defending Alan's stop loss ideas or various theoretical claims at all. As far as the 18 yo's goes, I've offered my thoughts before and nobody, including Alan, buys them, so I have no further ideas on that. What I said was that I believed Alan saw something highly unusual. It may not have been 18 due to miscount, but because Alan doesn't drink or do drugs, I do assume he was in the ballpark, maybe 12 or 13 or more, which is still impossible unless a pair of rigged dice was inserted accidentally into the equation, even though those rigged dice served no purpose for house or players. Rigged dice exist, Alan hasn't made any other claims of Venusians capturing him or his doing handstands for a mile or anything like that, so the chance that he is out and out lying on this is very small. The chance that 18 in a row happened with normal dice is basically impossible. So, to me, to quote Sherlock Holmes in The Sign of the Four, when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.
But for some reason nobody wants to consider the concept of rigged dice accidentally brought into play, including Alan.
Janet is out of the hospital. We're back in a Salt Lake City hotel near the hospital because she will still get daily check ups and treatments. She had a third bone marrow stem cell transplant infusion yesterday. We pray three times is the charm.
Redietz I don't dismiss rigged dice. But the stickman rattled the dice on the table at least twice and they appeared to be unweighted. And each time the dice were returned to the shooter I know the dice faces were turned.
Were they rigged dice? I don't know. But as I've said many times no one made a nickel betting yo.
Kewlj please... you never really explained how counting two tables at Treasure Island was possible.
Yes my pictures were blurry but what I tried to show was that the blackjack tables were in a straight line and when sitting in a middle seat it was impossible to see cards on the tables to your right or left because of the placement of the tables.
Further there were lips on the tables that obscured your view unless you had a bird's eye view.
Why TI? Because it was one of the casinos you mentioned.
You had an opportunity to meet me there and show me your ability. The blackjack pit was empty at 3am. No one would have bothered us.
And this angle of the tables, and the height of the lip, has nothing to do with seeing paint or pips at 100 feet. The angles made it impossible to see cards-- period.
How many times have I asked any forum member to SIT at a table at a casino to see for themselves? Only Redietz says he STOOD behind one table. Well, standing behind ain't the same as sitting at.
Honestly Kewlj you can't explain how it's done you've got to show how its done.
Now... I'll make a concession. If blackjack tables are grouped so there is a curve a middle seat player just might be able to see the cards at nearby tables. But watch that lip and the depression of the table surface... unless you have x-ray vision.
18yos. Totally routine occurrence.
Winning 99% of baccarat sessions over 3 years. Completely believable.
Using eyeballs in head to look between two tables.
UNPOSSIBLE!
He gets an A+ for consistently stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by jdaewoo
With that said. I am glad to hear of Janet's appearance of progress. May that continue. In the end that's all that really matters.
I too am delighted to hear of Janets progress and hope it continues.
Alan, I realize you are sitting in a room in Utah with nothing to do, but I am not going to rehash the whole tracking a second table thing for your entertainment. I will make this brief statement and then you are on your own.
In you quest to disprove me, you have bounced around from, 1) can't see the cards (too blurry), to 2) people blocking the table, to 3) this "lip" argument. The lip argument the most ridiculous of your attempts. Unless a players eyes were level with the table (which would have him sitting on the floor), this lip is just completely irrelevant. If the "lip" blocks anything at all it would be the lower portion of the players stack of chips, which are up against the edge. The playing surface, where the cards are dealt, is no where near the edge, nor effected by this lip. Even your blurry pictures showed this!
Of your arguments, the only one that holds ANY water at all, is players blocking the line of vision and I have always said "when conditions were right". I have even explained in detail just what the key seat was in each scenario. If that seat is occupied, conditions probably aren't right, although that depends on the exact set up and spacing of tables.
That is all I am going to say. You can re-hash to your hearts content.
All you had to do was show up at TI.
First, he's trying to keep his anonymity due to being a counter; were he to meet you, especially in a casino where his pic with you would be taken. that wish would be compromised.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Second and most importantly think back to when you were a kid and recall some of the taunts kids threw at each other; ever hear "I'll show you mine if you show me yours?"
Same same ... you should first show us how 18 yo's in a row were rolled before his duty to show you anything ripens.
BTW, good news about Janet.