Documenting History

Every gaming enthusiast knows how for almost 8 YEARS! I documented both my winning play strategies as well as the BS about advantage play and advantage players, in my UNDENIABLE TRUTH Gaming Today column. And I was informed that their most popular article ever was when they ran my publicly proposing a six-figure bet to self-proclaimed, but since failed, "luminary" sports bettor FEZZIK, that I indeed could prove my winnings-to-date--along with identifying where I had already put up my escrow--with their managing editor appropriately re-titling it "Gaming Today Columnist Throws Down The Gauntlet".

Well, nothing could have thrilled Owner/Publisher Chuck DiRocco more. He couldn't stand the constant flow of nonsense from the likes of Jean Scott, Dan Paymar, and Bob Dancer, and he loathed Fezzik and his big mouth on local radio. The fact that Fezzik was part of the LVA crowd made this whole episode even more satisfying for him, as in the end, that entire bunch ran scurrying for the hills with their tails tucked firmly between their tails. There they were, proudly standing together talking and writing trash about me week after week as my articles continued to document my winning hundreds of thousands of dollars on "unbeatable" -EV machines....yet that entire LVA machine was rendered gutless & helpless by my big challenge.

Those were certainly the days...but Wait! When arci made one of those to me here recently, and then predictably diverted and deflected and stalled himself into escaping the whole thing after I accepted and took identified action, it got me thinking. This is something I'd love the gaming world to see, and what better way to expose arcimedes/shadowman/spock/mroejacks and all his other silly aliases etc. etc. etc. as the lying phoney he's always been?! Oh what FUN! I've also been itching to tell what the Wizard told me & advertizes on his sites about non-random machines vs. what he did when actually confronted with the situation.So I made a call, and they're giving me a 2-time opening to write about it, as long as one of the articles fully explains the strategies I've used to help me become the winner I've been and continue to be, since quitting as a failed "AP". They're also allowing me to put in links to this forum so people can waste no time watching me explain my special plays videos that have been instrumental in helping me consistently win, and reading arci's own words as he weasels & lies his way into...and then out of...his challenge. GT's naturally not so much interested in an anonymous Internet hack's antics as they are in what I have to say about the machine--and any reaction that may come in from Shackleford and/or the Gaming Commission.

This one's dedicated to you, Chuck!

Rob,

Let me know when the articles will run -- I'll make sure I get multiple copies of GT those issues.

P.S. GT isn't, as I've said, the Mensa guide to gambling, but it is an enjoyable read. It's light and covers a lot of different stuff, including poker columns, LV celebrities and shows (with Monti Rock), some non-technical business columns, and it has local pinup girls.

I will, but I have to have time to write them first, and that means it won't be right away.

You're correct in that it isn't gambling mensa, but perhaps it will be after my strategies are explained. I never did that in the past in any publication because I didn't want it to appear I was "selling" strategy in any way.

Rob, I don't know much about the newspaper business, but I would think that a publisher would need to plan in advance and therefore has some dates in mind for your articles. What is your time frame? If there is no time frame I become skeptical. Sorry.

I don't think GT is locked into that kind of schedule, Alan. The editor should be able to run what he wants to run, pretty much. They have eight or nine regular columnists, some of whom (like sports) have date-relevant columns, but some of whom do not. They could always pull the keno column and the vp column for a couple of weeks. I suspect they'd run Rob after the football season, though. Or, quite possibly, since their "feature" article usually isn't earth-shattering, they might use Rob as their front-page headliner, which wouldn't disrupt anybody's regular columns at all.

Thanks redietz, that's good to know. If the paper doesn't have any production schedules to "fit" then we should see Rob's articles sooner rather than later.

Alan, have those IRS forms from Singer shown up yet? Didn't think so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

Alan, have those IRS forms from Singer shown up yet? Didn't think so.

---

They have not, frankly I hope they don't.

How about his birth certificate. Oh no wait-----that's Obama.

Two things about which I have an opinion:

1) Rob probably has the tax forms.
2) Arci is very much NOT Spock.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Two things about which I have an opinion:

1) Rob probably has the tax forms.
2) Arci is very much NOT Spock.

---

There is no question that Rob has his own tax returns. The issue was for me as an independent "reporter" to get Rob's tax returns directly from the IRS so that I could report to the forum the info to settle the dispute about claims. As I mentioned here many times, whether or not anyone actually won money and how much they won doesn't mean much to me when it comes to discussing any video poker strategy. What I was more interested in was a report from the IRS which supports Rob's claims about his controversial deductions. I did not sign a non disclosure agreement for Arc until I received Rob's tax returns. Rob said he was cancelling his order for the back tax returns. And I never liked this particular soap opera. But Under The Dome on CBS has two more episodes left and in recent weeks the story has been getting better. And I really look forward to Revolution returning to NBC soon.

Alan,

I thought Rob was using your forum to post his systems and his proof. Is he going to post something different or more complete on Gaming Today? Will it be available online? What happened? Did you two have a falling out?

I don't know what Rob will be doing in the paper, but if it's an attack on certain AP's I wouldn't put it on this website -- so he would have to put it in the paper.

I think Rob has covered his strategy pretty extensively here both with the videos and articles and forum posts. If he has more to say about his strategies, he is always welcome here to post it.

I'll clear things up amid the speculation.

