I have a question, as I am unfamiliar with digital photography (even though I was an old school photographer). Is it possible to crop photos from a high def monitor in such a way as to present them as photos one has taken live?
Printable View
I have a question, as I am unfamiliar with digital photography (even though I was an old school photographer). Is it possible to crop photos from a high def monitor in such a way as to present them as photos one has taken live?
I think your question really is: can you take photos of photos and pass them off as original?Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
A funny thing happened last night (Dan, can you confirm the date these photos were taken?) when I went back to Rincon for $150 of free play: I lost with the free play. So I took out $500. I was at my favorite machine #3116 -- the same machine that dealt me quad aces of Royal Aces Bonus about a week ago, and then gave me an $8,000 royal, and then Sunday morning gave me quad aces for $4,000 on Royal Aces Bonus again... yes that same machine.
So there I was with $100 in the machine and I score quad 3s which paid $400 and then I am dealt trip aces... and draw the fourth ace for another $4,000. I had the slot attendant take a photo of me gesturing that this was my second $4,000 pay with quad aces. The photo of the quad aces (compare it to the other wins -- it's different) is also below.
I guess this means I am a "strong player" and I have a system that works, doesn't it? But no -- I won't call myself the greatest video poker player... because I got lucky. And that's all it is... luck.
Hitting jackpots will not save a life, cure cancer, end heart disease, end the starvation of children, or bring about world peace. Any day of the week I'd rather save a life, cure cancer, end heart disease, end starvation of children or bring about world peace than hit jackpots. (Are you listening Rob?)
Is this the same jackpot, Alan-photographed twice? The second is not clear but both machines clearly have a diamond, diamond, spade, heart, and club in the same order on the cards. I just can't tell the denoms of the cards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
No. They're different. In the first I held one ace. In the second I held three aces. On the 25cent win all four aces were dealt and auto held.
Something's wrong with my computer. I only see two photos and both with more that one Ace held.:confused::rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
When looking at the two pics in your post on Royal Aces bonus, I saw 2 different pics with what you're referring to.
Good for you Alan, and I must admit, I'm not at all jealous or in emotional pain! Sorry.
In the post about Royal Aces Bonus two photos are posted: the 25-cent with all four aces held, and one of the $1 (hit early Sunday morning) with one ace held. On this thread, just above in post #643 is the photo with quad aces with three aces dealt to me, and the photo of my in front of the screen with the three aces dealt.Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
Really, sling, you need an explanation for something this simple as counting the number of aces held but you can figure out Rob's ARTT, SRTT, STFU and every other combination of letters he uses? Do you really not see the difference in the photos or did your buddy Rob ask you to challenge the authenticity of my photos?
My tolerance is waning rapidly.
Reading your post you seem to indicate two DIFFERENT wins, but now I understand it's two pics of the same win. So why didn't you just answer my question the first time? This IS the same jackpot photoed twice. Get over it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Let's see if I understand you now:Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
I have hit quad aces three times on Royal Aces Bonus in about the last week. There is ONE photo of the dealt quad aces at 25-cents. There is one photo of the quad aces when only one ace was dealt to me. And yes, there are two photos of the quad aces (one jackpot) when three aces were dealt to me.
In the case of the quad aces when three aces were dealt to me one photo shows me in front of the machine, and the second photo is a tight shot of the screen.
Sorry if I misunderstood you.
Got it. Congrats, by the way. I haven't seen the game here in Shreveport, but will keep an eye out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Alan, the first image filename is 20140224_224147. That means you took it at 10:41pm on Feb 24, 2014.
The second filename is 20140224_224200, meaning you took it at 10:42pm on Feb 24, 2014.
You took them 13 seconds apart.
Correct?
BTW, did you take these with an iPhone? If so, it looks like the identical naming convention to Rob's more recent photos, making it highly likely he took that one picture on January 15th instead of early Feb like he claimed.
