The Reinstate Argentino Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Singerwelsher plays Triple Bonus Poker Plus, a very high variance game. At least that's what he has said he plays. It comes in various payback percentages. He says his tactics--Singerwelsher uses tactics, not a system--works on all the payscales.

---

Yes there are other games he plays but his PRIMARY GAME is 8/5 Bonus. He also plays Triple Double Bonus.

Instead of guessing or making things up watch the videos or ask.

---

Alan, Singerwelsher doesn't play for Four Aces that pay only 80 for 1 and Small Quads that pay only 40 for 1. That 99.8% that he listed? Guess what that is. It's 9/5 Triple Bonus Poker Plus. 8/5 is 98.7%. 7/5 is 97.7% and 6/5 is 96.7%. Singerwelsher has said he can beat all these payscales. When he says he can beat these payscales he is talking about the future, not the past.

And that 99.8% game is rare.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Mickeycrimm when Rob is allowed to post he will tell you his primary game is 8/5 Bonus but if you watched my videos you'd see he says it there. And -- brace yourself mickeycrimm -- I've been talking to Rob for the last 24 hours so I'm telling you the truth. In fact Rob just texted me this:

"Where did this "fail point" come from? For my strategy, there was never a need to figure one because the pay tables I play are all between 98% & 99.8%, and I can easily win consistently on those.
Such a stupid question.@"

---

I've watched some of those videos but not all. They're so stupid I can't sit through them. Not just Singerwelsher but you too. That goofball stuff about breaking up 3 Queens for a 3 card royal....and hitting the royal? Singerwelsher uses the result to justify his actions. Goofball, goofball, goofball.

Here's some advice for you, Alan. I once held a pair of tens and hit the draw button at the exact same time I seen the 3 card royal in the hand. To late! I had held a pair of tens over a 3 card royal. Out came the other two tens for four of a kind. So because of my result, Alan, I'm advising you to hold a pair of tens or any other low pair over a 3-card royal. You'll hit quads. Get my drift?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Why'd you sell the forum?

---

Because I didn't want to deal with the same controversies we see today.

Dan has an interesting way of handling it, however. For the most part he does nothing and lets the forum run amok. This is why visitor traffic is off more than 60% and he lost the posters he had before.

---

Do you read his PFA site? This site is very tame compared to that place.

A persons lifestyle speaks volumes of their success.

John patrick has written many books had hundreds of seminars, had a cable TV show during the height of atlantic city interest in the 80's. He wrote a book 15 years ago about about 21st century blackjack where he claimed on his website in posts that he came up with a new BS that brought the house advantage to zero. Yet after all that he lived with his mommy most of adult life, and even followed her when she moved to FLa.......and is still in what he calls "hades" in lutz fla. Hasnt been to vegas in a dozen years . After all the other income from the tv shows, seminars, books, dvds, tapes....plus all his winnings by playing his "systems"....he is in lutz fla moaning that its a rat hole. Like I said....life style speaks of success.

There was a guy at the Meadowlands track that sold his tout sheets(25 years ago)....he didnt personally sell them..they were there on cheap xeroxed pages to buy when you bouight the programs from the girl at the desk. But once a month the meadowlands let him have a small stage and give his picks and promote his sheets. He said that he lived at the track and was there early mornings for workouts, and knows the trainers and horses inside out.
Onr day I am getting gas, and I see him.He has a 15 year old car held together literally with duck tape. Rusted. filthy. And thisis the best he can do with all his success?
Again....lifestyle tells the story of success

So to me Singer is no different than Patrick with his "methods" and the race guy with his inside "knowledge".......Is he well off living the good life?..after all these years of accumulating wealth from his "methods"? For someone who has it figured out..why is he on message board after message board looking for someone to believe him. Why isnt he just saying "fuck it" as he collects his money, and lays on a beach drinking pina coladas.

