Why is Rob allowed to post here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

I'm still wondering why Rob Stringer is allowed to post here...

---

You and me both RS. I get that some people want a forum where people are free to post whatever is on there mind, free of censorship. In theory, that is great. But there is a difference in people having differing opinions (good), and someone who's only intention is to be disruptive and as nasty as they can possible be (bad), Allowing these types of troll and there is no other word for these bitter old men, only diminishes any site and discourages growth and new members. Every site seems to have a couple of these bitter old guys lately. :(

It confuses me as to what this site is supposed to be? :confused: Dan Druff seems like a reasonable guy. He explained the history of the site, that it started as Alan's site related to his infomercial business, but most of the conversation turned to gambling topics. I guess Alan had an anything goes policy. But when Someone else takes over and renames the site "Vegas Casino Talk", it would seem like the intent was to turn the page and have a legitimate site about gambling and AP topics. But that doesn't seem to be the intent. There doesn't seem to be any turning the page or interest in growth. Just a few bitter old trolls doing their thing....being nasty and disruptive and discouraging any kind of possible growth and/or new members. :confused:

Alan was a journalist, so he was a free speech advocate. I'm an old journalism major, and I'm big on free speech. One problem with Rob is that he fixates on individuals and attacks them in a way that is not related to whatever the argument is. That's usually a tip-off that the argument he's making just isn't standing on its own. Another problem is that he just makes things up and tosses them out there in a public space, which becomes an issue when people posting under their real names (such Alan and me) are the targets. For example, Rob has in the past decided Alan's a gambling addict and that is the reason for his multiple marriages. With me, who he knows less about, he decided I'm not me or I'm making things up. He's also said that I was a drug addict, which is so off the beaten path, I can't even get really upset.

I think Rob viewed Alan as a credibility lifeline after virtually every other site had shut him down and his GT tenure was truncated. Then Alan sold the site, and I believe Rob's just being nasty so he can get himself banned. Dan's actually hurt Rob by allowing him to keep posting because it's gets more and more clear that Rob's grasping at straws for credibility and is just being downright obnoxious so he can wave a flag that says he was banned for being politically incorrect and telling the truth (that's big these days).

Rob's not a bad writer, and he has some valuable things to say about Las Vegas and how it works. But he's basically decided to tout his "world's greatest vp player" schtick and verbally abuse people instead of warning about possible rigged machines, and Native American gaming, and tipping, and slot club addictions. He has his narrative, and he's sticking to it, no matter how loony a martingale vp system looks to anyone who can do simple math. I mean, my God, the man has 5000 posts. Go back and try to find one with some math in it, or even one with some kind of accounting of his own play. Sometimes it's the things that don't get written that tell you all you need to know.

There's no question Rob is a drag on people posting. He may be a boost for viewership, but he's definitely a drag on turning people from lurkers to posters.

I have been considering what to do about this.

Originally I wanted to run the forum mostly in the "spirit" of the original Alanbestbuys forum, and that included allowing Rob to continue to exist here.

But if he's just going to ruin every thread with pointless trolling, I might have to revisit that.

The problem is there is no context to Robs insulting posts. Since no one is really engaging him on his level it's taken the wind out of his sails. If you go back a ways he was entertaining in a way when Arci and him were going back and forth for instance. The last thing I chuckled at was Micky's drunken responses to him but Micky's now on the wagon (good for you) so that's the end of that.I think he's finally run his course.

I believe in positive reinforcement. I think we should react to Rob when he contributes something worthwhile and just ignore everything else. Rob could make some positive contributions.

Don't hold your breath waiting for something worthwhile.

If Rob does get banned from threads, I have to say I will miss Biloxi Bill's comebacks. Biloxi has saved me much wear and tear, as I have rarely felt it necessary to get down in Rob's mud. Biloxi has gotten into the mud, told some jokes, and out-wrestled the pig, so to speak.

Rather than an outright ban how about just deleting the bs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Rather than an outright ban how about just deleting the bs?

---

That would be like editing Dolly Parton's chest out of her photos. Sorry, sexist, but it's the first thing that came to mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

But if he's just going to ruin every thread with pointless trolling, I might have to revisit that.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I think we should react to Rob when he contributes something worthwhile and just ignore everything else.

---

Alan is correct.

I don't see anything ban-worthy about Rob's behavior. His post volume is frequent but not excessive. Usually he makes his points concisely. His personal insults are sometimes amusing, and always harmless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Rather than an outright ban how about just deleting the bs?

