Big Casino Wins and Jackpots

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Rob, I said it couldn't be verified. That's number one. The detailing of your system about how many hands are played at each level (denomination) are nebulous at best. It could all be one big fish tale.

You won, congratulations. But you are tooting your own horn like John Phillip Sousa's Marching Band but no one is joining your parade.

And quite frankly, if you won with only $500 left on the meter you escaped disaster by the skin of your teeth. Some system that is.

---

So explain what you mean by "verified". Maybe you could provide an example of how you've done that "#1" in the past. If you could do that then I could too, and your constant confusion would cease.

Sure I'll toot my horn when I hit these big winners and walk out with huge profits, and guess how much it matters if anyone else cares. :) So why not toot, especially when it irks the foolish critics. And it's no different doing that with $500, $5000, or nearly $10,000 bankroll left. To you it is, because you don't understand the strategy or how to leave with a minimum pre-determined win goal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Listen closely and become stupified by the sound of the pits falling in everyone's stomach....Now we'll have to endure the disappointed ones as they have no choice but to claim "amazing photoshopping skills " or "time travelling guru"or "we know he lost it all and more on the $100 machine, trying to be like Shirley Dancer". So much fun...

Is it any wonder all the envious & hateful critics skipped over this one? Well that won't happen now, as everyone--especially ARCI--can't let a post (or a picture....) go by written/posted by me without taking it in deeply. Even if it hurts :)

---

So lets give a totally embarrassed and humiliated "eddie" another opportunity to comment on that "doctored-up" $25 decal :) :) (yes, he deserves a double ridicule even though he's most likely used to guessing wrong in everyday life)

Rob, I know it must be getting bad in your lonely rusted out trailer since most everyone else here has been ignoring your stupid and false comments. You can only expect people to waste so much of their lives arguing with a low life like you. Arcimede$ has hung back, so has everyone else. The point is why bother? Everyone else on here still lives productive lives, while you dream shit up to troll others on this forum. Since you called me out for whatever reason, I'll bite. But we already know what will happen, don't we? I'm going to ask some hard questions, you'll lie and say you never read the post or just ignore them. So I'll post them for everyone else to read. At least that way if anybody was misguided enough to believe anything you had to say they won't now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

My wife likes all the cash, but she's getting tired of my leaving to play an unusual amount for me these days. So after tomorrow's one last session for at least 3 weeks

---

A quote from Feb. 22.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

. I got stuck playing 3 hours this time--my last for maybe a month.

---

A quote from Feb. 23.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

That said above, I myself found a way to make an unplanned trip to the casino today,

---

A quote from Feb. 28.

3 lies to start the post off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

A. If you can get arci, who made the challenge and said he would send Alan his tax forms, to actually do that, I'll do it too. Now what's the chance of him complying? Ha!--since he's already stalled more than a model T in a rainstorm and since he knows I've already seen 3 years' worth of his and they ain't as advertised

---

You never did elaborate on this lie Rob. You say you saw 3 years worth of arcimede$ taxes? I call bullsh!t on that too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

C. W2G's on these wins that make you and a few others squirm with envy, will be provided to Alan for posting as soon as he and everybody else posts theirs,

---

A Feb. 11 quote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Rob, I would gladly post my W2Gs of my big wins if you would, in turn, post your W2Gs of your big wins. But I don't think my W2Gs matter because after all, I am a net loser at video poker and I don't claim to be a big winner. I only play $5 VP games (and on a few rare occasions I played $10 and $25 when I had free play to do it for a very limited number of hands).

I have two progressive royals from several years ago at Rincon... both for about $36K and a few months apart... and I will post them here if you would in turn post your W2Gs from the $50K winner and the $100K winner. Post your answer, please.

Regarding the other points above:

A. I wanted to see your tax forms first before Arc sent in his -- and now I am asking both of you to have them sent to me. Let's see who does.

B. You've been promising that data for a long time and if you have it now you OWE it to us to make it available. As I offered to you before -- I will post it and ALL OF IT on my website at no charge if it will prove your claims. So send me the proof.

C. I responded to your W2G challenge above.

D. You'll never make it in the Diplomat Corps.

---

Alan's comments the next day which you all but ignored.

The other day Alan posted a picture that he took of an off-centered $5 graphic. I believe him. If that $25 graphic is off centered as well, so what? No one here believes it was yours anyways. You claim that you are too stupid at your advanced age to photoshop or alter pictures, and yet that $100,000 picture was altered by you when you first posted it. No one is actually that stupid... are you?