And if anyone hasnt noticed.....we live in the internet age. There are no secrets. Once his methods are known and verified....there would be testimonials by thousands of people. All other videopoker books would be rendered obsolete....Just as the new BS by patrick would render the old BS obsolete had it been verifiable.

everyones got a system...but no one seems to win.

I have been surprised at the rather high profile Patrick has with some people. Everybody I grew up with or knew dismissed him immediately and treated him as a joke. There were never debates about his merits after people watched a video or two. But I guess I grew up with some cynical, relatively experienced people. I can't imagine anyone taking his stuff seriously.

Regarding the lifestyle stuff, I remember Argentino making claims of "having" a Hellcat. Never really stated that he "owned" it, mind you, just that he "had" it. Not sure what happened to it. I'll try to figure out how to post some photos of me and my local ride. I don't own the thing, but if I were trying to make an impression by misrepresenting myself, this car would do the trick.

I'm going to reinstate him now, but he will be restricted to post only in this thread and the other recent Singer thread.

I will delete any posts of his anywhere else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Why'd you sell the forum?

---

Because I didn't want to deal with the same controversies we see today.

Dan has an interesting way of handling it, however. For the most part he does nothing and lets the forum run amok. This is why visitor traffic is off more than 60% and he lost the posters he had before.

---

Traffic isn't down.

It has the best Alexa ranking that it's ever had: https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/vegascasinotalk.com

It would be funny if Singer blew everyone here off and didn't post a damned thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lAY-rRRa4o

MisterV that's my thought. Why should he bother when there is the likes of mickeycrimm telling us how Singer really plays. LOL

Singer watched me play years ago when I shot some of those videos. My card was in the machine. And Rob corrected me when I made a mistake with BASIC CONVENTIONAL STRATEGY. Never did he suggest a special play, and I was playing 8/5 $5 Bonus at Caesars.

I never saw Rob practice "witchcraft." And this will hurt you APs who claim you play +EV machines, but I wish I had always taken Rob's advice to quit when ahead.

What, quit gambling for good, or quitting just that session?

And if just that session, how would quitting a session at any particular time possibly have any affect on whether you win or lose during future sessions?

I'm cracking a smile right now but I'll wipe it off so some of you don't get too agitated. And to Dan, I'll follow your rules above. Also, aside from a post I made at the other forum that I'm copying and pasting below, I'm not gonna be responding to any of redietz' whacky foolishness. Several posters here have already done a nice job exposing his silly intentions, his non-stop self-advertisement and his weasel-wording people into getting in touch with him so he can try and sell them his picks like he does me EVERY SINGLE WEEK, his refusals to post anything he claims about himself, and they've taken him to extreme task for becoming the troll that he now is known for being. Nuff said.

I'll start off by correcting the latest uneducated assertions posted by mickey. He really should have heeded the words of Alan about which games I play. The strategy plays up to 300 credits on 8/5 BP (if available where I choose to play; if not, then 7/5 BP), then up to 100 credits on either (and in this order of choice) SDBP, TBP+, SABP, TDBP, DDBP, or DBP. I did not play TDBP much because of its non-availability early on, but these days when I can find it I will play it. Some of you remember my hits on it at $25 at Wynn and in Mississippi. And that is it. FPDW is not capable of winning according to my requirements. JoB is, as I have always said, a loser's point-accumulation game with ANY pay table--even the 10/6 the Strato had in the early 2000's.

This part has to do with the ongoing claims that there is "no way" I could be consistently winning--and be so far ahead--by only playing -EV vp games. Well, it has happened everybody, and it is still going on. It's just amazing to me that people who say they believe in math, believe in statistics, and say they understand how video poker works, to wholeheartedly agree that my play strategy can win "a session", you folks understand and agree that I actually do have a highly probable chance of winning that session (it's just under 85% in case you never read it before here)....yet for some odd reason that's never explained rationally, you make up that when I go back to play it again and again and again as individual sessions starting at my lowest denomination, now it has to lose! Why in the world do you want to keep thinking after one winning session the statistics suddenly have to stop working?