---

Or move to a containment thread if it's considered intolerable in the place where it was posted. But it's not desirable to completely eliminate the BS. Perhaps a warning could be added, advising people not to wear their good shoes inside the forum.

https://s26.postimg.org/z21g1dxt5/Fr...rs_Company.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bocce ball

Alan is correct.

I don't see anything ban-worthy about Rob's behavior. His post volume is frequent but not excessive. Usually he makes his points concisely. His personal insults are sometimes amusing, and always harmless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Rather than an outright ban how about just deleting the bs?

---

Or move to a containment thread if it's considered intolerable in the place where it was posted. But it's not desirable to completely eliminate the BS. Perhaps a warning could be added, advising people not to wear their good shoes inside the forum.

https://s26.postimg.org/z21g1dxt5/Fr...rs_Company.jpg

---

Bocce, really, if you were posting under your real name and Rob said your gambling addiction had ruined your marriages (without data or examples or evidence), or that you were guilty of identity theft and/or you were a drug addict, would you consider that "harmless?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Bocce, really, if you were posting under your real name and Rob said your gambling addiction had ruined your marriages (without data or examples or evidence), or that you were guilty of identity theft and/or you were a drug addict, would you consider that "harmless?"

---

Pretty much. If there's no evidence, it's obviously not a credible accusation. If there is evidence, someone else would have mentioned it eventually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I believe in positive reinforcement. I think we should react to Rob when he contributes something worthwhile and just ignore everything else. Rob could make some positive contributions.

---

The problem is that Rob does not make positive contributions (perhaps once in a blue moon he will). I've put Rob on my ignore list, but his bullshit still shows up, as I can see what he wrote in quotes. Even if he isn't quoted but someone responds, it's still changing the subject the thread, derailing it. This is every single thread where Rob posts.

Your suggestion is like saying a dog owner should ignore it when the dog shits in the house and praise him when he does a backflip. You're going to end up with a house full of shit and a dog that doesn't do backflips.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Rather than an outright ban how about just deleting the bs?

---

These are essentially the same thing, as everything he writes would be deleted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bocce ball

Alan is correct.

I don't see anything ban-worthy about Rob's behavior. His post volume is frequent but not excessive. Usually he makes his points concisely. His personal insults are sometimes amusing, and always harmless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Rather than an outright ban how about just deleting the bs?

---

Or move to a containment thread if it's considered intolerable in the place where it was posted. But it's not desirable to completely eliminate the BS. Perhaps a warning could be added, advising people not to wear their good shoes inside the forum.

---

Rob tries to derail every thread he posts in. I mean come on, wtf is this bullshit:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Alan, we know how special this story is, how it relates to what's really important in life, and what memories it surely holds for you. But do you really think it has any meaning whatsoever to most of the slug gamblers and "ap" bsers here, who can't even show respect for their own lives most of the time? And guess how much a lowlife like mickey, who continually ignores personal hygiene and health by drinking and smoking (and as we can see, poor eating habits also) would appreciate what you've gone thru.

The world is better because you're still here. That's all that's important.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bocce ball

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Bocce, really, if you were posting under your real name and Rob said your gambling addiction had ruined your marriages (without data or examples or evidence), or that you were guilty of identity theft and/or you were a drug addict, would you consider that "harmless?"

---

Pretty much. If there's no evidence, it's obviously not a credible accusation. If there is evidence, someone else would have mentioned it eventually.

---

We don't live in a world where people care about evidence or credibility.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

We don't live in a world where people care about evidence or credibility.

---

True, but silencing Rob doesn't eliminate the problem of stupid people believing stupid things. They'll simply seek out something else stupid to believe.

Free exchange of ideas with vigorous debate encourages people to think for themselves instead of mindlessly following along with the crowd.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bocce ball

Free exchange of ideas with vigorous debate encourages people to think for themselves instead of mindlessly following along with the crowd.

---

vig·or·ous. [ˈviɡ(ə)rəs],
ADJECTIVE
strong, healthy, and full of energy
synonyms: robust · healthy

If what we were really talking about was 'vigorous debate' relating to a specific, on topic discussion, that would be a good argument. But that is NOT what we are talking about. The gay references and insults, including references of HIV against me, the constant drunk references against mickey and so many other frequent offensive attacks by Rob to other members, are not only mostly not on topic, but they clearly show beyond any reasonable doubt two things. (1) that this person has no robust, healthy, reasonable argument to make so he resorts to personal attacks and (2) that his sole intent is to be disruptive, argumentative, combative and offensive.