I'm writing 2 articles under my old "Undeniable Truth" column title. Haven't started them yet. One will be a detailed explanation of my play strategies (SPS, RTT, & ARTT). After Chuck D. died his wife wanted me to start identifying my strategy for the readers and do less knocking around of the AP's. She let it go for a long time, but eventually since I wouldn't put the strategies anywhere but on my site, rather than go in and argue, I stopped sending in articles to them. I always refused payment, so I wrongly thought I could talk her out of it. What I'm doing is like a compromise for us both. The other article will be more education on why advantage play is nothing more than a state of mind, and I'll detail arci's ill-fated "tax return challenge". And so arci can sweat, here's the facts--which will be greatly expanded upon of course--as I'll demonstrate them:

1. Challenge is proposed and the IRS form is identified. Arci "proclaims" that I will not accept it.

2. One day later I accept. Absent any betting parameters and needing to get this done because of an upcoming trip, I chose the maximum # of years (7) to request, which are the middle 7 years of my 11-yr. professional gambling career. This made perfect sense, I sent my request form as well as my $399 in to the IRS, and I clearly explained all that I did on the forum. Prior to doing so there was a discussion about non-disclosure agreements, and I said I did not need one because I trusted Alan.

3. Dazed and confused, arci took his needed time, but eventually threw together a plethora of deflections, diversions, and stalls by claiming he wanted an NDA just after saying he "had nothing to hide". Then of course, he claimed, after knowing which years I've already requested, that nothing would be valid unless I requested 2008 & 2009 for no known reason. I gave arci 2 weeks to tell us he had sent in his request, and when he came on pointing fingers and doing everything BUT what he knew needed to be done to get his form mailed, I did what I said and requested my forms not be sent from the IRS. I'll be using more descriptive wording and exact dates etc. so that anyone can go back and read how he squirmed out of his own challenge.

Redietz is correct: GT can put up my articles probably any time they want. The paper has shrunk enormously since I left. I don't think adding or even subtracting anything will be a problem.

I mailed in my cancellation request prior to leaving for SF. When I got back (and before hitting that beauty up at Harvey's) there was an IRS envelop here that confirmed receipt of my original 4506 request & fee, and also asked me to identify if my "3rd party" was a trustee, a mortgage co., an Atty., some others, or just identify. It mentioned something about filing schedule C's. So my cancellation request must have crossed this thing in the mail. I'm thinking if I ignore the request it'll be cancelled anyway.

Looking forward to reading those articles, Rob. Keep us posted when you have them published.

Rob, my guess is that if you don't confirm who the third party is, the tax returns will not be sent out. Whether or not you get your money back is another issue. LOL

Rob, you can't say you accepted the "IRS challenge" and then back out. Either show the forms or not. But don't act like saying you're going to do something is the same as doing it. Talk is cheap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quahaug

Rob, you can't say you accepted the "IRS challenge" and then back out. Either show the forms or not. But don't act like saying you're going to do something is the same as doing it. Talk is cheap.

---

quahaug is correct about this. In all fairness, you should not even mention it again, Rob. It should be considered a "moot issue" as if it never happened, because in reality it never happened.

While I used to read the GT and enjoyed Rob's column, all that this will accomplish is to recycle the same debate that was slowly fading here. Arci will still say the math says no--Rob will say screw the math here are the results--and off we go. Everyone will call everyone else a liar, and the insults will fly. Do we really want to start over with all the same arguments?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by regnis

While I used to read the GT and enjoyed Rob's column, all that this will accomplish is to recycle the same debate that was slowly fading here. Arci will still say the math says no--Rob will say screw the math here are the results--and off we go. Everyone will call everyone else a liar, and the insults will fly. Do we really want to start over with all the same arguments?

---

Perhaps GT wants to increase its circulation? Dancer, Fezzik, Scott and Arci will have to read the issues. :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quahaug

Rob, you can't say you accepted the "IRS challenge" and then back out. Either show the forms or not. But don't act like saying you're going to do something is the same as doing it. Talk is cheap.

---

That logic escapes me. I accepted it by sending in the form with the fee and gave Alan's address as the 3rd party. I then told arci to stop stalling and get it done too, and I clearly stated he had 2 weeks to do so or I would take action. And while he was obviously sweating up a storm during those 2 weeks of silence, I did what I said I would do. So since arci stalled and dithered, he submitted nothing. At the end of the day, talk indeed may be cheap, but silence & cowering has zero value.

While analyzing this is simple, I'll let the GT readers decide for themselves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by regnis

While I used to read the GT and enjoyed Rob's column, all that this will accomplish is to recycle the same debate that was slowly fading here. Arci will still say the math says no--Rob will say screw the math here are the results--and off we go. Everyone will call everyone else a liar, and the insults will fly. Do we really want to start over with all the same arguments?

---

Not much to disagree with there, except by exposing all of arci's known aliases and continuing cowardice when it comes to me, the geeks of the gambling world will take another big hit--if only for old tymes sake :)

Alan, I would expect you'll get nothing from the IRS since I'm not responding to their request, but I bet they return the money (unless they think I'm a conservative :)).

Rob are you going to say in your article that no one got your tax returns? And there is still no one who can independently verify your reported taxable wins (with or without offsetting business expenses)??

In other words, Rob, I think bringing up this "challenge" is a cheap shot and saying that others backed out is also a cheap shot because no one -- including you -- actually took part in the challenge.

You can't have a test of tax records without an actual test. It's all a lot of hot air.

You can't claim Arc backed out because he didn't. I didn't send him the NDA and I didn't send it because I had not received your tax returns from the IRS. So don't blame Arc.

Now, as I have said, I am very happy that you are not sending your tax returns to me. I don't really care who won what. Frankly, I expect that you won more than Arc because you played higher denomination machines -- and that's not going to be a surprise to anyone. And tax returns will not prove that VP strategies work or don't work.