Here's a flash, and it's got to do with mathematics (even though likely few or none of you has any formal education in math or statistics): the Law of Large Numbers states that yes, if I continually play -EV games my results can expect to end up negative over a large amount of play. However, it also states that if a sample EVENT is built with and thru varying parameters within, even though that event is to be repeated many, many times, that single event remains a single event throughout all of its occurrences. What this says is what I've been trying to make people understand for years. My play strategy does not try to rewrite the math books. It does not ignore the math. It does not BEAT the math. What it DOES do is take one play session, apply strict regulation & purpose (bankroll, discipline, etc.), and when the opportunity is there it utilizes properly analyzed special plays that deviate from optimal strategy to increase the probability of good luck that may or may not be enough to end a session with the minimum or better win goal.

So when this is accomplished--and I believe most or all of you, as I said earlier, believe my strategy has a high probability of winning a single session--it is entirely capable of happening over and over and over again. Sure the big and other losing session appear....I just had one a few weeks ago at Boulder Station. But the many smaller winners and the sometimes large and very large winners far more than make up for the losses. It's a simple as that. When Kew keeps claiming how "impossible" it is for me to have won so much so consistently, and when Dan says how strange it is, people like this really don't understand the play and/or just can't get into the true reality of how statistics work. No it is not easy to understand and yes it is a method that is far more complex than simple optimal play. But as far as I know, it is the only way to consistently make money off of the vp machines.

Redietz keeps bringing up this so-called "fail point" as it relates to my game's pay tables. First, for him to ask this silly question shows how he has no idea what is involved in my strategy, he clearly has no interest in finding out, he wouldn't understand it anyway, and he doesn't want to so he can keep criticizing. For AP's, the fail point is 100%. They fail if they don't make money. For my strategy, it's an irrelevant statistic. It was predicated on certain games with certain win goals, and pay tables on games down to 98% are winners for me. It could be lower and most probably is, but it doesn't matter.

There's one funny point I'd like to bring up for my first time here--Kew's wonderful proclamation that his best day of the year was the day he lost $8800 because of how much "EV" he "accumulated" or something silly like that. So please tell us, exactly what can (or did) all those phantom bucks buy you? And if you're a real AP--which I have never believed you are esp. when your claim of being able to count 2 tables emerged and then changed to "count them but not accurately" as the tough questions appeared--what you said is the same thing as saying you were "due", which in AP lingo is the sign of a phony.

Here's a copy of a post I made "over there" that addresses the nonsense being asserted about me over here before Dan reinstated me. I know some of you just won't like it and will keep on making up dumb things and scenarios (he lives in his daughter's driveway stealing electricity/he's on welfare/etc.) and the lies will forever appear. But guess how much that means to me as we continue on....

Aside from Red's nonsense here, he seems to be placing a high degree of trust & credibility in these two single old men he shacks up with in Calif. Why? Because one's a CFO somewhere and one's a retired VP of Boeing. The funny part is, I'm a retired VP of Northrop Grumman. If past titles is all it takes to impress hypocrite redietz, I win that one hands down.

Now onto the guy you just KNOW sits at his computer picking his toes the better part of his 24 hr. days--LarryS. He compares me to some guy named Patrick, who he says "still lives with his mommy" in his declining years. IE, no life success, meaning Patrick's "systems" don't work. Larry further goes on to assert that if my VP play strategy made me so much money, why am I not "swimming in cash" along with all the "testimonials" on forums from others?

Already went thru some of this Larry 2 years ago. Most who play my strategy or something close to it, do so for fun and recreation at far lower levels than I do. There are a few who play as I do and they still report their results to me. But few if any would bother showing up at forums because they've seen the harassment others have gone thru for years. Or they're instantly accused of being me using an alias, which I never have without first identifying myself and why. In fact, 2 years ago you yourself did nothing but insult slingshot right here, after he kept trying to explain his success, his understanding, and why he chooses not to play at high limits.