His agenda is not to add anything to the site, but to troll and be obnoxious...plain and simple. Some may enjoy that drama. Maybe a few of the lurkers that lurk everyday only read for that drama. If that is the purpose of the site, so be it. But if the purpose is responsible healthy discussion involving gambling, and Vegas related topics allowing this obvious trolling to continue only serves to discourage legitimate members from participating and will forever limit this site and any possibility of real robust, healthy and vigorous discussions.

The way I remember it.
1. There was a period of time when his strategy was discussed-and the posts are on this forum.
2. Then there was a period where "math" and derogatory remarks were used to downplay and "disprove" the strategy.
3. Now when the tables turn, no one wants to hear what they once were guilty of- filthy, stupid, senseless remarks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

The way I remember it.
1. There was a period of time when his strategy was discussed-and the posts are on this forum.
2. Then there was a period where "math" and derogatory remarks were used to downplay and "disprove" the strategy.
3. Now when the tables turn, no one wants to hear what they once were guilty of- filthy, stupid, senseless remarks.

---

Just wondering why math and disprove are in quotation marks, as opposed, say, to "strategy."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

The way I remember it.
1. There was a period of time when his strategy was discussed-and the posts are on this forum.
2. Then there was a period where "math" and derogatory remarks were used to downplay and "disprove" the strategy.
3. Now when the tables turn, no one wants to hear what they once were guilty of- filthy, stupid, senseless remarks.

---

Just wondering why math and disprove are in quotation marks, as opposed, say, to "strategy."

---

Simple. No one tried any of the strategies or met with Rob to actually post results but instead used theoretical formulas and percentages that "proved" their rebuttal. And dollar amounts are no excuse as they can be tried at any denomination(s). Even Alan, who sometimes watched his play never sat for a learning session.
Actually, it doesn't matter anymore as I grew weary of checking in so often and left feeling I was in a prison of homos, drunks, and murderers. To wit, my respect for Arci grew because of his silence and restraint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

The way I remember it.
1. There was a period of time when his strategy was discussed-and the posts are on this forum.
2. Then there was a period where "math" and derogatory remarks were used to downplay and "disprove" the strategy.
3. Now when the tables turn, no one wants to hear what they once were guilty of- filthy, stupid, senseless remarks.

---

Just wondering why math and disprove are in quotation marks, as opposed, say, to "strategy."

---

Simple. No one tried any of the strategies or met with Rob to actually post results but instead used theoretical formulas and percentages that "proved" their rebuttal. And dollar amounts are no excuse as they can be tried at any denomination(s). Even Alan, who sometimes watched his play never sat for a learning session.
Actually, it doesn't matter anymore as I grew weary of checking in so often and left feeling I was in a prison of homos, drunks, and murderers. To wit, my respect for Arci grew because of his silence and restraint.

---

He went bankrupt...that`s all anyone needs to know

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

The way I remember it.
1. There was a period of time when his strategy was discussed-and the posts are on this forum.
2. Then there was a period where "math" and derogatory remarks were used to downplay and "disprove" the strategy.
3. Now when the tables turn, no one wants to hear what they once were guilty of- filthy, stupid, senseless remarks.

---

Just wondering why math and disprove are in quotation marks, as opposed, say, to "strategy."

---

Simple. No one tried any of the strategies or met with Rob to actually post results but instead used theoretical formulas and percentages that "proved" their rebuttal. And dollar amounts are no excuse as they can be tried at any denomination(s). Even Alan, who sometimes watched his play never sat for a learning session.
Actually, it doesn't matter anymore as I grew weary of checking in so often and left feeling I was in a prison of homos, drunks, and murderers. To wit, my respect for Arci grew because of his silence and restraint.

---

He went bankrupt...that`s all anyone needs to know.....that, and he looks like a poor man`s version of Kramer, and his significant other looks like Francis the Talking Mule

Trying something that won't work is ignorant and stupid.

Btw, an easy way to breathe underwater without using a scuba tank, snorkel, etc. is to close your eyes and count backwards from 100. Don't go using some theoretical mumbo jumbo saying you'd drown/die, just try it for yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

Trying something that won't work is ignorant and stupid.

Btw, an easy way to breathe underwater without using a scuba tank, snorkel, etc. is to close your eyes and count backwards from 100. Don't go using some theoretical mumbo jumbo saying you'd drown/die, just try it for yourself.

---

Oh- I forgot one! You just reminded me. Twisted logic.

Rob had his "students" use his card in the machine. That's the bottom line. That's what his "system" is based on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

I'm still wondering why Rob Stringer is allowed to post here...

---

You and me both RS.