One thing Rob's articles will accomplish is to pop the balloons of those selling their vp wares as if it makes any difference to winning and losing. I'm an AP, and I'm firmly in Frank's camp, namely that winning any serious money playing vp in Las Vegas is now a fool's errand. The only reason Dancer and Scott and others can survive is that they have special ratings that return more cash back and comps than 99.9% of normal joes and because they may indeed be getting direct rebates on losses above and beyond their cash back.

Now I can play 25-cent FPDW at the Palms for enjoyment and enough profit for dinner, and I can briefly play NSUD at the Boyd properties on multi-point senior days to eke out a profit and keep my comped nights coming, but actually playing with the intent of making any real money is a high variance, low edge nightmare.

The Dancer column wherein he got relieved of a couple thousand by a compadre demonstrates how tight things are -- Dancer flew cross country to play somewhere he'd never been with a person he hadn't met -- all to make a projected 4-5K. If he's doing great in LV, he probably doesn't make that trip.

That's a good point about Dancer. Fly across country with so many unknowns for not all that much expectation? How bad are things for him in LV?

Alan, once I not only accepted but got my form mailed in from this so-called challenge, in retrospect, there was no way arci was ever gonna send anything anywhere. He used the NDA as just one part of his diversion & stall. He knows he didn't need it if you believe the characterization he gives of himself, and you know it wasn't needed yourself.

Of course I'm going to tell every step of what happened and of course arci backed out. He was nervous from the start, which is why he never brought up why you didn't send that NDA form. Because my post gave him two weeks to act or else, he knew if he waited it out without disturbing your inaction, he'd have a reason to get out of the whole thing. He backed himself into his own corner, and like I said, I'll let the readers decide what kind of a weasel he really is.

This will not be about proving anything about me, but if someone else, like the idiots from LVA, like the tax return possibility and want to challenge me with a bet, I'll certainly be up for it. Come to think of it, I wonder what would happen if I made this challenge in the paper to DANCER!?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

That logic escapes me. I accepted it by sending in the form with the fee and gave Alan's address as the 3rd party. I then told arci to stop stalling and get it done too, and I clearly stated he had 2 weeks to do so or I would take action. And while he was obviously sweating up a storm during those 2 weeks of silence, I did what I said I would do. So since arci stalled and dithered, he submitted nothing. At the end of the day, talk indeed may be cheap, but silence & cowering has zero value.

While analyzing this is simple, I'll let the GT readers decide for themselves.

---

Sorry Rob, this has nothing to do with your ongoing pissing match with Arci. Post a scan of any of your sch-c's as a professional gambler or run off with your tail between your legs. Your choice.

I've been away, but it seems you are the one not paying much attention.

If I were Rob and I had those tax forms, I would try to use those columns to lure Dancer into an earful of cider. One factoid I'd mention in a column might be that the biggest score in Dancer's book wound up on Shirley's income taxes, so technically the book should have been labeled "How Shirley Won Half a Million."

Since Dancer is no longer with Shirley, she might appreciate it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

One thing Rob's articles will accomplish is to pop the balloons of those selling their vp wares as if it makes any difference to winning and losing.

---

Really? When I read the books and practice with the software and go to the lectures, they are not telling me how I am going to "win." They are telling me and showing me proper strategy. No one ever guaranteed a win. I am going to put this comment in the file of "cheap shots."

That probably explains why Dancer's book is titled "Million Strategy Video Poker" -- "How I turned $6,000 into Proper Strategy." And I didn't know the WinPoker video trainer had changed its name to "StratoPoker."

Yeah, that was a real cheap shot.

Let me say it as I see it:

1. You can't say Arc backed out because I never sent him the NDA which I think was a reasonable request on his part.
2. I find it curious that redietz has joined up with Rob to blast Bob Dancer but then we know that redietz wants to be known as a gaming guru and gaming consultant so I guess blasting the competition is the thing to do.
3. Rob, if you claim that Arc backed out you have really crossed the line. ONLY if I received your tax returns and Arc failed to send me his tax returns after I sent him the NDA could you claim that Arc backed out. Rob, do not make the mistake of saying Arc backed out. He did not.
4. And since when does Arc have to present his tax returns to prove that Rob Singer has won what he claims to have won?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

That probably explains why Dancer's book is titled "Million Strategy Video Poker" -- "How I turned $6,000 into Proper Strategy." And I didn't know the WinPoker video trainer had changed its name to "StratoPoker."

Yeah, that was a real cheap shot.

---

I would not consider the book to be his lessons or guide for video poker strategy. I have attended his lectures in Vegas. I have used his software. Reports and books and articles about his own play and experiences should be separated from his lessons about proper strategy.

So redietz, do you follow proper strategy? If not, what part of the strategy that Bob Dancer teaches do you disagree with? What seminars of his have you attended? What software of his have you used?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Let me say it as I see it:

1. You can't say Arc backed out because I never sent him the NDA which I think was a reasonable request on his part.
2. I find it curious that redietz has joined up with Rob to blast Bob Dancer but then we know that redietz wants to be known as a gaming guru and gaming consultant so I guess blasting the competition is the thing to do.
3. Rob, if you claim that Arc backed out you have really crossed the line. ONLY if I received your tax returns and Arc failed to send me his tax returns after I sent him the NDA could you claim that Arc backed out. Rob, do not make the mistake of saying Arc backed out. He did not.
4. And since when does Arc have to present his tax returns to prove that Rob Singer has won what he claims to have won?

---

Totally agree!! You see Alan, there's hope for us after all :)

I don't entirely get the intention of the upcoming GT columns. Is it to bring attention to SPS, it's succes rate and all the details involved in playing it well? Or Rob, are you going to use it as a platform to publicly blast everybody you've had a beef with in the past? If it's option one I would actually be interested in reading it, if it's option two I wouldn't even bother.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vegas_lover

Totally agree!! You see Alan, there's hope for us after all :)

I don't entirely get the intention of the upcoming GT columns. Is it to bring attention to SPS, it's succes rate and all the details involved in playing it well? Or Rob, are you going to use it as a platform to publicly blast everybody you've had a beef with in the past? If it's option one I would actually be interested in reading it, if it's option two I wouldn't even bother.

---

I wonder if GT would really publish an article of "attacks" by Rob Singer? I think Rob might throw in a few zingers but an article with outright attacks? Nah. Never happen.

I think an article titled "What ever happened to Rob Singer?" with a report from Rob about his play, his record, his observations would be very useful and beneficial, including a report about his system and methods. (by the way, where is mr jjj ... the "method man" ??)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I wonder if GT would really publish an article of "attacks" by Rob Singer? I think Rob might throw in a few zingers but an article with outright attacks? Nah. Never happen.

I think an article titled "What ever happened to Rob Singer?" with a report from Rob about his play, his record, his observations would be very useful and beneficial, including a report about his system and methods. (by the way, where is mr jjj ... the "method man" ??)

---

I would like to know how Rob gets all those $20,000 royals with very limited play during his retirement years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

(by the way, where is mr jjj ... the "method man" ??)

---

I guess he might realize that 3 strikes means you're out. To be honest, I don't miss him.

Sorry, Mr. Mendelson, you'll have to point out that post where I said I wanted to be a "gaming guru," whatever that is. I love how you paraphrase me inaccurately. Dancer and I are hardly competitors.

You know, Mr. Mendelson, before predicting what GT would or would not publish, you might want to have read some of Rob's old articles wherein he blasted people in GT almost every week and in terms equal to or worse than anything here. Rob was pretty friggin' nasty, and those articles were often Page One.

Why, Mr. Mendelson, do you persist in rendering opinions on things about which you know almost nothing? What is your rationale for saying "Nah. Never happen?" Rob's previous GT articles were filled with outright attacks. Did you actually read any of them?

You're right redietz, I don't know anything about you, including your real name, what makes you a gambling authority, if you really have gaming clients, etc. I am sorry for making such statements. Heck, I don't even know if you really play 25-cent video poker as you claim you do.

Eddie, I'm having phenomenal luck for some reason these days....even more so than when I played as a pro with a large bankroll for 11 years. Of course, much of it has to do with my following win & loss goals, using my special plays that deviate from optimal strategy which more often than not do give me more hands to play with in any individual session, and by sometimes using my RTT and/or ARTT strategies.

Alan, many of my articles depicted my disdain for the constant flow of lies thrown around in the media by the current crop of vp "gurus" --many of whom had ties to LVA. And it was fun. I had the biggest megaphone, and I had my respected book publisher supporting me at the same time. That said, I have no intention of naming anyone other than anonymous arci this time around, but my attacks on the AP approach will be as strong--and loved by my readers--as ever. There may also be casual mention of spousal abuse brought on by advantage play addiction, but that will depend on my mood at the time. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

I have no intention of naming anyone other than anonymous arci this time around, but my attacks on the AP approach will be as strong--

---

There is nothing wrong with attacking the "AP approach" and of course you wouldn't name anyone in particular, nor would the publisher of GT allow you to. I hope redietz takes note of this.

But again, I caution you not claim that Arc backed out of the challenge. He did not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quahaug

Sorry Rob, this has nothing to do with your ongoing pissing match with Arci. Post a scan of any of your sch-c's as a professional gambler or run off with your tail between your legs. Your choice.

---

Robs silence is deafening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

There is nothing wrong with attacking the "AP approach" and of course you wouldn't name anyone in particular, nor would the publisher of GT allow you to. I hope redietz takes note of this.

But again, I caution you not claim that Arc backed out of the challenge. He did not.

---

I regularly named those AP's whom I blasted in the past, and the owner Chuck D. enjoyed every word. But I won't be doing that now.

Of course arci ran away from his own challenge like a coward tucking his tail between his legs, by taking no action after I gave him the two weeks to do so. I sent my form in, and that scared the daylights out of him. If he weren't looking for his usual escape route he'd have made his end happen just as I did mine. And that's exactly how the facts will be laid out, which can be validated by the link I'll provide to right here. As always, those facts will allow my readers to decide for themselves.

Rob, I don't know that you sent your form in. What I can say is this: I did not receive your tax returns, and therefore I did not send a non disclosure agreement to Arc. Those are the facts. Now, before you make any claims about Arc backing out or running away "from his own challenge like a coward tucking his tail between his legs" be sure I have received your tax returns direct from the IRS. Until I do receive your tax forms from the IRS there is no challenge. And if you claim otherwise, I will do my best to set the record straight.

I have given you a fair chance, Rob, but I will not allow you to distort the truth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quahaug

Robs silence is deafening.

---

Follow the dotted line and pay attention. Or, you can go to the thread that has my recent $20k royal and other big winners posted, get an upset stomach over it, and join all the others who over the years, loathed me for publishing my even bigger winners week after week in Gaming Today, then found themselves chowing down the tums in order to sleep at night. :),

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Rob, I don't know that you sent your form in. What I can say is this: I did not receive your tax returns, and therefore I did not send a non disclosure agreement to Arc. Those are the facts. Now, before you make any claims about Arc backing out or running away "from his own challenge like a coward tucking his tail between his legs" be sure I have received your tax returns direct from the IRS. Until I do receive your tax forms from the IRS there is no challenge. And if you claim otherwise, I will do my best to set the record straight.

I have given you a fair chance, Rob, but I will not allow you to distort the truth.

---

That's dumb Alan and it makes no sense. Show me where in arci's challenge he laid out a groundrule that stated I had to send my form in first, then he didn't have to send his in until AFTER you received my tax returns AND until after you & arci signed that silly NDA. Go ahead--show me. People will immediately see the truth, and you have zero to do with being able to erase the facts I write about in my article. You are, however, giving me a few more ideas on what to add the more you try to twist them here. So be careful. All you're doing is rewriting the challenge rules after the fact, and as usual, your grasp of reality isn't going to do you any favors.

The more nonsense you post about "the record according to Alan" the more the link will be worth to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

That logic escapes me. I accepted it by sending in the form with the fee and gave Alan's address as the 3rd party. I then told arci to stop stalling and get it done too, and I clearly stated he had 2 weeks to do so or I would take action. And while he was obviously sweating up a storm during those 2 weeks of silence, I did what I said I would do. So since arci stalled and dithered, he submitted nothing. At the end of the day, talk indeed may be cheap, but silence & cowering has zero value.

While analyzing this is simple, I'll let the GT readers decide for themselves.

---

Unless IRS forms show up at Alan's you never sent them in. Of course, I already know you never sent them in but then I know you are a pathological liar. I'm still available to send my forms to Alan if he sends me an NDA. Nothing has changed. I have the form ready to go.

And, since you backed down on the 2008, 2009 forms we now know you lost those years. If you had won you would be happy to send in the forms. QED.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Let me say it as I see it:

1. You can't say Arc backed out because I never sent him the NDA which I think was a reasonable request on his part.
2. I find it curious that redietz has joined up with Rob to blast Bob Dancer but then we know that redietz wants to be known as a gaming guru and gaming consultant so I guess blasting the competition is the thing to do.
3. Rob, if you claim that Arc backed out you have really crossed the line. ONLY if I received your tax returns and Arc failed to send me his tax returns after I sent him the NDA could you claim that Arc backed out. Rob, do not make the mistake of saying Arc backed out. He did not.
4. And since when does Arc have to present his tax returns to prove that Rob Singer has won what he claims to have won?

---

Alan, maybe now you're starting to understand that Singer and the truth are rarely found together. This little exercise is a good one for getting to know the real Singer. He will lie about anything. As far as I know, if he sent in requesting those tax forms there is no way to cancel the request. So, if he was telling the truth you would eventually see them. You won't.

Despite the outcome of this whole scenario, Alan's suggestion still stands. You can't prove the validity of the system. The only way to do that is for someone to play ONE of the strategies at 1200 credits-if the win goal isn't reached-and then say yea or nay that the system worked during one of the 3 sessions. And don't use the high denoms for an excuse-it can be 25-50cents-$1-$2 on artt, for example. I've heard all the excuses from all sides and yet not one of the con side of the argument has tried ANY of the strategies. Otherwise, continue seeing who can piss the farthest.

slingshot, I am going to go even farther than what you said: I don't think anyone can prove that Rob's system works just like no one can prove than conventional strategy (what is taught by Dancer, Grochowski or a host of others) works.

Strategy and methodology is only a factor in whether or not you will have a winning hand or a winning session. it all comes down to the RNG and what it delivers. Playing video poker is not a test of the right draws to make. Video poker is a gamble -- every way you look at it. You hope that your holds and draws will turn out the way you want them to. But making the "correct hold" doesn't make you a winner, just as making holds Rob Singer's way won't make you a winner.

Personally I cannot consider a tax return as proof that anyone's strategy or method of play is superior. There are too many other factors that affect the bottom line in video poker and "luck" is the number one factor -- not the strategy followed, not the use of win and loss goals, not the prayers recited when dealt four to the royal, etc.

And because tax returns don't prove anything, I think looking at tax returns has no purpose at all. Rather, I would like to know the reasoning behind different strategies.

In fairness to Rob, I think his reasoning is pretty good for certain "special plays." I also think his reasoning is valid for win and loss limits and goals. Now, I am also going to say that the conventional strategy is also valid and in fact Rob follows conventional strategy most of the time.

So when you step back what the heck is all of this arguing all about? Nonsense is what it's all about.

This has nothing to do with Arci, Rob. I'm asking you for one sch.c as a professional gambler, nothing more, nothing less. Put up or shut up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

slingshot, I am going to go even farther than what you said: I don't think anyone can prove that Rob's system works just like no one can prove than conventional strategy (what is taught by Dancer, Grochowski or a host of others) works.

Strategy and methodology is only a factor in whether or not you will have a winning hand or a winning session. it all comes down to the RNG and what it delivers. Playing video poker is not a test of the right draws to make. Video poker is a gamble -- every way you look at it. You hope that your holds and draws will turn out the way you want them to. But making the "correct hold" doesn't make you a winner, just as making holds Rob Singer's way won't make you a winner.

Personally I cannot consider a tax return as proof that anyone's strategy or method of play is superior. There are too many other factors that affect the bottom line in video poker and "luck" is the number one factor -- not the strategy followed, not the use of win and loss goals, not the prayers recited when dealt four to the royal, etc.

And because tax returns don't prove anything, I think looking at tax returns has no purpose at all. Rather, I would like to know the reasoning behind different strategies.

In fairness to Rob, I think his reasoning is pretty good for certain "special plays." I also think his reasoning is valid for win and loss limits and goals. Now, I am also going to say that the conventional strategy is also valid and in fact Rob follows conventional strategy most of the time.

So when you step back what the heck is all of this arguing all about? Nonsense is what it's all about.

---

I felt that way when the last Royal was hit. I woulda been outta there way before then. But then again, he DID play the 1200 credits fully. I would have just played the 400 credits on 3 different machines. I played yesterday on 12 different machines with only 1 quad on bp. Everyone was really griping and a few left, one guy threw his card in the waste basket. This is called random?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quahaug

This has nothing to do with Arci, Rob. I'm asking you for one sch.c as a professional gambler, nothing more, nothing less. Put up or shut up.

---

Proves nothing. Alan's already said it: returns mean nothing coming from anyone directly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

Unless IRS forms show up at Alan's you never sent them in. Of course, I already know you never sent them in but then I know you are a pathological liar. I'm still available to send my forms to Alan if he sends me an NDA. Nothing has changed. I have the form ready to go.

And, since you backed down on the 2008, 2009 forms we now know you lost those years. If you had won you would be happy to send in the forms. QED.

---

Keep sweating arci :) Those who read this thread after they read my article will decide what makes sense. Of course, they can also do what I did and actually READ the form, and they'd easily see where you can only request 7 years the first time. That spells bad news for you needing '08 & '09 after already seeing I requested the max. But keep digging your own hole my friend. I'm sure you'll need one around there sooner or later anyway:) And just in case Alan keeps having this strange sympathy for you and your self-created pitiful situation, I've already copied this entire thread and put it into linkable blog form. Nothing beats my megaphone! You may even need a vp.com meet & greet among you and the hacks over there in order to help you figure a way out of the corner you've painted yourself into by running away from this one.

Alan, why don't you explain, as I asked, where in the world you came up with the story about arci not sending in his request form until AFTER you received my returns? And if you go back and read your own forum, you'd see that arci proposed we BOTH do this, not just me.

Where do you come up with these things? Good thing I'll be "setting the record straight" in my article.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

Despite the outcome of this whole scenario, Alan's suggestion still stands. You can't prove the validity of the system. The only way to do that is for someone to play ONE of the strategies at 1200 credits-if the win goal isn't reached-and then say yea or nay that the system worked during one of the 3 sessions. And don't use the high denoms for an excuse-it can be 25-50cents-$1-$2 on artt, for example. I've heard all the excuses from all sides and yet not one of the con side of the argument has tried ANY of the strategies. Otherwise, continue seeing who can piss the farthest.

---

Sling, you've seen the enormous jealousy here in the other jackpot thread over how much I win by playing not all that much once a month. How do you think these people would react to being there for the actual winning? The geniuses on WoV couldn't stomach it, arci never wanted to have to live with the memory, and no one else would. All they'd say is "it's easy to win a lot of small winners, but that one big loss will wipe it all out and more"--of course, completely ignoring the many big winners that happen. That's one of the reasons why GT loved my column. The owner required I play a session in front of him and I did, hitting a dollar royal very quickly into the session. He was a rich man and congratulated me. These people wouldn't.

Alan, you have what I'm going to write about and how, it's all right here for everyone to confirm when they want the proof, the best part is the readers will all be able to watch arci lie and squirm his way thru his own proposal, and now they'll even be able to watch you come up with several head-scratching, after-the-fact challenge parameters that make no sense at all, which is why you have no way to answer the questions.

It's all been said. Arci cooked his own goose when he did nothing but point fingers after the 2 weeks were up. And if you worked for me after making up that stupid story about my returns must be in your hands before arci needs to send in HIS form....I'd walk you out with everybody watching.

The readers will decide. Yes they will. And I'm not you or your mercy-mission arci. I'm wasting entirely too much time here, trying to get thru your density. I've got articles to write, places to go, and family is coming to town. So here's a hint: sit back, relax, and wait for your visitors to spike, which will mean one or both articles ran. It'll be a while, and I won't be back until after that time IF there's any questions. In the meantime, please welcome arci to continue trying to make himself feel better about a proven liar being a weasel by backing out of his own challenge. You just can't make these things up!

So in other words, to round this one up. Rob's articles are going to be about patting himself on the back some more and blasting the people he has a beef with. Cops at the scene of an accident describe Rob's upcoming articles best: "move along people, there's nothing to see here". As I said earlier in this thread, no reason for me to read them. Not interested because of the content.

My guess is the main reason publishers still give Rob a platform is because they know people like to look at a train wreck. Sad but true. People read his stuff and wonder if this man could really be such a self absorbed ................(insert whatever you like on the dotted lines). He surely is the man everybody loves to hate. Even though Rob thinks that it has everything to do with his amazing vp results, I have a different opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Alan, why don't you explain, as I asked, where in the world you came up with the story about arci not sending in his request form until AFTER you received my returns? And if you go back and read your own forum, you'd see that arci proposed we BOTH do this, not just me.

Where do you come up with these things? Good thing I'll be "setting the record straight" in my article.

---

Rob, I don't recall the order of who said what, and frankly it doesn't matter. If you want to prove your wins you should send your tax returns to an independent third party to have them verified. I don't think Arc's claims about winning are an issue here. Frankly, if he shows a profit playing 25-cent to $1 machines I wouldn't care. And, frankly, I don't care if you have big profits averaging a hundred thou a year. And the reason I feel this way is that I believe people can and do win playing video poker. If I didn't play craps, I'd be showing a profit from my video poker as well over multiple years because I've hit big royals and when I had my long royal flush drought I had an abnormally high number of straight flushes and quad aces.

So again, the "money argument" doesn't impress me.

But for the record, Arc asked that I sign a non disclosure agreement before he asked the IRS to send to me his tax returns. And it was my decision, and my decision alone, not to send to Arc the NDA until I received your tax returns. I did this because I honestly didnt want your tax returns Rob and I thought if I could talk you out of this chest-thumping exercise I would save Arc the time, trouble and expense of sending me his tax returns for his turn at chest-thumping.

So if you want to say that I derailed the challenge then please go ahead and say it. I can take it. I think the challenge is meaningless to begin with, as I said earlier.

Does Rob really think we care about this Arci crap? I thought this had to do with fileing as a pro gambler and not owing taxes even with a winning year, which has nothing to do with proving anything or showing up anybody. I gave Rob the benefit of the doubt for a long time but no more. He's proven beyond a shadow(man) of a doubt that when it comes to video poker, He's full of s#&t.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quahaug

Does Rob really think we care about this Arci crap? I thought this had to do with fileing as a pro gambler and not owing taxes even with a winning year, which has nothing to do with proving anything or showing up anybody.

---

Yes, this is what's most interesting to me. But again, it's not what shows on the tax returns. Anybody can put anything on a tax return. What would be of interest is some documentation from the IRS that the unusual deductions held up to the IRS scrutiny and he could in fact deduct such things as groceries for a business meal deduction. We don't need his tax returns for that -- we need an opinion from the IRS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Yes, this is what's most interesting to me. But again, it's not what shows on the tax returns. Anybody can put anything on a tax return. What would be of interest is some documentation from the IRS that the unusual deductions held up to the IRS scrutiny and he could in fact deduct such things as groceries for a business meal deduction. We don't need his tax returns for that -- we need an opinion from the IRS.

---

I don't have any problem with a sch-c from Robs desk drawer. If its totally made up that's OK too. It's for educational purposes only. He doesn't have to prove anything.

OK-getting bored with this show--I think it's a re-run. Where's Mr. JJJ when we need him.

Maybe to get some excitement here I need to have my cousin run another million hand simulation and when it doesn't mirror the ER, Arci can have a post menopausal rant.

Can we move on from this nonsense already. Nothing is ever going to be proven, and no common ground will be found. You either believe Rob won or you don't.

I don't doubt Rob won. I just want to know about deducting groceries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I don't doubt Rob won. I just want to know about deducting groceries.

---

Correct Alan. If Rob doesn't step up then He's lying case closed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I don't doubt Rob won. I just want to know about deducting groceries.

---

Alan,

Why do you not doubt Rob? What evidence in any form has he provided you that he has not provided everyone else with?

Going back (maybe 2 years?) you started a very good thread about people claiming they had successful gambling systems. You listed 5(?) things a "charlatan" could do to try and fool people into believing in the validity of their system. One of the things you listed was including large wagers against non-believers of their system in order to get people to back down. Anyways, I was searching for that thread but could not find it. Would you be able to comment on it to bring it back up to the front page, or tell me what the title was so that I can find it? I think it was titled something like "It's Easy to Come Up with a Gambling System" or something like that.

Thanks.

Rob...oh...Rob....are you there?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Personally I cannot consider a tax return as proof that anyone's strategy or method of play is superior. There are too many other factors that affect the bottom line in video poker and "luck" is the number one factor -- not the strategy followed, not the use of win and loss goals, not the prayers recited when dealt four to the royal, etc.

And because tax returns don't prove anything, I think looking at tax returns has no purpose at all. Rather, I would like to know the reasoning behind different strategies.

---

If you can verify you are looking a person's actual tax return, and I think you can if you get both mine and Rob's, then you can verify if we have been honest or lying. He has claimed he won every year. If he were to provide a set of tax returns chosen by another person and those returns all showed wins then it would appear he has been honest. Anything else indicates he has been lying.

I agree it has nothing to do with the validity of a system, however it does tell us whether the people making claims about those systems have been honest. And, that is really the most important issue.

As for the validity of systems, we already know the answer to that question. We have mathematics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quahaug

Rob...oh...Rob....are you there?

---

It is looking more and more like you will never see any returns from Singer. Absolute proof he's been lying. You can tell he's in a panic over the whole thing with all the other BS he's been slinging. Singer is a pathological liar, that has already been shown over and over again. This just adds a little icing on the cake.

really simple to end the tax return issue----both of you get the form to Alan by next friday. He then sends it in to IRS.

Case closed.

But that will never happen here because this has become a life unto itself and arci and singer seem to need this and, I assume neither really wants to do ir or it would have been done already.

The fact is, when it comes to playing video poker as it currently exists in Las Vegas, it might be a good idea to consult the stated conclusions of the guy who posted here who put in the most hours, did the most surveying and math analysis, and has the most hands on, city-wide experience. That would be -- not Alan (God no), not Rob, not Arci, not anybody else but Frank.

He said it was currently a high risk endeavor with risk of ruin running many times what it was a decade ago and potential for profit running a fraction of what it was a decade ago. In other words, for any serious amounts, a fool's errand.

As far as criticizing Dancer, people have been gentle. Did anybody read between the lines of his "I got ripped off" article? It's not explicitly stated, but it seems pretty likely he had recruited the guy who ripped him off to collect free play using his card while Dancer was 2500 miles away. Now this is done in an under-the-table kind of way by family members all the time -- it could be done at Pechanga, for example -- but we're talking about a guy winging his way around the country trying to establish other people as him to collect free play. That would be frowned upon by management, one would think.

The reason why I don't doubt that Rob won big money is because he played high denominations. You don't have to be brain surgeon or a computer wiz to win big money playing high denomination video poker. You only have to get lucky.

In fact, being smart, being educated, and playing with "proper strategy" isn't enough to win at video poker. Because if you do win, what are you winning? Pennies.

Who can win at video poker? Well, certainly those who get lucky. And, those who take chances to hit long shots. Like Rob who broke up three queens to hold three to the royal and got the royal on a $25 machine paying $100,000. That particular royal is well documented. Breaking up a full house to only hold three aces in Bonus poker is another long shot that when it hits means a significant win.

I don't doubt Rob's wins because I don't think the publisher of GT would have allowed Rob over all those years to post bogus reports of his wins. Is there a different opinion I am not aware of?

If Arc can win $10,000 or so each year playing $1 video poker, Rob can win on average about $100,000 a year playing $5, $10 and $25 video poker.

So instead of asking me why I don't doubt Rob, why aren't you asking me why I don't doubt Arc? Well, I don't doubt Arc either.

But winning is not the issue for me. The issue for me is still Rob's claims that he was able to make certain business deductions that don't seem to be legitimate, such as groceries as a business meal deduction.

Here is the thread with my post about "how to sell a gambling system": http://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/showth...selling+system

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I don't doubt Rob's wins because I don't think the publisher of GT would have allowed Rob over all those years to post bogus reports of his wins. Is there a different opinion I am not aware of?

---

How would the publisher of GT know? Because Rob brought in a bunch of pictures that could have been taken of anyone's hits? GT didn't care because they never certified Rob's column's as being true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

How would the publisher of GT know? Because Rob brought in a bunch of pictures that could have been taken of anyone's hits? GT didn't care because they never certified Rob's column's as being true.

---

Arc... there was no moon landing. It was shot in a studio in Hollywood. How do I know? There are no stars. The set designer forgot the stars.

This stuff's still going on....funny. Anyway, I won't discuss the article I am writing any more because you know what's going in it, why, and every part of it will be traceable to right here. I want to tell Alan that I can understand how he doesn't exactly remember each of the steps once the challenge got started, but he should understand that I did give arci a clear two week chance when Alan wanted to stop everything right then & there, & also arci proposed both he & I do it--not just me, although I agree it is 95% about me, given all his lies about my address, my winnings, and my wife's job. BTW arci, looks like IBM is pushing you guys out of its health care system and into Obamacare. Hope that doesn't have lifetime minimums! And if we had any sense at the start and if I wasn't in such a rush to get my part done because of our travel schedule, we should have done this the way regnis said with both of us sending our completed forms and checks to Alan to send into the IRS. Still no excuse for Alan to create a rule after my request was mailed saying that arci need not send in his request until after he received my returns.

Redietz, I don't know of any casino that would allow someone other than the person named on the slot card to retrieve free play. It was just another desperation move by Dancer that backfired--like when he thought he could dictate all the terms of the marriage to his wife.

Arci, sorry but you got caught in YET another lie....and they get more stupid by the lie. Yes GT published some of my big jackpot pictures, you know, like I do here. But whenever they did that or I wrote about big jackpots that they either did not have room to put up the picture or I didn't take one, I ALWAYS was required to show them my W2G's. Yes I know, now that you got shot in the foot, all you're left with is "but that doesn't prove that Robbie didn't lose it all before quitting". But we know you don't really think that, don't we. Otherwise, you'd be trumpeting those envious toots all over the place after having to endure my latest $5 gem. :)

Pissing match episode 426. You'd think that after so many episodes the producers of the show would think it's time to terminate it. Guess not :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vegas_lover

Pissing match episode 426. You'd think that after so many episodes the producers of the show would think it's time to terminate it. Guess not :p

---

Co- dependency anyone?

Vegas_lover is right. It is time to terminate. So, I think the only fair way to terminate is to do it this way:

Rob: have your tax returns sent to me.
Arc: as soon as I have the tax returns, I will send you the non disclosure agreement, so you will send in yours.
Everyone: I will keep Rob's envelope from the IRS sealed until Arc's envelope is received. When both envelopes have been received I will videotape and show opening both sealed envelopes as proof that the contents came directly from the IRS.

No more he said, she said, that was a lie, no that was a lie. We are going to do it.

Rob, why am I waiting for the IRS envelope before sending the NDA to Arc: because that's how I want to do it. And, it should make no difference to you if you really are sending me your tax returns.

Now, if you don't want to do it this way, I guess GT can save itself some ink, and a few more branches of a tree somewhere will live.

Just plain dumb Alan on several counts. So after the fact, you say arci now doesn't have to file until MY returns are received, because "that's the way you want it"? If it were arci who mailed his form in first, do you think he would actually have no problem with me not filing until AFTER you received his returns? See how stupid what you're saying is? THEN--and this is where your comprehension is truly depressing: do you not recall that I said the IRS sent me mail saying they need to know if you're an atty., trustee, mortgage co., or whatever, because my filings involve schedule C's....and that I wasn't responding because arci failed to bother filing his? What am I supposed to tell them, that I'm having 7 years worth of tax returns sent to the media?

Now I've got even more readable, very memorable ammo for my article--a forum owner who creates the oddest, dumbest mid-challenge parameters, then doesn't pay attention to the in-process activity. Come on Alan, this whole thing sounded good and doable to me but really was dumb from the start....and you recognized it hopefully because someone like arci proposed it. I gave it a good shot and I gave arci fair warning, yet for some strange reason you had to jump in and change things around, making it totally undoable even for the guy who escaped his own challenge.

Rob, I am sure that a note to the IRS to confirm that you want your returns sent to me will be sufficient. If you need a title for me, call me a "business consultant."

I still don't understand why it makes a difference to you if your returns are sent to me first?

Now, for the record: I don't want your returns. But I don't want you putting an article on GT saying that Arc backed out of the challenge because that isn't true.

Frankly, I think this whole "challenge" is stupid. So I have another idea: use your space in GT to write about something more interesting and more important. I am absolutely positive that you have other, better uses, for the space in that paper.