To the "money" part. As "Rob Singer" I'm up as I said close to $1.4million over 18 years. But that's really peanuts compared to how much Rob Argentino earned in his last 18 years of work. As I said, I didn't start gambling until I saved the bankroll for my strategy, and until our retirement was fully funded.

Why am I not as you say "lying on the beach"? Because our "life of Riley" consists of travelling in either of two RV's between any of the 4 homes we bought with cash--3 for our children and one for us. We get about $100k in SS and pensions, and we withdraw between $3k & $7k/mo. from our retirement accounts. We do live well but we are not "wealthy". And tell redietz my Hennessey Hellcat Charger is at my home in S. Dakota.

So you see, your fantasy belief about successful gambling equating to a successful life really doesn't apply to me. It's the success THROUGHOUT life--along with leading a respectable life--that defines people. I happen to have two children and four grandchildren....and a wonderful wife of 39 years.

I did it right, and I did video poker right. Which, of course, because it's so distant from the socially inept lives of the vast majority of casino gamblers, causes tons of angst and endless envy whenever it comes to just about anything I say on forums.

And I love every minute of it

quahog, you lied. Never have I used my card when training or advising at a machine, and in fact, at least half of the time we do so with my money, and I've trained hundreds. Obviously, anything said on vp.com about me is going to be false. You just went with it because you wanted to--and still do. It's exactly the way everyone who can't stand my success reacts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

What, quit gambling for good, or quitting just that session?

And if just that session, how would quitting a session at any particular time possibly have any affect on whether you win or lose during future sessions?

---

I'll help you with this. You quit a session, and it has zero to do with the next. Just as one hand has zero to do with any that have come before it or are yet to come.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Boz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Redietz you're now the biggest troll on the Internet. Congratulations.

---

What part was he wrong about regarding Singers playing style? Taking all the personal stuff out if it, he makes the points and questions that have been asked for years, yet have never been answered.

Simpler to call him a troll.

---

This is special. One of a number of almost all WoV rejects still reeling for how I humiliated Wizard and Math Extremist years ago by them running and hiding when I offered to bet them on the results of 10 of my sessions. Typical of WoVers--all mouth. Nearly all of them are anonymous armchair gamblers who find safety behind their keyboards spewing bs. BTW, weren't you one of the fools that gave Mike money after he begged for it?

BTW Dan for your record, I've been told and have read some that 2 or 3 posters who came here after I was banned, were assumed to be me. They weren't. I have computers in 3 states, inside 2 RV's, and I have several smartphones. It makes no sense that I wouldn't figure a way around whatever system is in place, I wouldn't do it anyway, and my time is much more valuable than that. I do know the person who posted that lives here in Az., but nothing came from me. I would check to see what mickey has to do with any of this. This stuff's his whole life.

The only one of Argentino's many fascinating statements I wish to correct is the one where he says that I am calling him every week to sell him something. That's a really weird blatant lie.

I have never done phone solicitation in my life. Never. Not once. Not when I started at 21. Not in the 40 years since. And I certainly never called Argentino.

So whatever the truth value of Argentino's other statements, I have to call him out as baldly lying for some blessed reason about that one. Maybe it's an attempt to procure my phone number to check against whatever number's calling him. I have no idea what the rationale is, but it's an odd thing to throw out there in his first post because it almost assuredly requires me to respond.

If anyone has any theories as to why he would claim this, now's the time to let me know.

Why?

To agitate.

Inflame.

Instill ire.

Same as it ever was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

The only one of Argentino's many fascinating statements I wish to correct is the one where he says that I am calling him every week to sell him something. That's a really weird blatant lie.

I have never done phone solicitation in my life. Never. Not once. Not when I started at 21. Not in the 40 years since. And I certainly never called Argentino.

