A reminder about the high limit room at Wynn

This is an open email to all Forum members:

If you happen to be in the vicinity of the Wynn casinos in Vegas, please stop in to the high limit slots area and if you can snap a photo of the video poker machines that show a $25 denomination.

We are interested in how the $25 denomination appears in the "oval" similar to the photo below. If you don't want to post the photo yourself, please send me a Private Message and I will give you an email address to send it to me.

The reason we are interested in the appearance of the $25 in the oval is because of allegations that a particular jackpot photo was bogus and the image of the denomination was altered.

Thanks.

I wonder why redietz didn't just do this. Was it because the high limit room at Wynn wasn't up to snuff for all his high roller clients? :)

Alan, you'll need to do this task yourself. None of the paupers here can afford walking into Wynn, let alone the trip to LV.Besides, which of these tunas would have the courage to post a picture of any machine in there with a non-centered $25 decal? Then, we'll need one of these geniuses to explain how I got the perfectly fitted $100,000 verification screen to overlay the hit. So funny....

Dang, I was at Wynn (well, Encore) on the 25th and 26th. I walked through the high limit room and saw several high limit slots, but wasn't paying attention enough to notice a $25 video poker. Probably because I know I'll never be able to play them.

As for those who think they can't afford to stay at Wynn, don't be so sure. We played slots there for about 2 hours one day last August, 2 players on the same card. We earned 300 points which was enough to get us a free buffet for 2. It didn't take long and they were sending us letters for mid-week comps with $150 free play. We used it this week for 2 nights and was offered a 3rd day with an additional $50 free play, but couldn't stay longer. We chose Encore over Wynn as they are all suites. Had a great time. Didn't have to pay the resort fee, but did use the internet for $13.99.

Expecting the machines at Wynn/Encore to be tight, I actually held my own there. They tend to be highly volatile machines, but larger payouts. Since I went with the idea to loose, I actually came out ahead.

Left the Wynn this evening. Stopped by the high limit room and noticed the $25 machines. The symbol is 100% OFF center.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dante

Left the Wynn this evening. Stopped by the high limit room and noticed the $25 machines. The symbol is 100% OFF center.

---

Thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jbatdorf

Dang, I was at Wynn (well, Encore) on the 25th and 26th. I walked through the high limit room and saw several high limit slots, but wasn't paying attention enough to notice a $25 video poker. Probably because I know I'll never be able to play them.

As for those who think they can't afford to stay at Wynn, don't be so sure. We played slots there for about 2 hours one day last August, 2 players on the same card. We earned 300 points which was enough to get us a free buffet for 2. It didn't take long and they were sending us letters for mid-week comps with $150 free play. We used it this week for 2 nights and was offered a 3rd day with an additional $50 free play, but couldn't stay longer. We chose Encore over Wynn as they are all suites. Had a great time. Didn't have to pay the resort fee, but did use the internet for $13.99.

Expecting the machines at Wynn/Encore to be tight, I actually held my own there. They tend to be highly volatile machines, but larger payouts. Since I went with the idea to loose, I actually came out ahead.

---

Wynn/Encore has always been a fairly easy comp for those not afraid to go in there. So your experience seems to be spot-on to what I've known and had many others tell me. The scary part is the prices in the restaurants, at their bars, and how they do not comp drinks at the bars even if playing vp at $50/hand. It's as if Steve Wynn built these places for foreigners who get their five or six week "holidays" each year and flock to the properties not really caring how much they piss away on food or drinks, because they can't get anything like it where they come from.

BTW, does anybody think they'll ever see mickeycrimm Nv. or LV again, let alone Wynn? :)

I made a quick trip to the Wynn casino when I was in Las Vegas for a short time and I went into the high limit room and took a photo that confirms that the $25 symbol is off center. See the photo below.

And compare it to the original photo posted by Rob. Rob's original photo appears first. My photo taken at the Wynn is below Rob's.

http://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/attach...1&d=1391291441

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I made a quick trip to the Wynn casino when I was in Las Vegas for a short time and I went into the high limit room and took a photo that confirms that the $25 symbol is off center. See the photo below.

And compare it to the original photo posted by Rob. Rob's original photo appears first. My photo taken at the Wynn is below Rob's.

http://vegascasinotalk.com/forum/attach...1&d=1391291441

---

Do you think there will ever be an apology forthcoming from eddie? :) Or will he prefer to continue to be stunned by the truth? And how about all-logic, no-BS, it's-all-just-a-fabrication Mr. Spock. Imagine how stupid he feels right now.....