I have a Samsung GalaxyS and yes they were taken right after each other. The photo of me was taken by the slot attendant who was waiting for a supervisor for verification and then payment. I'm not sure it was exactly 13 seconds, but if you say so I believe you.
Hitting jackpots always seems to irritate a few....even you. Sling had a valid point that he had to explain three times before you chose to try and understand it.
A "strong" player is one who isn't controlled by the casinos. These casinos count on weak players to keep on coming in to the same place, often, because casinos know such people have no plan, they have no willpower, they have no discipline whatsoever, and they will always JUMP at their every mailed command. A strong player becomes a "super" player when they have the ability to reverse all of the above, they follow intelligent strategies that never promote addiction and the predictability to play at the same place over and over, they are able to stay out of the trap of giving away parts of their handpays to people who are paid to make them look more foolish that the problem gamblers and habitual casino rats they know they are, and most of all, they treat their family like they are equally important at least ONCE in a while..
Who takes your pictures? Some of them are worse than mine.
Rob: I take the photos of the screens.
The photo of me was taken by the slot attendant.
As for the rest of your post: what the F--- are you talking about?
I have kind of a random question for anyone. When playing on a machine that that has an adjustable dealing/drawing speed, which do you prefer? I usually play at the second variable. Rob, I noticed on one of your earlier pics you were playing at the slowest speed. Is that your preference?
Generally I take the middle speed. Most machines have three speeds.Quote:
Originally Posted by dannyj
I should note that the speed you choose for the "displaying of cards" has nothing to do with the speed at which you play the game or that you make your decisions about what to play. I've been "stuck" on machines that have the fastest speed "set" but that does not alter the time I take to decide which cards to hold. I am not a fast decision-maker.
I also run them at middle speed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Slow speed is painful and you just want the damn cards to speed up and show themselves.
Fast speed is too quick. It doesn't feel like cards are dealing, but rather just appearing in front of you.
I like seeing the effect of cards being "dealt", but not to take very long to actually do so. Medium speed is perfect for that.
And I am a fairly fast player. I go through about 500 hands per hour.
Yes I play slowly because that's my preference. My strategies require constant thought and mathematical monitoring, and unlike many players, I'm not trying to pile up the points as fast as possible. My goal is to pile up the money.Quote:
Originally Posted by dannyj
No answer about the date discrepancies?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Your points aren't all that far off, except you keep making the same irresponsible comment about ARTT when you don't understand it nor have you ever been trained to play it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I'm not here to prove that I win what and how I say I do. The only time "proving it" meant anything at all to me was when I humiliated the HP bunch back in 2006. People can either accept it or not, just as they have always done with anyone else anywhere who has ever made claims of winning or losing. Sure my picture postings here and in the paper have irritated many over the years, but at least I've posted my wins. 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. 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. Here's an idea: he's got to be convinced I'm a photoshop sharpshooter at this point. Haters usually do. 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.
First Robbieboy doesn't provide straight answers to Dan's questions about his New Orleans offer and than Robbie doesn't provide straight answers to Dan's questions about the dates of his pictures. Please do tell, why does anybody still discuss anything with this character? There really is no reason at all to discuss anything with him, it's all just completely useless and you're all waisting valuable time and energy.
There's only one solution: give this man a stage in an empty concert hall and let him sing whatever tune he likes.
That's the funniest thing I ever read. Every time you post it's about how and why you do whether it involves your special plays, or ARTT, or discipline or whatever. Even when you comment about someone else winning it's about how the other person is doing it all wrong and is either destined to fail or is addicted because they don't do it your way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Quite frankly, Rob, NO ONE knows what your way is, not even your most ardent supporters who continue to ask question after question.
Even I thought it was pretty clear about your "special plays" when it came to holding kickers and then we recently found out that even that simple rule was not a rule.
To be honest, if you can't come up with straight answers to legitimate questions you don't have a verifiable system and you have no right to make your claims about your system or your wins.