So whatever the truth value of Argentino's other statements, I have to call him out as baldly lying for some blessed reason about that one. Maybe it's an attempt to procure my phone number to check against whatever number's calling him. I have no idea what the rationale is, but it's an odd thing to throw out there in his first post because it almost assuredly requires me to respond.

If anyone has any theories as to why he would claim this, now's the time to let me know.

---

Would you mind quoting Rob's post where he allegedly says you call him? I can't seem to find it and since this is so crucial we should all see it.

The only reference to contact I saw was when Rob posted this:

"...so he can try and sell them his picks like he does me EVERY SINGLE WEEK,..."

There is no reference to a phone call or phone calls. Redietz might you use emails? Or ads sent to Rob through various websites?

Here is the full reference written by Rob and again I see nothing about phone calls:

" Several posters here have already done a nice job exposing his silly intentions, his non-stop self-advertisement and his weasel-wording people into getting in touch with him so he can try and sell them his picks like he does me EVERY SINGLE WEEK, his refusals to post anything he claims about himself, and they've taken him to extreme task for becoming the troll that he now is known for being. Nuff said. "

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

The only one of Argentino's many fascinating statements I wish to correct is the one where he says that I am calling him every week to sell him something. That's a really weird blatant lie.

I have never done phone solicitation in my life. Never. Not once. Not when I started at 21. Not in the 40 years since. And I certainly never called Argentino.

So whatever the truth value of Argentino's other statements, I have to call him out as baldly lying for some blessed reason about that one. Maybe it's an attempt to procure my phone number to check against whatever number's calling him. I have no idea what the rationale is, but it's an odd thing to throw out there in his first post because it almost assuredly requires me to respond.

If anyone has any theories as to why he would claim this, now's the time to let me know.

---

Would you mind quoting Rob's post where he allegedly says you call him? I can't seem to find it and since this is so crucial we should all see it.

The only reference to contact I saw was when Rob posted this:

"...so he can try and sell them his picks like he does me EVERY SINGLE WEEK,..."

There is no reference to a phone call or phone calls. Redietz might you use emails? Or ads sent to Rob through various websites?

Here is the full reference written by Rob and again I see nothing about phone calls:

" Several posters here have already done a nice job exposing his silly intentions, his non-stop self-advertisement and his weasel-wording people into getting in touch with him so he can try and sell them his picks like he does me EVERY SINGLE WEEK, his refusals to post anything he claims about himself, and they've taken him to extreme task for becoming the troll that he now is known for being. Nuff said. "

---

In the GF exchange between us over on www.gamblingforums.com, Argentino mentions that I am texting him. I am not. It made me feel like there is a real mental issue with Argentino.

I have not emailed anyone any ads. I don't do bulk email ads, or individual email ads. I did not advertise "through various websites." I did not advertise at all this past season. I haven't advertised at all in roughly a decade.

What is really bizarre is that Argentino says I am trying to sell him picks "EVERY SINGLE WEEK." That is really, really strange for reasons that are obvious to anyone who knows me.

It's pretty weird for someone who gets reinstated to immediately lie about something like this.

It's even stranger when Argentino doesn't reply, but Mr. Mendelson is first at bat. Since Mr. Mendelson was, by his own admission, in touch with Argentino during the last 24 hours, I would think he was aware of the GF exchange and the texting comments.

Argentino comes back, and in his first post lies about something like this. What a credible dude. And as hot as Argentino was to post when he returned, when I call him out on this lie, there is no response from him. Just from Mr. Mendelson. Obviously, if Argentino had ads or emails from me soliciting him, they would have been posted already. Very strange. Why lie when you're going to be called on it? Maybe something is really wrong with Argentino. Or it's tough to deviate from SOP.

Really redietz, you don't email, you don't text, you don't advertise? And of course you don't promote yourself on websites, right?

You are amazing.