Why would anyone apologize or feel stupid? The image looked odd before, and still does now. The only thing this proves is that IGT doesn't appear to be very particular about the quality of their graphics, which I do find surprising.

And none of this makes any difference with the REAL issue surrounding this image, the one you keep trying to ignore:

That image was used to support your claim that it was won in early February of 2014 but the file name on the image clearly shows that the picture was actually taken in mid January.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spock

Why would anyone apologize or feel stupid? The image looked odd before, and still does now. The only thing this proves is that IGT doesn't appear to be very particular about the quality of their graphics, which I do find surprising.

And none of this makes any difference with the REAL issue surrounding this image, the one you keep trying to ignore:

That image was used to support your claim that it was won in early February of 2014 but the file name on the image clearly shows that the picture was actually taken in mid January.

---

You're funny Spock. This one bothered you, so you jumped into damage control mode in a flash. Usually, you comb thru, study, and bide your time while trying to come up with your stupid conspiracy theories about my wins. Your "photoshopped" theory and eddie's "altered" silliness got shot down by the undeniable truth, so you divert and deflect that into criticizing IGT which means absolutely nothing here. It's all about sour grapes and you know it. So whatcha got left? Time travelling. Get over it, and wise up. If I really hit it in Jan. instead of Feb., just think of how much more time I'd have had to win even more, which would have burned you up no end!

Actually the photo and confirmation of the $25 graphic proves nothing except that's how the graphic looks at Wynn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Actually the photo and confirmation of the $25 graphic proves nothing except that's how the graphic looks at Wynn.

---

But that doesn't stop Robbie from throwing in another round of insults.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Actually the photo and confirmation of the $25 graphic proves nothing except that's how the graphic looks at Wynn.

---

If that's REALLY the case Alan, then why didn't you go to Mandalay Bay or Treasure Island and take a picture of their $25 graphics instead? Oh wait....BINGO! It's because I hit the winner at Wynn!

Now we get to sum this up: Alan's claim of "inconsistencies" took another hit, as did the entire case from the two dufuses. So rather than capitulate to the facts, Alan prefers to keep the silly controversy going, and he does so only because he just can't come to grips with how I don't sit for hours and hours like he does, losing, after hitting big winners.

Calling regnis! You see my friend, this is the stuff I love. People in obvious pain over someone who's outperformed even their collective dreams. These are weak people who give themselves no chance whatsoever of ever overcoming the flaw. I gave them a chance, yet they prefer to writhe in agony instead of accept that which they do not want to and could never conceive of accepting. So instead of fighting it, I mock them. And after a while, I start to enjoy it. So sit back, relax, and enjoy! (unless, of course, forum etiquette and addiction is the end all in your life too--which I highly doubt) :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

If that's REALLY the case Alan, then why didn't you go to Mandalay Bay or Treasure Island and take a picture of their $25 graphics instead? Oh wait....BINGO! It's because I hit the winner at Wynn!

Now we get to sum this up: Alan's claim of "inconsistencies" took another hit, as did the entire case from the two dufuses. So rather than capitulate to the facts, Alan prefers to keep the silly controversy going, and he does so only because he just can't come to grips with how I don't sit for hours and hours like he does, losing, after hitting big winners.

Calling regnis! You see my friend, this is the stuff I love. People in obvious pain over someone who's outperformed even their collective dreams. These are weak people who give themselves no chance whatsoever of ever overcoming the flaw. I gave them a chance, yet they prefer to writhe in agony instead of accept that which they do not want to and could never conceive of accepting. So instead of fighting it, I mock them. And after a while, I start to enjoy it. So sit back, relax, and enjoy! (unless, of course, forum etiquette and addiction is the end all in your life too--which I highly doubt) :)

---

Ahhh more insults. Now there's something new. Hey Alan, this "ignoring" stuff is working like a charm :)

Rob all I could do is confirm the appearance of the graphic. The controversy about your wins will continue because you want them to continue.

I never doubted your win -- only your claims about how long you play and now I also challenge your accounting of soft profits.

Frankly Rob when all of the evidence or lack of evidence is laid out I don't know what to believe.

Rob, why won't you comment about the date of the picture?