And a system that can't be verified is no system at all.
http://i639.photobucket.com/albums/u...cc6bo1_500.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Not a good idea Alan saying some of that. All you're doing is confirming that you do not understand something because you haven't the ability to learn it. I think I've tried to be as nice as possible in the past by loosely using the words "thick"....or "dense". In other words, you talk a big game here and you play higher limits than most, but you just don't have the aptitude to comprehend either that which is clearly explained to you, as I and Sling have detailed in ARTT, for example, multiple, multiple, multiple times, nor do you really have an interest in learning why you've lost so much, since taking time to do that would cut into your casino visits and ultimately, your need to spend hours and hours at the machines each visit because you just can't bear to leave the action behind. And here's a flash Alan--one which you've never understood, and frankly, couldn't. My strategies (aka "systems" to you) are based on mathematics, but unlike optimal strategy, they are not totally based on math. Remember? So for anyone who truly wanted to understand them would have to go into it comprehending that they are not 100% verifiable with the math, which in turn means they would need to have a bit more intelligence than the standard smart guy or math guy. And that's not you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
There you go again Rob hurling insults instead of a rational comment. You and Sling seem to be two peas in a pod and the rest of us don't know enough to swallow what you are trying to put on our plates.
If you really think you have something make it easy to understand and to learn and follow. Right now you can call me anything you want to but you get a fail.
That said above, I myself found a way to make an unplanned trip to the casino today, and while I weakly justified it because my wife's sister is visiting for about a week and I labeled it under "it would be good for them to spend some time together today" they will both like the results. I went in with just a thousand dollars and decided to play 3-play and 5-play quarters only, with no goals or time limits.
I put $500 in to start on triple play, but as you can see and likely to a few people's disgust round here (but to my absolute delight!:)) it didn't take me long to nail the machine for almost $2000! Of course, I went right home. Ain't it beautiful, Singer fans....ain't it GREAT!! Psst....BTW Dan, for your benefit, I took a phone (one of 3) with me today just in case I got an enviable win. And Bingo! Again!! But I really like my old camera better, even though I have to keep changing the batteries because of so many jackpots.
Enjoy! Oh.....the P-A-I-N....
YAHTZEE!! Well of course none of you can swallow it--have you ever really wanted to? 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. But if you ever took the time to understand how I'm able to do that in consistent fashion, you're probably afraid of what it would do to your planned 8 hour excursions to Rincon every few days. That, in and of itself, is where the real fail lies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I'll add to the above beautiful picture. I left with a nearly $2k profit, and I played very little time. But if it were Alan, how long and at what limits would he have kept on playing? Sure he could have won a lot more, but overwhelmingly it won't happen most of the time and we all know that, and because he plays no particular strategy of any kind, he would have lost it all and made up self-excuses to cash checks or hit the ATM's. It doesn't make much sense, but either he doesn't really like going home, or not being able to leave casino action with a sure winner in hand has got the best of him. (BTW, I can help with both).
Congratulations on the win. Someone who plays as much as you should have lots of wins.
That you play a lot and that you have winners doesn't mean that anyone understands your system or that your system has any validity.
Yes and it was a nice and very unexpected win, thank you. Over the years I've tried to teach as many as possible how to play better, although this win was just plain quick dumb luck but I'll take it of course. I've said many times in the media and on the Internet that my strategies require much more than simply understanding optimal play. Some try to understand them, most don't. And what's most surprising is that unlike Curtis, Wong, & Snyder, I don't sell anything or require fees of any sort to help others understand how to play like me. As I've told you, winners don't need other people's money; losers always do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
OK all you experts, especially arci: You may know from past discussions that my daughter moved to Minnesota--home of my good friend--recently. Well, this is where we'll be staying when we go out there probably from Nov. to Jan. And as arci can see, there's PLENTY of room....5600 sq ft to be exact. And guess how they were able to do some of this :) So Dan....how's the picture look? Is it real, was it taken in the summer, and did we have to get CET to fly us there to take it??