---

You both advocate censoring Singer, but offer no opinion on Biloxi Bill?

That's some serious AP BS right there.

Let me correct one point. Rob filed bankruptcy as a conventional video poker. He says when he switched to his system he won the million dollars.

Regarding why I never learned Rob's system: I didn't avail mylf of the opportunity. I still don't understand it and I would have to sit with him to learn it.

My videos with him were just about special plays. Frankly I reject most of them but not all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

I'm still wondering why Rob Stringer is allowed to post here...

---

You and me both RS.

---

You both advocate censoring Singer, but offer no opinion on Biloxi Bill?

That's some serious AP BS right there.

---

Maybe because I don`t screw with anyone here or get too involved with threads unless you or your jackoff idol are in there acting like total dickwads to people...

You and Singer are mental midgets and intellectual dwarfs compared to someone with a high IQ like myself....cutting both of you to bits requires very little effort on my part...

both of you know this, and why you both don`t engage me...that and the obvious fact you`re both internet pussies :rolleyes:

I told you a few things when I first joined here a year and a half ago, and you accused me of being someone else after my first post...One, I told

you I was in the jackoff extermination business...you and your hero are obvious candidates....and two, after you were so rude to me and tried to punk me out, I told you i would be your worst nightmare on this board, and I believe in being a man of my word :cool:

I`ve seen you for a year and a half try and come on here like a wise ass trying to punk various people out .....that won`t and never did fly with me boy, so run along back to the boys locker room and stay there

I don't mind if Rob gets in the mud and argues with the various people here. There's plenty of fighting on this forum without Rob. It won't be peaceful a this place even if I ban Rob.

However, Rob does tend to derail threads with pointless trolling, and that's what I want to see stopped.

I might just try banning him from specific threads if he shows up and causes them to get derailed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

The way I remember it.
1. There was a period of time when his strategy was discussed-and the posts are on this forum.
2. Then there was a period where "math" and derogatory remarks were used to downplay and "disprove" the strategy.
3. Now when the tables turn, no one wants to hear what they once were guilty of- filthy, stupid, senseless remarks.

---

Sling, you need a double shot of a good dose of reality. Singer's bs has been going on in the forums for 15 years. Go read the early days of FREEvpFREE or LVA Sports or WoV where Rob is involved. Countless individuals have tried to debate with Rob over the merit's of Rob's tactics at video poker. It starts along the lines of "Mr. Singer, I disagree with your tactics at video poker and here is why...." and Rob's response is along the lines of "You filthy disgusting addicted gambler...."

Rob has made countless attacks on Bob Dancer and Jean Scott over the years calling them filthy disgusting addicted gamblers. But have you ever read anything from them attacking him. No, you haven't. A prime example is kewlj, a new member here. Without provocation Rob made a gratuitous blistering attack on him.

Sling, you really need to wake up and smell the coffee. You need to start dealing with reality. Singer's system should of made you rich by now if it really works. Instead of doing it once a week like Rob said he did you could do it once a day, twice a day, and in short order you should have parlayed up to the 1/2/5/10/25/100 level that Rob said he played at. And then hit the big time. But you haven't done that have you?

Sling, do you have any bankroll at all? What did you say Singer has done for you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biloxi Bill

both of you know this, and why you both don`t engage me

---

Stop...I already buried you back when you used to call yourself LoneStarHorse.

90% of your posts are one-liners that show you are mentally ill, if anyone is on the chopping block around here it's gotta be sicko Biloxi Bill.

Once Dan started talking about banning people, then all of the sudden you start posting more than one stupid sentence at a time...so now you post multiple stupid sentences at a time.

You are your parents' worst nightmare boy, not mine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biloxi Bill

both of you know this, and why you both don`t engage me

---

Stop...I already buried you back when you used to call yourself LoneStarHorse.

90% of your posts are one-liners that show you are mentally ill, if anyone is on the chopping block around here it's gotta be sicko Biloxi Bill.

Once Dan started talking about banning people, then all of the sudden you start posting more than one stupid sentence at a time...so now you post multiple stupid sentences at a time.

You are your parents' worst nightmare boy, not mine.

---

You didn`t burn anything but your tongue on Rob`s ass, you miserable puke....I doubt anyone has ever seen a man crush like you have on Singer....pathetic, and kinda creepy at the same time....like I said, it`s clear you are a little keyboard pussy who latched on to another man to validate himself.....get back to that peephole that connects from your janitors closet to the football teams shower......boy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

I'm still wondering why Rob Stringer is allowed to post here...

---

You and me both RS. I get that some people want a forum where people are free to post whatever is on there mind, free of censorship. In theory, that is great. But there is a difference in people having differing opinions (good), and someone who's only intention is to be disruptive and as nasty as they can possible be (bad), Allowing these types of troll and there is no other word for these bitter old men, only diminishes any site and discourages growth and new members. Every site seems to have a couple of these bitter old guys lately. :(

It confuses me as to what this site is supposed to be? :confused: Dan Druff seems like a reasonable guy. He explained the history of the site, that it started as Alan's site related to his infomercial business, but most of the conversation turned to gambling topics. I guess Alan had an anything goes policy. But when Someone else takes over and renames the site "Vegas Casino Talk", it would seem like the intent was to turn the page and have a legitimate site about gambling and AP topics. But that doesn't seem to be the intent. There doesn't seem to be any turning the page or interest in growth. Just a few bitter old trolls doing their thing....being nasty and disruptive and discouraging any kind of possible growth and/or new members. :confused:

---

waaa....waaa....sniffle sniffle :) Poor twinkle toes is beside himself. :)

What you might ponder over more than your obsession with me, is why you just had to come here and spew your lies about being some phony bj (and I mean Blackjack--not what you're disgustingly really into) "pro" and having the ability to simultaneously count tables next to you that you can't even see the cards on.

Wise up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quahaug

The problem is there is no context to Robs insulting posts. Since no one is really engaging him on his level it's taken the wind out of his sails. If you go back a ways he was entertaining in a way when Arci and him were going back and forth for instance. The last thing I chuckled at was Micky's drunken responses to him but Micky's now on the wagon (good for you) so that's the end of that.I think he's finally run his course.

---

Mickey's on the wagon? Was it his latest DUI that triggered it??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bocce ball

Alan is correct.

I don't see anything ban-worthy about Rob's behavior. His post volume is frequent but not excessive. Usually he makes his points concisely. His personal insults are sometimes amusing, and always harmless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Rather than an outright ban how about just deleting the bs?

---

Or move to a containment thread if it's considered intolerable in the place where it was posted. But it's not desirable to completely eliminate the BS. Perhaps a warning could be added, advising people not to wear their good shoes inside the forum.

https://s26.postimg.org/z21g1dxt5/Fr...rs_Company.jpg

---

Bocce, really, if you were posting under your real name and Rob said your gambling addiction had ruined your marriages (without data or examples or evidence), or that you were guilty of identity theft and/or you were a drug addict, would you consider that "harmless?"

---

Red, absolute evidence or a court verdict is not needed when it comes to internet discussions--esp. about social problems as it relates to gambling. Ever hear of the saying "if it quacks like a duck then it's a duck"? We'll, when someone who's a very nice person and has a decent job, and at the same time spends what amounts to an inordinate amount of time gambling and discussing gaming--and has one failed marriage after another after another after another--then you need not consult an encyclopedia, a group of mensas, or some know-it-all library university professor, to understand where the problem truly lies.

A good education would have taught you that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biloxi Bill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Just wondering why math and disprove are in quotation marks, as opposed, say, to "strategy."

---

Simple. No one tried any of the strategies or met with Rob to actually post results but instead used theoretical formulas and percentages that "proved" their rebuttal. And dollar amounts are no excuse as they can be tried at any denomination(s). Even Alan, who sometimes watched his play never sat for a learning session.
Actually, it doesn't matter anymore as I grew weary of checking in so often and left feeling I was in a prison of homos, drunks, and murderers. To wit, my respect for Arci grew because of his silence and restraint.

---

He went bankrupt...that`s all anyone needs to know

---

Very good Bill--in 1996....when I was an AP.

So how's that fit into your silly narrative....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RS__

Trying something that won't work is ignorant and stupid.

Btw, an easy way to breathe underwater without using a scuba tank, snorkel, etc. is to close your eyes and count backwards from 100. Don't go using some theoretical mumbo jumbo saying you'd drown/die, just try it for yourself.

---

Explain how you "know it won't work". It works for me--far beyond whatever you say works for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biloxi Bill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biloxi Bill

both of you know this, and why you both don`t engage me

---

Stop...I already buried you back when you used to call yourself LoneStarHorse.

90% of your posts are one-liners that show you are mentally ill, if anyone is on the chopping block around here it's gotta be sicko Biloxi Bill.

Once Dan started talking about banning people, then all of the sudden you start posting more than one stupid sentence at a time...so now you post multiple stupid sentences at a time.

You are your parents' worst nightmare boy, not mine.

---

You didn`t burn anything but your tongue on Rob`s ass, you miserable puke....I doubt anyone has ever seen a man crush like you have on Singer....pathetic, and kinda creepy at the same time....like I said, it`s clear you are a little keyboard pussy who latched on to another man to validate himself.....get back to that peephole that connects from your janitors closet to the football teams shower......boy

---

Lonestarhorse is forever agitated over how I took him out to the woodshed multiple times exposing his silly claims, and then how he cowardly would not meet me inside the HRH garage. It doesn't take much to understand why he dances around as bill, trying very unsuccessfully to bother me. I simply laugh at him after pointing out what a failure he's been. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Sling, you really need to wake up and smell the coffee. You need to start dealing with reality. Singer's system should of made you rich by now if it really works. Instead of doing it once a week like Rob said he did you could do it once a day, twice a day, and in short order you should have parlayed up to the 1/2/5/10/25/100 level that Rob said he played at. And then hit the big time. But you haven't done that have you?

Sling, do you have any bankroll at all? What did you say Singer has done for you?

---

Mickey, the silence from these two fools (Slingshot and Shit Slinger) speaks volumes!

THEY'RE BOTH 100% FULL OF SHIT LIARS!!!!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

I have been considering what to do about this.

Originally I wanted to run the forum mostly in the "spirit" of the original Alanbestbuys forum, and that included allowing Rob to continue to exist here.

But if he's just going to ruin every thread with pointless trolling, I might have to revisit that.

---

Where else you gonna get a thread like this, and where else you gonna get somebody who doesn't accept everyone else's fantasy version of casino knowledge and gambling....

The problem with these WoW strays and even redietz is they came here or became obnoxious out of total frustration with Alan's rightful conclusion about the dice question, and their first order of business as always been to argue with Alan over the most stupid of issues. Ever hear of someone who claims to be a winning AP but can't tell anything about it? Ever hear someone say they'd accept a challenge (from coach) then claim to be busy in his hometown FOR THE ENTIRE WEEK OF THE VISIT? And ever heard someone try to make others believe he can count two tables simultaneously and accurately (which is the only way it's worth being done) as if he were trying to persuade a kindergarten class?

Alan shouldn't have to put these fools in their place all by himself. So if you cave into pressure from these clowns then I'll certainly try to keep busy elsewise :)

I'm still trying to process mickey not drinking any longer. Is there an over/under on that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

The way I remember it.
1. There was a period of time when his strategy was discussed-and the posts are on this forum.
2. Then there was a period where "math" and derogatory remarks were used to downplay and "disprove" the strategy.
3. Now when the tables turn, no one wants to hear what they once were guilty of- filthy, stupid, senseless remarks.

---

Sling, you need a double shot of a good dose of reality. Singer's bs has been going on in the forums for 15 years. Go read the early days of FREEvpFREE or LVA Sports or WoV where Rob is involved. Countless individuals have tried to debate with Rob over the merit's of Rob's tactics at video poker. It starts along the lines of "Mr. Singer, I disagree with your tactics at video poker and here is why...." and Rob's response is along the lines of "You filthy disgusting addicted gambler...."

Rob has made countless attacks on Bob Dancer and Jean Scott over the years calling them filthy disgusting addicted gamblers. But have you ever read anything from them attacking him. No, you haven't. A prime example is kewlj, a new member here. Without provocation Rob made a gratuitous blistering attack on him.

Sling, you really need to wake up and smell the coffee. You need to start dealing with reality. Singer's system should of made you rich by now if it really works. Instead of doing it once a week like Rob said he did you could do it once a day, twice a day, and in short order you should have parlayed up to the 1/2/5/10/25/100 level that Rob said he played at. And then hit the big time. But you haven't done that have you?

Sling, do you have any bankroll at all? What did you say Singer has done for you?

---

I thought you were on the wagon??

Your problem with what sling does us you can't separate someone who's addicted to the machines like you are, from someone who does it only for low-level entertainment when they have the time to do it. Yet at the same time you readily deflect the fact that I indeed worked the strategy very successfully for ten years, and I've done even better since then by using ARTT.

Your a bad apologist for Dancer and now Jean Scott. They've both spewed lies about me many times on various forums. Only difference? Dancer's were gate & envy-based; Jean's were dunce-like. You know, sort of like the nonsense you come out with---drunk OR sober.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biloxi Bill

both of you know this, and why you both don`t engage me

---

Stop...I already buried you back when you used to call yourself LoneStarHorse.

90% of your posts are one-liners that show you are mentally ill, if anyone is on the chopping block around here it's gotta be sicko Biloxi Bill.

Once Dan started talking about banning people, then all of the sudden you start posting more than one stupid sentence at a time...so now you post multiple stupid sentences at a time.

You are your parents' worst nightmare boy, not mine.

---

This is funny stuff!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mickeycrimm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

The way I remember it.
1. There was a period of time when his strategy was discussed-and the posts are on this forum.
2. Then there was a period where "math" and derogatory remarks were used to downplay and "disprove" the strategy.
3. Now when the tables turn, no one wants to hear what they once were guilty of- filthy, stupid, senseless remarks.

---

Sling, you need a double shot of a good dose of reality. Singer's bs has been going on in the forums for 15 years. Go read the early days of FREEvpFREE or LVA Sports or WoV where Rob is involved. Countless individuals have tried to debate with Rob over the merit's of Rob's tactics at video poker. It starts along the lines of "Mr. Singer, I disagree with your tactics at video poker and here is why...." and Rob's response is along the lines of "You filthy disgusting addicted gambler...."

Rob has made countless attacks on Bob Dancer and Jean Scott over the years calling them filthy disgusting addicted gamblers. But have you ever read anything from them attacking him. No, you haven't. A prime example is kewlj, a new member here. Without provocation Rob made a gratuitous blistering attack on him.

Sling, you really need to wake up and smell the coffee. You need to start dealing with reality. Singer's system should of made you rich by now if it really works. Instead of doing it once a week like Rob said he did you could do it once a day, twice a day, and in short order you should have parlayed up to the 1/2/5/10/25/100 level that Rob said he played at. And then hit the big time. But you haven't done that have you?

Sling, do you have any bankroll at all? What did you say Singer has done for you?

---

I thought you were on the wagon??

Your problem with what sling does us you can't separate someone who's addicted to the machines like you are, from someone who does it only for low-level entertainment when they have the time to do it. Yet at the same time you readily deflect the fact that I indeed worked the strategy very successfully for ten years, and I've done even better since then by using ARTT.

Your a bad apologist for Dancer and now Jean Scott. They've both spewed lies about me many times on various forums. Only difference? Dancer's were gate & envy-based; Jean's were dunce-like. You know, sort of like the nonsense you come out with---drunk OR sober.

---

So Bob Dancer envies Rob Singer? And he wants your gate? Is that a code for one of those swinger abodes out on Boulder Highway? Or are you saying you swing both ways, like a gate, and Dancer envies your ability to go back and forth?

Help me out, man. I don't get any of this.

If you haven't figured out Dancer's nothing more than a low level businessman who peddles and takes advantage of the commercialized side of gaming, then you might want to re-arrange your mysterious PR pack.

As such, he's always been envious of my winning because it's something he has never been able to do. Further: divorced, thrown out of the house, no children, remarried to a close friend because those are the only women losers like him can get on the rebound, still works anywhere he can get a paycheck from even though he's well past normal retirement age....getting the picture yet red?

He knows very well that the only reason one sets out to become a professional gambler is because he sets a firm goal of retiring as early as possible so he can do something....anything else. He looks at me and sees all that. He looks at himself and sees an old man stuck in rut that's controlled by how long he can stay healthy enuf for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

If you haven't figured out Dancer's nothing more than a low level businessman who peddles and takes advantage of the commercialized side of gaming, then you might want to re-arrange your mysterious PR pack.

As such, he's always been envious of my winning because it's something he has never been able to do. Further: divorced, thrown out of the house, no children, remarried to a close friend because those are the only women losers like him can get on the rebound, still works anywhere he can get a paycheck from even though he's well past normal retirement age....getting the picture yet red?

He knows very well that the only reason one sets out to become a professional gambler is because he sets a firm goal of retiring as early as possible so he can do something....anything else. He looks at me and sees all that. He looks at himself and sees an old man stuck in rut that's controlled by how long he can stay healthy enuf for it.

---

Maybe he also sees someone that is married to a thing that just barely learned to walk on her hind legs

Judging by how many posts Rob has just made, looks like he just woke up from his bender and he's furious. Lol

I've got the time RS__ because I'm not in casinos all day long like you. In fact, it's been months, but when I return to Tahoe in Oct. then you can bet I'll win on those awful, negative EV machines.

FEROCIOUS!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biloxi Bill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

If you haven't figured out Dancer's nothing more than a low level businessman who peddles and takes advantage of the commercialized side of gaming, then you might want to re-arrange your mysterious PR pack.

As such, he's always been envious of my winning because it's something he has never been able to do. Further: divorced, thrown out of the house, no children, remarried to a close friend because those are the only women losers like him can get on the rebound, still works anywhere he can get a paycheck from even though he's well past normal retirement age....getting the picture yet red?

He knows very well that the only reason one sets out to become a professional gambler is because he sets a firm goal of retiring as early as possible so he can do something....anything else. He looks at me and sees all that. He looks at himself and sees an old man stuck in rut that's controlled by how long he can stay healthy enuf for it.

---

Maybe he also sees someone that is married to a thing that just barely learned to walk on her hind legs

---

You're just mad because Cindy's a first class, intelligent lady and it burns you that Rob got that lucky. Hmmm. There's that word luck again.

Picking up bits and pieces in my short time here....let's see if I got this right.

This person posting as Rob Singer, main claim to fame is that he has made a million dollars playing negative EV video poker, using some sort of negative EV progression system, which of course has no merit and just makes him another jackwad making ridiculous and fantastic claims easily disproved by mathematics.

So millionaire Rob lives in a winnebago in his daughter's driveway, making him "official" trailer trash.

Now this obviously bitter and losing degenerative gambler, hates people that use their brains and make money from the casino industry as he can't, but wishes he could. So, he attacks everyone. Everyone who has the ability to make money. Everyone that questions his ridiculous claims.

Is that about it? :confused: My question remains is why anyone on this forum or anywhere in life, would bother in any fashion with this loser? My advise continues to be to just ignore this obvious trolling bitter loser.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by slingshot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Biloxi Bill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

If you haven't figured out Dancer's nothing more than a low level businessman who peddles and takes advantage of the commercialized side of gaming, then you might want to re-arrange your mysterious PR pack.

As such, he's always been envious of my winning because it's something he has never been able to do. Further: divorced, thrown out of the house, no children, remarried to a close friend because those are the only women losers like him can get on the rebound, still works anywhere he can get a paycheck from even though he's well past normal retirement age....getting the picture yet red?

He knows very well that the only reason one sets out to become a professional gambler is because he sets a firm goal of retiring as early as possible so he can do something....anything else. He looks at me and sees all that. He looks at himself and sees an old man stuck in rut that's controlled by how long he can stay healthy enuf for it.

---

Maybe he also sees someone that is married to a thing that just barely learned to walk on her hind legs

---

You're just mad because Cindy's a first class, intelligent lady and it burns you that Rob got that lucky. Hmmm. There's that word luck again.

---

Mr or Mrs Throatshot, if that`s what you consider luck, I feel very sorry for you....That beast looks like it`s 140 years old....but I`ve seen pictures of Singer too, with his moth eaten, mustard stained, Purina shirts, so it`s really no surprise that`s what he ended up with.....you know, the old there`s somebody for everybody thing....that certainly applies here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Picking up bits and pieces in my short time here....let's see if I got this right.

This person posting as Rob Singer, main claim to fame is that he has made a million dollars playing negative EV video poker, using some sort of negative EV progression system, which of course has no merit and just makes him another jackwad making ridiculous and fantastic claims easily disproved by mathematics.

So millionaire Rob lives in a winnebago in his daughter's driveway, making him "official" trailer trash.

Now this obviously bitter and losing degenerative gambler, hates people that use their brains and make money from the casino industry as he can't, but wishes he could. So, he attacks everyone. Everyone who has the ability to make money. Everyone that questions his ridiculous claims.

Is that about it? :confused: My question remains is why anyone on this forum or anywhere in life, would bother in any fashion with this loser? My advise continues to be to just ignore this obvious trolling bitter loser.

---

Yes, she`s his landlord...She charges them $300 per month, which they can easily afford as Rob`s wife has a good paying job sniffing luggage at the airport

This narrative is funny. A homo who lives with some other sicko in a cheap LV apt. on food stamps, Medicaid, and probably SSDI income, wants the world to believe he's successful.

The only thing "millionaire" about my wife and I are our retirement savings accounts---something virtually none of you will ever have. And how many if you slug gamblers will ever see SS income or our even more lucrative pension payments? I tingle when I think about how poor most of you are. And of course, it gets even better knowing most of you pay our monthly SS with deductions from your paychecks.

We just recently purchased another house in the Phx. area for a rental property. I put that in my daughter's name too. If you people had any money or idea on how the estate regs read when it comes to inheritance, oops! I forgot, you guys live paycheck to paycheck and you don't/can't care about how normal people live.

Wise up.

So your daughter bought another house in Phoenix, eh? That's great but she dumped her husband and kids and ran off with that dude to Minnesota. He must have plenty of money.