In fact no one here (except slingshot) believes anything you have to say. Now, over the past few weeks, you have posted a HUGE amount of bullsh!t. Grasping at straws. Almost like someone struggling to keep themselves in the limelight. Are you really that desperate and lonely?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Pictures don't prove much beyond a winning hand, but they're worth a lot more than someone like Dancer saying he always wins

---

A quote from Feb. 27.

No Rob, I've only ever read a few of Bob Dancer's columns and he doesn't say he wins all the time. You are the one claiming that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

All you're infatuated with is my ability to hit so many jackpots in so little time compared to you and possibly what everyone else expects.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

When it comes to my very unusual style of play that's grounded in discipline, structure & adequate bankroll, and my ability to win consistent extraordinary amounts because of it, I've obviously run into "wrong" far more often.

---

Your whole online existence is a sham. Even your name was copied off your hero, whom YOU ENVY. Bob Dancer is more respected than you, still writes and contributes to online sites or magazines, still consults for casinos and can still charge for private lessons. You on the other hand have been reduced to trolling internet forums looking for some sort of human interaction, making up lies, posting bogus photos and insulting people you don't even know.

You've said before over these last 2 weeks that you aren't here to prove you win what you do. You then go on to say that you want to teach people, well I've been reading this forum for only a year and a half. You aren't teaching anyone anything. You are trying to get under people's skin, good or bad to incite some conversation. To get people thinking or talking about you. Almost like the strategies used on reality TV or WWE professional wrestling. Well, I had my fun mocking you and your pathetic life. You still know nothing about me, or arcimede$ taxes or Vegas Lover. Everyone else here knows all we need to know about you, and your ridiculous attempts to troll others. I am making a conscious effort to not respond to you any longer. What's the point? You have 2671 posts on this forum alone. I can't compete with that, nor do I want to. I will reserve my posts and conversation for others on this board that are interesting and have something to say. You don't, and never did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

OK Alan, I explained very clearly that I took $10,000 to play a session of $1 thru $25 ARTT, that I had $500 left when I hit the $100k winner. So if you can add and subtract you'll see a profit of $90,500,

---

Rob, what about your "soft profits" that you banked all along during your play? You've made such a big deal about your soft profits yet they don't show up here. Why?

You started with $10,000 and according to your previous posts you bank these "soft profits" as you play. Yet, in your final tally you only report the $100,000 jackpot less the $9,500 from your starting bankroll. Where are the soft profits?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Rob, what about your "soft profits" that you banked all along during your play? You've made such a big deal about your soft profits yet they don't show up here. Why?

You started with $10,000 and according to your previous posts you bank these "soft profits" as you play. Yet, in your final tally you only report the $100,000 jackpot less the $9,500 from your starting bankroll. Where are the soft profits?

---

Alan, Rob said earlier that "soft profits" were a cornerstone of his strategies. Remember this post?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

First, the return of a game is based on the overall pay table, not just the flush and/or full house. They always get the distinction because they're the two winners which change the most, which in turn affects the payback %. And I agree, there's been too many times to count, most recently in some of the sessions where I've hit my big winners, where flushes and full houses were nowhere to be found in the session.That's why I teach not to focus on those two hands being very important in the overall scheme of things. They play a part, but mostly (and I say that because in goal-oriented strategies such as mine they play a slightly more important part) only as far as giving you a few more hands to play--and most probably, lose anyway--before you leave. They are greatly overrated, and mostly serve to feed into the meaningless +EV & -EV frenzy, which any intelligent player knows is of so little difference that in any given session

---

Well, it seems to me that flushes and full houses would make up a good portion of these "soft profits" but here Rob has forgotten an earlier lie and downplays the importance of these winning hands. I guess that since he only hits 4 of a kind with kickers and Royal Flushes now he doesn't need the "soft profits".

Eddie....if only you had half a brain...

Soft profits conclude many sessions. Others are concluded with those "wins" that so bother you.

Small mind...smal ****....Methinks you belong in Holland :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Eddie....if only you had half a brain...

Soft profits conclude many sessions. Others are concluded with those "wins" that so bother you.

Small mind...smal ****....Methinks you belong in Holland :)

---

News flash Rob...NO ONE BELIEVES ANY OF THE GARBAGE YOU POST. Why don't you just go kill youself? At least that way you would be doing the whole world a service.

Eddie, stellar posts! You hit the nail on the head. I'm going to leave this forum until the douchebag is finally gone. Alan thinks he should ban people for insulting him. Singer insults him and everybody else constantly and does nothing. 95% of all interaction on this forum has something to do with Singer's BS, why bother anymore.....

I take my hat off for you sir!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

I'm not here to prove that I win what and how I say I do.