BTW, it's just outside of St. Paul which I remember being maybe 75 minutes or so away from arci. So Mr. VP player of Minn.--please get the welcome mat out!!
Alan is starting to sound like me from years ago and Singer is now treating Alan just like anyone who brings up little things like reality. Hilarious. Now Singer is trying to take credit for the success of his son-in-law. More laughs.
I'm at the Wynn this weekend. The $25 symbol is 100% OFF centered.
If you zoom in real tight on the garage door, you can see that the address is off center. This is obviously a fake.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
I learn by doing-by just trying and sometimes failing. This week I played 3 sessions of artt at 5/10/25 cents. The first I finally hit 4 8's for an $18 win. Second session, I didn't have to wait long on bp-4 4's and I'm at $68. Now the third session is where I learned- two pairs, 3 of a kinds, etc. were hitting almost every other hand and I ALMOST just left it at quarters-it was acting like a hot cycle. Unfortunately, whenever I went back to nickels, 4 9's hit and instead of a $100, I had now only $78. i should have trusted my gut instinct. Still, it was fun and I'm getting better at trusting myself. Now I know this is peanuts to most,, but the A's. 2s, etc. just weren't showing up on ddbp.:oQuote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
So what does this mean in terms of you following Rob's strategy?Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
A royal at the Las Vegas Airport today. (Same royal shown in the Las Vegas Airport Video Poker thread.) By the way, this is the second time in my life that I got a royal playing Triple Double Bonus. Never had quad aces with a kicker at this game.
Ik zou maar wat warme kleding meebrengen als ik jou was. Het kan behoorlijk koud zijn in Minnesota in die periode van het jaar en als je in zo'n bouwval moet verblijven waarvan de eigenaar blijkbaar zijn hypotheek niet meer kon betalen (waarom heb je anders midden in de winter een half afgebouwd karkas van karton?) zul je het nodig hebben. Vrij onverstandig om te verblijven in een huis zonder keuken, toilet, deuren, ramen, dakbedekking. Aan de andere kant verwacht ik dat Rob dat wel gewend is, anders deed hij niet zo zijn best om ons te overtuigen van het sprookjesleven dat hij leidt. Ik heb nog wel een tip voor je voor komende winter, laat die hoop karton die daar staat goed drogen tijdens de zomer! Dan heb je komende winter wat voor in de kachel om je warm te houden.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Hey Rob, I don't understand your "strategy" and as you have said before I don't "grasp" the English language either. So here's a little challenge for you. Try to translate this one without an online translation machine. Good luck Mr. know it all.
On a different note, just another page of useless Singer BS. This topic has gone down the drain completely. Special thanks to our resident gambling addict.
Like at poker tables, I think we should have "English only."
Then make sure that your forum members keep their big mouths shut to foreigners for not speaking English perfectly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
The Americans here don't even know proper grammar of their own language.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegas_lover
I know Alan and I see your point but that doesn't change my position on this matter. Sorry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
You probably don't remember any of the posts on hot/cold cycles or the posts where Rob spotted a hot cycle and went up in denoms to hit the impending quads or whatever win.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I do remember Rob's comments about hot and cold cycles, but I am referring to this strategy of his that says to return to a lower denomination. As you noted in your previous post, had you not returned to a lower denomination your next quad 9s would have paid more. You wrote:Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
So again my question, what does this mean in terms of you following Rob's strategy? What about your own gut instinct? And more importantly, what if Rob has you playing nickels when the machine decides to give you a royal and you could have been playing quarters instead?Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
Alan, your last sentence is the essence of my strategies. You WANT to get a royal anytime, even at your lowest denomination, because the overall goal of my method is to get out of the casino with a minimum-or-better win goal ASAP. And what about hitting other big winners on the lowest denominations in strategies that don't allow you to reach a casino-leaving win goal? They are just as welcome, because as soft profits, they allow you to go DOWN in denomination to start again, this time needing LESS in order to leave the casino a winner.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
Yes I know leaving casino ambience and all that wonderful action after just an hour or even less is not possible for the vast majority of vp players. But THAT'S where I have a tremendous edge. It's not in the long term math that I'm able to keep clobbering the casinos. It's in my ability to close my mind to everything they want and expect players to do, especially when after winning or losing. You saw the four Aces I was dealt on triple play yesterday. I wasn't at the casino more than 15 minutes after planning to stay our at least several hours before I went home. Almost every vp player in the world would have played on, and probability overwhelmingly says they would have lost some, all, or even more than they won. Why? BECAUSE THEY JUST CAN'T WALK AWAY FROM THE ADDICTIVE ACTION! You know that, and that's why there's so much animosity towards me when people read about how I've completely overcome that serious flaw/weakness since 1999. And therein lies the reason you and others resist learning how to do better.