Clearly it was taken in mid-January, not February like you claimed.

Why is that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Rob all I could do is confirm the appearance of the graphic. The controversy about your wins will continue because you want them to continue.

I never doubted your win -- only your claims about how long you play and now I also challenge your accounting of soft profits.

Frankly Rob when all of the evidence or lack of evidence is laid out I don't know what to believe.

---

The "controversy" continues because there's too much jealousy over some big wins, and you can't stop feeding into it. You just won't accept how little I''ve played between the hits because it doesn't fit into your version of not being able to leave a casino when I do. You could learn, but you won't do that either.

What do you mean "challenge" about soft profits? I'm taking that as you don't understand them even after 50 times explaining them. So what's new. Then explain what confuses you.

I'll say it because you're afraid of humiliating your members--who you've already done that to by going into Wynn if you haven't figured it out yet. The crybabies said I altered the $25 decal, which to them was absolute proof I "fabricated" my largest win at Wynn. But here comes Alan, with camera in hand, seeking out the undeniable truth about if I actually played a machine there that had an imperfect decal. Alas, it matches up, when most or all other machines everyone's looked at elsewhere had "perfect" decals. Oops! RS wasn't making this up!!

Tough love people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

Rob, why won't you comment about the date of the picture?

Clearly it was taken in mid-January, not February like you claimed.

Why is that?

---

Now onto these sour grapes. You couldn't do a thing about my offers, you are dumbfounded over Alan making a fool out of you over the decal, so we're time travelling again.

Why is the date a bit off? You tell me. Are all cameras technically perfect? Hmmm.... And if I "altered" the date to spoof you? More fun for me. But did I REALLY play on a different date for some reason and chose not to give anonymous critics exact finite details? Well, my only comment is when Shackleford saw this he chose to congratulate me without any whining whatsoever. (Maybe because he's met me?--get it?). So I'll leave it to you and your disappointments over the decal etc.to answer the "date" question. But you should get over it. You might make yourself sick again and make the missus work more overtime.

Rob, you're right. I can't accept how little you've played between the big hits. Especially when you tell us that you are not always playing at the high denominations and some or perhaps much of your play is at lower denominations-- and then miraculously with only a few hundred dollars left you hit the monsters at the $25 denominations.

Your strategy about banking soft profits also no longer makes sense because in your last accounting of your net win you failed to list the value of your soft profits that you cashed out -- and that is a big oversight and an error because it means you didn't have any soft profits, doesn't it? Are we to believe that you pumped your soft profits back in? And if so, what does that say about your soft profits strategy?

Yes, Rob, you have too many inconsistencies. There is no jealousy here, but there is a lot of doubt.

I don't think you fabricated your big wins, but I think you weren't forthcoming about the true time and denominations that you played. Because what you claim just doesn't add up.

So save your talk about pain and jealousy because it's meaningless talk now. The graphic of the $25 means nothing -- period. It was only one small piece of the jigsaw puzzle that you created for yourself. Meanwhile the rest of the jigsaw puzzle still cannot be put together.

If you won't come up with verifiable facts, then no one can believe your claims. It's just that simple. And as long as you don't come up with verifiable facts, but substitute name calling for them, no one will believe you and the animosity will only increase.

So I am going to put this question to you: do you want to be believed? If you do, you will present the information to make your claims about big wins in short periods of time believable. Or, do you just want to continue hurling insults without responding to valid questions? The choice is yours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Now onto these sour grapes. You couldn't do a thing about my offers, you are dumbfounded over Alan making a fool out of you over the decal, so we're time travelling again.

Why is the date a bit off? You tell me. Are all cameras technically perfect? Hmmm.... And if I "altered" the date to spoof you? More fun for me. But did I REALLY play on a different date for some reason and chose not to give anonymous critics exact finite details? Well, my only comment is when Shackleford saw this he chose to congratulate me without any whining whatsoever. (Maybe because he's met me?--get it?). So I'll leave it to you and your disappointments over the decal etc.to answer the "date" question. But you should get over it. You might make yourself sick again and make the missus work more overtime.

---

Rob, those pictures were clearly taken by a phone (probably an iPhone), and you didn't think about the time/date stamp in the filename before uploading them. You probably just saw them as a bunch of numbers. You have been caught in an obvious lie, and now you are DANCING around it.

The only thing I'll agree is that you are indeed "spoofing" us. Your entire presence here is a big troll job. I think you're also half-serious (in that you really want people to respect you and your video poker play), but you also enjoy getting everyone riled up.

Dan you're an angry man, and I don't have an iPhone. We went over the dates nonsense last year as well as my list of phones and cameras, so while you may want to think "unawareness" abounds, that envy-driven foolishness meant nothing to me then and is just as irrelevant to me today. The only meaningful part is watching you and Spock come apart at the seams over it. I just hope you're not going thru this at Caesars again so you won't be forced to blame them for something else that you think the world is being so unfair to you over.

On the positive side, may I offer you this vehicle that should give you a "smidgen" of comfort:

1. Tell yourself " he plays with someone else's money"!
2. If that isn't cutting it, then convince yourself "he has sugar daddys that he sends out so he can take credit for their wins"!
3. Should those comfort-inducing efforts fail, just use the old standby: "he probably lost it all anyway".

Just as closing one's eyes at an IMAX show instantly eliminates all feelings of discomfort for those too weak to go in in the first place, this method is a proven fix for jealous, losing gamblers. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

We went over the dates nonsense last year as well as my list of phones and cameras

---

Nice try, but not even close. You need to remember that while the writings of others are usually well documented and contain factual information your substance-optional posts are much less likely to support your contentions. In this case it can all be read starting on this page. No list of phones or cameras. No comments at all from you about the important issue which was out of sequence file names that didn't support your narrative of when they were taken. Your response was precisely what you always attempt to do: bullshit your way out of a corner without writing anything that actually answers the criticism pointed towards you. In fact, it's virtually identical to what you are currently doing. So last year you posted images that were out of sequence which undermined their validity while this year you post images with dates that don't match the times you claimed to have won them. Two similar, yet completely different issues, with both being addressed by you with similar attempts at evasion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Are all cameras technically perfect?

---

Nope, and had this been one single occurrence you might have been able to get away with it. But there are three separate and distinct events where images don't match your narrative. The variations in each are widely different, which shows it isn't a technical error.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

And if I "altered" the date to spoof you? More fun for me. But did I REALLY play on a different date for some reason and chose not to give anonymous critics exact finite details?

---

Wow. I can't believe you were so desperate that this was all you had left. The only UN-surprising aspect of this pathetic attempt to explain your blunder is you showing complete contempt for others by expecting them to believe it. The old "I did it on purpose but didn't tell anyone until I got caught" defense is about as believable as documents hiding in storage lockers and secret regulations that violate the law. BTW, don't believe for a second that your fishing expedition attempt to put a number of possible excuses out there to see which one might fly didn't escape notice.

I think you need to adopt the moniker "Robocchio". Or maybe we should do that for you. Perhaps with an accompanying graphic showing a swelling proboscis. Not only does it fit the tall tales you tell about your own life but its good in describing your warped "analysis" of others. I happened to see your reply and made a response but in your fantasy world I "jumped into damage control mode in a flash". Even though you should be well aware by now that a significant number of people reading this and other forums don't believe a word you write you continually try to deflect criticism as being the product of "envy" or "sour grapes", an impossibility for those who consider your tales to be completely fabricated.

And while you'd really like to think that my comments about IGT had some relationship to you, (because if there is one thing I think everyone here can agree upon its that everything revolves around Roboccio), rather than a "diversion" it was a simple observation. If I was trying to deflect I'd probably do something like... hmm... I dunno.... maybe mentioning Bob Dancer over and over again in a thread that had nothing to do with him.

Oh. That's right. You already did exactly that while squirming away from answering uncomfortable questions about your image dates not matching your stories.

You need to realize that just because you are jealous when reading about other peoples wins and spend most of your time trying to evade the tough questions that you are asked doesn't mean the rest of us do, nor is there some sekrit underlying reason for everything people post. If you need to imagine that everyone is jealous of you in order to retain your sanity then feel free to do so, but the constant repetition of "sour grapes" and "envy" in the forums only serves to make you look silly. I mean good Lord; after the first thousand times I think people got the point. And Roboccio, every time you claim you've "gotten under someones skin" and then spent weeks and weeks mentioning them every single time you post even if they have not posted in ages clearly shows the one who has most been effected is you...

The only thing I can't figure out if its all just an act or if you truly are that delusional. Based on everything else you've written, especially of late, "delusional" is clearly leading the pack.

Learn from the "masterocchio" Spock: I never read long rambling posts. Not my fault you aren't articulate enuf to make your point efficiently. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Learn from the "masterocchio" Spock: I never read long rambling posts. Not my fault you aren't articulate enuf to make your point efficiently. :)

---

I read it Rob. You should too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I read it Rob. You should too.

---

He did read it. If he didn't then why did he write "masterocchio"? that phrase wasn't exactly prominent in the original post. You really should spend more time focusing on what he does, not what he says. Its a lot more illuminating.

It doesn't matter to me anyway; I write primarily so everyone else that reads this forum can learn things they might otherwise not be aware of.

Waa...waa...waa...Spock. Get over it, and see if there's anything in your life that you might be able to live with. Or keep me inside your head. I like torturing you :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I read it Rob. You should too.

---

I began reading it Alan until I saw robonocchio or whatever he wrote, then I quit. It made no sense. He's in a bad place and he's full of hate. If he weren't, he'd have openly eliminated his nonsensical statements about the decal as soon as you proved it exists there instead of deflecting and diverting over to time travelling. He is incapable of ever letting go, just like Dan. Losers do that, esp. when they have to endure and agonize over the wins of someone else. I've seen this reaction for many years.

Spock,

Thank for your very sensible and accurate post. Best piece of analysis I've read in quite a while.

I have one comment about "image dates." Since all smart phones are linked to a "network" I believe that all smart phones have their internal clocks and time stamps automatically updated. I doubt that a smart phone used today would show a time stamp from a previous date. If I am wrong about this please correct me.

But with that said, the only time my smart phone showed an incorrect time (time -- not date) was when I've had a time change going through a time zone change (on a flight) or because of a switch to daylight savings time or to standard time, and then the time was corrected either after a delay or when I rebooted my phone. However, even with the "time" being off the "date" was not off.

So little time, so many lies .... Singer can't help make a fool out of himself over and over again. BTW Robocchio, I thought you were going to send me those "documents" defining your system. Chuckle, chuckle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcimede$

So little time, so many lies .... Singer can't help make a fool out of himself over and over again. BTW Robocchio, I thought you were going to send me those "documents" defining your system. Chuckle, chuckle.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

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

---

arcimede$, I'm surprised no one challenged Rob on this lie. Does having a "son-in-law who works for the IRS" entitle you to look at everyone's confidential information whenever you like?

Actually if Rob is telling the truth about his relative being an IRS employee and allowing Rob to see tax returns of other people not only would Rob face a felony, but his relative would lose his job... and also face a felony. Considering that the peeping eyes of the government are supposedly watching every website for clues about terrorist activities and criminal activities, and since the government already can match Rob's screen name to his true name, and can identify his relative -- if any of this is true Rob has already caused some serious trouble for his relative.

So... that's why I don't think it's true.

All the speculating in order to soothe the pain my winning has cause is more fun than I thought! And a gold star to anyone who can find where I said a "relative" of mine showed me anything :) Didn't anyone ever see the movie Law Abiding Citizen?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

All the speculating in order to soothe the pain my winning has cause is more fun than I thought! And a gold star to anyone who can find where I said a "relative" of mine showed me anything :) Didn't anyone ever see the movie Law Abiding Citizen?

---

You're probably right about that. It's likely your relatives want nothing to do with you.

Come on Eddie! Show us some more of those" he DOCTORED it!!" hysterics that pumped up your hopes....That is, until you fell flat on your face--again!! Hahahahaha :):)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Come on Eddie! Show us some more of those" he DOCTORED it!!" hysterics that pumped up your hopes....That is, until you fell flat on your face--again!! Hahahahaha :):)

---

Earlier Alan (whom everyone believes) posted a picture of an off centered $5 symbol. He posted the picture of the off centered $25 symbol and I believe him. Why you should feel that somehow validates your lies or proves you didn't make up the win is beyond me. Oh, I know why you would think that...it's because you are a stupid, old, delusional man.

Robocchio (whom no one believes), you could post 1+1=2 right now and no one would believe it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by a2a3dseddie

arcimede$, I'm surprised no one challenged Rob on this lie. Does having a "son-in-law who works for the IRS" entitle you to look at everyone's confidential information whenever you like?

---

I asked Rob to post the information right here. I've even gave him permission. What has he done? Zilch. Until he backs up his claim and posts the information he is admitting he lied.