---

And you've been doing a stellar job of that. In fact, presenting pictures of "wins" that directly conflict with your narrative goes a very long way towards your not proving you win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Pictures don't prove much beyond a winning hand, but they're worth a lot more than someone like Dancer saying he always wins when it's obvious his money comes from working.

---

Pictures that don't match the accompanying story actually serve to prove quite a bit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

And maybe Dan should spend his time trying to nail down that about him instead of theories about time stamps, which we discussed months ago and which can easily be changed but I wouldn't bother --or maybe I did just to bug the Sherlocks :)--and my CET offers.

---

Dancer doesn't post here. You do.
But your pathetic attempt to shift the focus away from yourself is noted.

The previous camera issues were raised about a year ago and while you certainly did a lot of hemming and hawing while trying to 'splain things you never gave any satisfactory explanations for the issues involved. Not that it matters anyway because;

Those issues are completely different from the current one..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

How about you send him to Wynn to take some pics in the high limit room and see what he can admit to when he REALLY has some facts.

---

Dan already has facts; very interesting facts that truly do show a tremendous amount. You're just doing everything you can to avoid and minimize them. Those facts are:

On three different occasions you posted image files that you claimed represented wins that you had recently made, including 2 of your largest "wins".

Each of these images had a file name that showed the date and time the images were taken.

The dates on those images did not match the dates you claimed to have won them, some by a substantial amount of time.

This is not something that could have happened by accident. It isn't possible that it was a technical error. It isn't something you can blame on a former editor. It isn't something you can blow off as the product of one of your sock puppets. The actual date didn't run away after you challenged it to a huge bet. The date didn't change due to a 5th card flip-over. The real date isn't sitting in a storage locker in Arizona.

There is nothing that can explain this as being anything other than what it is; a fabricated narrative involving your purported wins. Whether the images depict a win that you actually made is immaterial; the fact that the images are not 100% in sync with the story you told when you posted them brings everything about them into question.

For many years you've been making claims and relying on "your good word" as being sufficient proof that what you say is true. But that "good word" is now fully tainted by both the images and your repeated attempts to evade the issue. Given how blatant this is I can't imagine how anyone could ever believe anything you wrote in the future.

For everyone else it all comes down to this: who you gonna believe, Rob or your lyin' eyes? http://www.gifs.net/Animation11/Ever...Gun_smokes.gif

My my my....deflect and divert Spock....all you want and all you need to do in order for that jealous pain to just go away. Dan couldn't stand it either--winners do that to losers. When the whining over the "photoshopped" $25 decal got abruptly stopped in mid-flight, panic set in, setting the stage for the next desperate set of attempts.

I tingle. :)

Nothing about the $25 decal oddities has changed. One person, who appears to be more interested in trolling here than anything else, made a claim without anything to back it up. Only in your warped alternative reality would that be remotely considered as changing that issues status.

Regardless, nothing about that issue has anything to do with the much larger issue which is that your stories don't hold up to scrutiny. They might make a good addition to a Brothers Grimm book, but there is no way we'll ever see them aired on an episode on TruTV.

As for "deflect and divert" it is you who continually tries to evade things you can't explain, both on this issue and many others as well. I'm sure most people reading this will appreciate the irony of your attempting to evade questions by falsely accusing others of trying to do the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spock

Nothing about the $25 decal oddities has changed. One person, who appears to be more interested in trolling here than anything else, made a claim without anything to back it up. Only in your warped alternative reality would that be remotely considered as changing that issues status.

---

But "Spock" my pal and buddy: whatcha gonna do when ALAN or anyone you don't want to think of as being a troll, comes on with another similar factual statement or even, horror of horrors, a PICTURE showing your theory wrong? Which you know WILL HAPPEN :) You gonna claim I'm Alan or regnis or someone else? That "last gasp" perhaps?

Sleep well....

Sorry, Rob, but your attempt at trying to deflect attention to banking soft profits failed. And don't say it is a problem with my comprehension. If you had soft profits banked they would have been mentioned in your "net win amount" but they were not.

You have an out, however. You could say you forgot to include them. But -- it's too late. You already had a chance to use that out.

I don't think you have a system at all. Sure, you have "special plays" but now you have told us that there is no hard and fast rule about your special plays. And now it appears you don't maintain your bank of soft profits -- you just plow them back into the machine just like those addicted gamblers you make fun of all the time.

Rob... when you initially talked about "special plays" they had some reasoning behind them. But now holding kickers has destroyed some of your most important special plays.

You have also undermined your own strategies about soft profits.

And now we see that you are playing so much video poker it's hard to think you even have any self control about where or when you play... and it seems you "drop in" for quick visits just like any compulsive gambler would.

Alan,

Went to Rincon Saturday night but I was playing more penny slots than poker. Had some free play on Sunday and lost mine quickly but my husband hit a Royal on DB on your #3116 on his $30.00 free play. I continued to play it on various games and got it up to 1600 credits on quarters. Took me down to 765 credits and I hit a straight flush for 500 credits on TB. #3116 kept me playing for 4 hours on my husband's $30.00 free play.

I said I'd report on my play after we all went out to dinner a few nights ago, but probably because of skiing and age, I ran out of gas. But I did go overnight with $2000, and planned on playing the first $1k on five-play quarters, then the final $1k on $1 DDBP.

I didn't do my usual fantabulous stupendous, but I did win because of this hand below. I got nothing at all on five-play. But notice how I continue to get dealt four Aces--this time with the kicker as I got on the $25 game, and as I got recently on two of the 3 hands on triple-play when drawing on four Aces. My profit? A mere $165, but good enough for someone who isn't controlled by casino ambience or action-craving. It's what I do. Haters, use your heads and learn from it instead of trying and trying unsuccessfully to discredit how I do what I do just so you don't feel so inadequate.

Nice hit. And without it you would have lost all $2K. There were no soft profits to report, were there?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Nice hit. And without it you would have lost all $2K. There were no soft profits to report, were there?

---

I'm scratching my head. Yes it was a nice hit, esp. on the deal, and thanks. But of course I would have most probably lost $2000 if it were not hit. This was more last minute huge good luck. It happens, and a lot recently. I feel invincible....anybody would after all this. But no way it goes to my head. That's the control part. I never stray from my belief that winning $5 is better than losing anything. So I leave at a point where I feel I could not get any luckier.

I did not play any particular strategy this time out. So no soft profits were involved. I did not play for points, for freebies, or for slot card status. I simply did what any strong player would do: I played to win some money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

I did not play any particular strategy this time out. So no soft profits were involved.

---

Come on Rob... this makes no sense. You made a "career" out of having a system and a strategy. And now you're saying that your system and strategy are good for the gander but not for the goose. Or, to put it in English... "do as I say, not as I do."

So now you are a hypocrite.

Well, what are you going to say now? Perhaps that you are not playing professionally and that's why there was no strategy? Or will you say it was "after 7-PM Mountain Time on a Tuesday" and that's why there is no strategy?

Look -- Bob Dancer has been criticized a lot here but at least the guy is consistent and he appears to be honest about reporting at least some of his losses while he sticks with the same strategy.

Rob Singer... on the other hand... is just full of inconsistencies. Sometimes he has a strategy and sometimes he doesn't. Sometimes he plays like a pro and sometimes he doesn't. Sometimes he holds kickers and sometimes he doesn't. BUT... he is always a winner! And now do you understand why you are challenged?

And what's worse, because your play is not consistent, and you waver in your own strategy, how can anyone follow your strategy? It's impossible! You can't follow a strategy when the author of that strategy doesn't follow it himself.

Sorry, Rob, just gotta call 'em as I see 'em.

And there's nothing wrong with calling them as you see them. However, you have a problem and it's like dealing with a bad employee someone else recommended but people quickly discover the guy just doesn't fit in: you sometimes read w/o comprehending.

If you paid attention you'd have seen where I recently wrote that I was going out to a casino after our dinner out, to play five play, deuces, or whatever just for relaxation. But I got tired and didn't go, so I went overnight instead. If I'm playing any of my strategies I always say so, and if I'm playing for a particular win goal I always do the same. Similarly, when I'm not I say so. Why is it a problem for you which way I choose to play on any given visit? If you were smart, you'd try to learn from all this instead of openly pandering to VL and a few other weaklings here. I play strategies to have the best chance at winning money. Other times, because I've WON so much of that money in the past year, I bring less cash and play lower limits, just to relax and watch some sports at times. You see, it's not all about being compelled to play, feeding into a habit, or craving some action. It's about smart, intelligent planning and approaches. Learn from it.

Oh, you eliminated one of those asserted "inconsistencies" yourself by proving my Wynn machine actually was my "winning" machine--to the disgust of the pauper crew. Maybe if you concentrate on those "inconsistencies" being ALL made up, you could concentrate more on how I play so successfully.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

If you paid attention you'd have seen where I recently wrote that I was going out to a casino after our dinner out, to play five play, deuces, or whatever just for relaxation. But I got tired and didn't go, so I went overnight instead. If I'm playing any of my strategies I always say so,

---

You have the reading comprehension problem. I addressed this above.