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...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dante
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 :)
Sorry, this makes no sense. If you have a $73,000 bankroll (or whatever you have Rob) why would you want to piss away your good luck at 25-cent machines or even dollar machines when you could be playing $5 and higher and getting your good luck fulfilled with a bigger denomination win?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
When I was playing quarters at the Vegas airport last night it was because that's all I could budget for this casino visit... $60. And then it was off to Nathan's for a hot dog before my flight.
And did I wish I was playing dollars instead of quarters after the hit? You betcha I was.
Alan, if you like hot dogs next time you're on your way to Rincon stop at Portillos in Buena Park (down the street from Knott's in the front of the Buena Park mall) for a true Chicago hot dog or Italian Beef. You won't be going back to Nathan's.
Having lived in Chicago for 4 years I was so happy when they built the Buena Park and Moreno Valley locations.
It makes no sense to you because you have a block up instead of really trying to understand it. You're always thinking in terms of wishing you were playing higher denominations when you hit jackpots. Who doesn't. Where you're confused is in how it's the MINIMUM win goal that's important, and not how much over it you are in order to get up and leave, which again is the #1 priority in my strategy. Ignore all your wishes and dreams and stick to reality. Those huge winners will come, and they will come without having lost tons at the same high denomination before it does--which is the reason for using a large bankroll that you can't comprehend.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I don't like hot dogs.
But Rob, it's easier to hit your minimum win goal playing $25 8/5 Bonus poker... just one full house pays $1,000.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
In fact, why aren't you playing $100 Jacks or Better? Hit two pair on the first play and you've got a $500 profit. Why are you wasting your time playing $1 and $2 and $5?? Do you need to soak in that casino environment through all of those lower denominations?
Oh I see... all that time you spend at the lower denominations is meant to eliminate the losing hands, and then when you finally do move up to the high denominations the machine is ready to spit out that winner. It's amazing how you have the machines all psyched out!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Nice triple play hit Rob. And a very nice royal flush hit as well Alan, even though it was "only" on quarters. I am still looking for my first royal at a higher than .25 denom. Maybe tonight.
Thanks Danny and let's hope you do that tonight, or soon afterwards.Quote:
Originally Posted by dannyj
In the meantime, the deafening silence over the $25 logo claims has even made its way over to the little houses in Holland, where envy runs high and language is gobbledygook.
Rob, as I said before ( but you never listen) I'm not interested in that logo. I don't believe any of your claims, right logo or not! There's nothing about you or your life I envy. I just feel sorry for you. Correction, I actually don't feel sorry for you, karma is a bitch and you'll get your fair share someday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Coming back to your language BS, as soon as you can speak Dutch, we'll talk again. In the meantime, just put a sock in it because you simply ain't the brightest light bulb. Actually I think you're missing some functioning chromosomes. Drinking too much does that to an individual. Now, run back to your trailer park, fetch yourself a nice cold beer, bang some relative and enjoy Nascar.
For the record I didn't doubt the legitimacy of the logo. But Rob still hasn't told us -- nor can we verify -- how much he actually played (winning or losing) before hitting the jackpot.
I could post the five $1 royals that my son hit in one day -- but we know the truth -- he still lost money on the day, so why bother?
And I could post photos of the five $5 quad aces I hit at Rincon in one session, but the truth is I lost money on that session despite five (5) W2Gs for $2.000 each... so why bother?
And this is where reading with comprehension comes into play, as you somehow never read my jackpot post which PRECISELY details how much I won--and played--overall. What it all comes down to is you not wanting to understand the strategy for some reason, which in turn completely obliterated your common sense and, unfortunately, your true desire to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
I do understand that you and your son are usually unable to quit when ahead, because you both crave action and just cannot stand to see it stop by going home. And I'm sure you both regret that problem and wish you could create reality out of the "fantasy" you pretend I live in with my ability to leave a winner so very often. I could teach you both how it's done, but it seems nearly hopeless just as it is for so many others, as most vp players just want that addictive intermittent satisfaction to come without taking any additional time to help that happen.
I will do the legwork shortly but all you need to do is look back when I posted my $100,000 hit and you will see the answers to your queries.
,
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, and if you've ever read the VERY DETAILED explanation I wrote several times here about exactly how ARTT works, you would have understood all of it. But all you're interested in is how much I left ahead or behind. Well, you now have your answer twice, and no, I never play past my goal-attainment, which means the casinos never get my wins back. Never. That's what weak andinexperienced players do....all the time as you may know and be disgusted over.
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.
I had hit 2 prs.(or better-can't remember) when I last progressed to quarters which sent me back to nickels. You would have to actually know the artt strategy to understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
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.
So lets give a totally embarrassed and humiliated "eddie" another opportunity to comment on that "doctored-up" $25 decal :) :) (yes, he deserves a double ridicule even though he's most likely used to guessing wrong in everyday life)Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Rob, I know it must be getting bad in your lonely rusted out trailer since most everyone else here has been ignoring your stupid and false comments. You can only expect people to waste so much of their lives arguing with a low life like you. Arcimede$ 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.
A quote from Feb. 22.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
A quote from Feb. 23.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
A quote from Feb. 28.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
3 lies to start the post off.
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
A Feb. 11 quote.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Alan's comments the next day which you all but ignored.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
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 $100,000 picture was altered by you when you first posted it. No one is actually that stupid... are you?
In fact no one here (except slingshot) believes anything you have to say. Now, over the past few weeks, you have posted a HUGE amount of bullsh!t. Grasping at straws. Almost like someone struggling to keep themselves in the limelight. Are you really that desperate and lonely?
A quote from Feb. 27.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
No Rob, I've only ever read a few of Bob Dancer's columns and he doesn't say he wins all the time. You are the one claiming that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Your whole online existence is a sham. Even your name was copied off your hero, whom YOU ENVY. Bob Dancer is more respected than you, still writes and contributes to online sites or magazines, still consults for casinos and can still charge for private lessons. You on the other hand have been reduced to trolling internet forums looking for some sort of human interaction, making up lies, posting bogus photos and insulting people you don't even know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
You've said before over these last 2 weeks that you aren't here to prove you win what you do. You then go on to say that you want to teach people, well I've been reading this forum for only a year and a half. You aren't teaching anyone anything. You are trying to get under people's skin, good or bad to incite some conversation. To get people thinking or talking about you. Almost like the strategies used on reality TV or WWE professional wrestling. Well, I had my fun mocking you and your pathetic life. You still know nothing about me, or arcimede$ 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.
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
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 Alan Mendelson
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".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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
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!
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 that don't match the accompanying story actually serve to prove quite a bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Dancer doesn't post here. You do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
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..
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:Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
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.
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spock
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?
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson
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.
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."Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
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.
You have the reading comprehension problem. I addressed this above.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer