A Theory About Anti-AP Posters

I was going to save the bulk of this for my own site, but I'll share it briefly. Many of my ideas have been aided by repeat readings of "Addiction by Design" by the anthropologist Natasha Schull.

Modern machine gambling is now a generation old. It is the most addictive form of gambling, and many people have now been exposed to it for more than 20 years. There exists an entire generation of addicted machine gamblers. Unless they are utterly disciplined, incredibly experienced APs, they lose. They pretty up their addiction with words like "recreational" and "fun." I'm good with that because addictions and recreation and fun all pretty much seem to go together to me, at least in a superficial sense.

This site has a number of people who appear to be anti-AP. Bill Yung, Mr. Mendelson, LarryS, OneHit (now departed), Rob Singer (also banned), coach belly, and so on. The interesting thing is that none of them have proclaimed that they don't gamble or that gambling is wrong. What they each argue is that the APs are lying, making things up, and that they themselves wouldn't spend their valuable life hours APing if they could, although they will spend hours losing money because it's fun or recreational or budgeted as such.

Now the quick obvious conclusion is that the anti-APs have disdain for the APs because the anti-APs lose and the APs report that they don't. That's certainly logical. But here's my Twilight Zone twist. I think the anti-APs despise the APs because the APs have the ability, by definition, to get up and leave whenever the odds are against them. The anti-APs simply do not have that ability, given their addiction(s). They need "time on device" regardless of the odds, so they construct all kinds of mental masturbations like stop losses and per day budgets and defining machine gambling as "fun" to justify their behaviors. I submit that it's the APs alleged ability to NOT gamble (unless the EV is in their favor) that fuels the disdain and hatred for them by the anti-APs.

where did i proclaim that I am anti AP.

I am anti scam artist. So DI promoters,or JP who makes ridiculous claims based on the fact that math doesnt effect him because he does not play in the long run ,,,the long run evades him.

So when does being against con artists make me anti AP.

I am on record as just a few hours ago, I noted that I believe KJ makes money and lives off of gambling.

I dont think AP is a profession, so what. I dont think dog walking is a profession....but that doesnt mean I am anti dog walkers.

you generalize and make statements that are useless and false.

I don't know that LarryS is anti-AP. :confused: Larry definitely has some dislike for a few of us (mickey, myself and others) that are AP's, but I don't know that the root of his dislike is because we are AP's. I think he has other reasons for disliking us and it just so happens several of us are APs. Maybe he is...I don't know. Maybe I am forgetting. I'll give him a pass for now, unless I am reminded of something that I am forgetting.

But there is a definite anti-AP crowd, Alan, coach belly, Bill young, among active members, onehitwonder, blackhole, Rob Singer, among inactive or banned members. I am sure there are others that I am forgetting. And many of these folks have been on multiple sites.

I am not smart enough to know the psychology of it, and I didn't even sleep in a Holiday Inn Express last night, so I don't know what the deal is. BUT it is weird. Because it is really deep-seeded hate for the AP's that participate here. I mean I have gotten some emails from Singer that probably approach the level of criminality. On Wizard's site, a member doxxed me and was requesting any info on me (name, picture, address, phone number) from anyone who had it. :confused::(

It's a level of contempt and hate that really is unexplainable. On this site, when I shared my medical situation last fall, there were people openly wishing nasty thoughts, and there continue to be nasty little jabs (as recently as this past weekend) about my health. It really is unexplainable, but it is real.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LarryS

you generalize and make statements that are useless and false.

---

Larry is correct, the statement below does not apply to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

What they each argue is that the APs are lying, making things up, and that they themselves wouldn't spend their valuable life hours APing if they could

---

I am not anti advantage play, it's silly to assert that I am anti-strategy. I have spent time APing, I would and will again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

It's a level of contempt and hate that really is unexplainable.

---

I have no contempt or hate for advantage players...take AxelWolf , who I've read is considered to be among the top APs ,
I've never had a negative interaction with him at all, never a cross word exchanged between us.

I have contempt for liars, folks who come onto this forum and deliberately post outright lies.

A liar has no credibility...if someone is willing to lie about one thing, then he'll lie about anything.

Nothing that a liar claims without proof should be considered legitimate, everything he claims should be vigilantly examined
in an effort to find the truth.

You are a proven and admitted liar.

Does that explain it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

I have no contempt or hate for advantage players

---

No? You have trolled the hell out of mickey forever.

You continue to troll me.

Just yesterday, you attacked member tableplay, calling him a fraud.

Just today a new member girlfriday introduces herself stating she only plays with an advantage. You immediately respond demanding proof, wanting her to post win-loss statements. Warm welcome.

Nope, No anti-AP bias is there? That is ALL you do! When was the last time you posted something useful, something beneficial to anyone on the forum. All you do is troll with an anti-Ap bias, laying in the weeds, waiting to spring, searching for some sort of "gottcha ya" moment. You are not here to contribute in a positive manner, you are here to troll. Dan looked at Biloxy bill's recent posts and decided he wasn't here to contribute anything, only to troll. I would ask him to do the same with you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

I have contempt for liars, folks who come onto this forum and deliberately post outright lies.

A liar has no credibility...if someone is willing to lie about one thing, then he'll lie about anything.

Nothing that a liar claims without proof should be considered legitimate, everything he claims should be vigilantly examined
in an effort to find the truth.

You are a proven and admitted liar.

Does that explain it?

---

No it doesn't explain it, but you did just prove my point beyond any doubt. You are full of hate, for whatever reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

But here's my Twilight Zone twist. I think the anti-APs despise the APs because the APs have the ability, by definition, to get up and leave whenever the odds are against them. The anti-APs simply do not have that ability

---

Eh, maybe.

Then again, maybe one or more of the so-called anti-AP's is just trolling.

Really, their animus is based on something deeper than superficial jealousy over perceived willpower.

The result: a seething anger thankful for finding a target.

I'm not anti AP. I'm anti unrealistic claims and I am against misinformation. I have on my website dozens of pages of casino information I believe in which I hope will give my readers an advantage in the situations I know.

Redietz you never told me you were selling information as a sports tipster. You wanted me to read 75 or so pages of documents with the goal of having me make some public statement about your success. You almost got it. You pressured me to hurry it up and I disappointed you when I had other things to do in my life.

Had you told me you were selling your services and you wanted an endorsement I would have told you I don't endorse gamblers or their services. I did not endorse Singer and I clearly say that on my website. I do not endorse any dice school. I do not endorse any casino company though I have done work for several.

Great synopsis, redietz.

larry, please don't go back to your old and worn out tirades on GF about machine AP's being "button pushers."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I'm not anti AP. I'm anti unrealistic claims and I am against misinformation. I have on my website dozens of pages of casino information I believe in which I hope will give my readers an advantage in the situations I know.

Redietz you never told me you were selling information as a sports tipster. You wanted me to read 75 or so pages of documents with the goal of having me make some public statement about your success. You almost got it. You pressured me to hurry it up and I disappointed you when I had other things to do in my life.

Had you told me you were selling your services and you wanted an endorsement I would have told you I don't endorse gamblers or their services. I did not endorse Singer and I clearly say that on my website. I do not endorse any dice school. I do not endorse any casino company though I have done work for several.

---

There you go back into your fantasy world. You are the last person in the world he would want an endorsement from. Anyone who reads you knows you haven't a clue about strategic gambling.

Mickeycrimm if redietz didn't want an endorsement from me why did he bother to send me those documents to read and comment on? Why didn't he send them to Dan or to any of the authors working for Frank Scoblete's various websites?

He also had plenty of time to send his package to others and he said he would -- but he never did. He also could have posted a bibliography of his credits here WHICH WOULD NOT HAVE VIOLATED ANY COPYRIGHT LAWS but he never did that. He singled me out. Why, I don't know because from the start I told him I had NO knowledge of sports betting.

Because he knew well in advance that I had NO knowledge of sports betting it will always puzzle me why he chose me?

Another intentionally divisive thread from another person drowning. Yawn.

redietz is mostly correct.

People tend to challenge anything which appears like it might be different AND better than the situation they have going on.

You see someone with a nicer car than you, and you say to yourself, "The maintenance must cost a fortune... AND look how quickly it depreciates!!"

You see someone with a better seat at a ballgame or concert and you say to yourself, "What a waste of money! I can enjoy it just as well over here for a fraction of the price!"

You see a guy with a hot girl and say to yourself, "I bet she's using him for his money and doesn't care about him."

You see a guy with a better job than you and say to yourself, "I bet he's a workaholic, always stressed out, and has no time for himself."

You get my point.

Nobody wants to feel inferior, and nobody wants to feel like a sucker.

For a non-AP to acknowledge that AP works, it's essentially saying, "You guys are smart enough to beat the casino for money, while I am a dope who constantly loses to them."

That's not a very nice thing to admit to yourself.

Therefore, the rationalizing takes place.

"Most APs don't make money."

"The few APs who do make money greatly exaggerate their winnings."

"Winning in gambling is all about luck, not finding small edges. The lucky person is the winner, and the unlucky one is the loser, which is why APs often have losing sessions and non-APs often have big winning sessions."

"Setting a stop-loss allows me to either lose a little or win a lot."

etc etc etc etc

It's the casual gambler's way of de-legitimizing what APs have accomplished, and they haven't.

It's too bad that these casual gamblers can't just admit the truth:

AP is work. It's not fun. It's not relaxing. It's often very tedious. It requires tremendous discipline.

Casual gambling allows you to have fun, play only what you enjoy, and expend very little effort. If you don't mind losing in the long run, it's far more relaxing than being an AP.

These are truths. That's why I don't begrudge casual gamblers. If they want to play -EV games because it's fun, then great. AP isn't for eveyone.

However, I do find it annoying when these casual gamblers are delusional and believe that they have the same chance to win as APs do.

They don't, and they never will.

All very true, Dan.

Another issue is that “casual” gamblers who spend large amounts of time and money in casinos tend to be in their own little (delusional) world. They constantly encounter people who falsify their results in their own heads and to others, so they assume that even those few who are competent advantage players are doing the same.

What you wrote may be true Dan but does that make anyone anti AP?

We would all like to have an advantage when we play. I look forward to the APs sharing their helpful information. Who will post first?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

What you wrote may be true Dan but does that make anyone anti AP?

---

Of course, everything has some truth to it. And some problems. The irony here is that our AP's want to advance their side (against the ones who point out problems with their matter of fact statements) with the argument that people take sides because... . An argument with zero bearing at any time if only to take another side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

We would all like to have an advantage when we play. I look forward to the APs sharing their helpful information. Who will post first?

---

Yeah, tell us some more about your non-qualifying mortgages. And how your day isn't complete until you take another picture of something.

I am not "anti-AP" as I fully recognize how card counting has provided a mathematical advantage to counters.

As time passed I learned of other AP methods: edge sorting, shuffle tracking: it all "computes," it all is logical and supportable.

However I do not believe DI affords any AP at craps; in that one instance I suppose it could be said I am "anti-AP," but that would be incorrect as it has never been established that DI actually is a viable form of AP.

Looking back, I probably should have warmed up to BJ and card counting, but it never floated my boat; oh well.

I have a hard time agreeing with much of this. AP or not, I want to see everyone beat the casino. Whatever your advantage, gimmick, good luck charm, skill, or whatever may be, I want you all to win. So while I am certainly not in the anti-AP camp here (more like Switzerland) , I have a few times questioned some things. I guess the difference is I heard the answers and moved on, whether I agreed with them or not.

For example, before Alan and Kewl really got into it, I was the first to question counting multiple tables. Kewl explained it and I accepted it. I can't do it---I can barely see the cards at my own table--and I don't completely buy the premise that missing a few cards doesn't materially impact the count. But I am no longer in that business and Kewl is making a profit so it seems to be working for him. So no problemo here.

But to say that several here are just anti AP I think is erroneous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

I have no contempt or hate for advantage players

---

No? You have trolled the hell out of mickey forever.

You continue to troll me.

---

I respond in kind to indivduals who bring up my name in their posts.

Some may be advantage players, but I don't consider their AP status, only their actions towards me.

You brought my name up in your initial contribution to this thread.
I responded to your mischaracterization...that's not trolling, nor does it demonstrate any bias towards a group.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Just yesterday, you attacked member tableplay, calling him a fraud.

---

tableplay provided a fraudulent answer to a legitimate question about his heads-up play,
after he concocted a phony scenario about only playing positive counts when heads-up.

I'll ask the same question of you, how is that possible from the beginning of the shoe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Just today a new member girlfriday introduces herself stating she only plays with an advantage. You immediately respond demanding proof, wanting her to post win-loss statements. Warm welcome.

---

I didn't demand proof.

She wrote...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by girlfriday

I'm ahead, but I can't prove that I am and I wouldn't even know how to do that even if I chose to. How have others here provided proof?

---

I answered with a suggestion...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

Post screenshots of your win/loss statements for the years that you played.

---

I was being helpful, I didn't demand anything. How else could she prove that's she's ahead?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

You are full of hate, for whatever reason.

---

You repeatedly posted here accusing me of a crime. You apologized, then doubled down on it.

You are every bit as vile and twisted as Biloxi Bill.

You should have been banned for that, and you should still be banned for it.

They're not anti-AP. They're just completely misinformed.

Let's be honest here. Our AP members have made some glorious comments about how great they are. They always invoke "the math" but we don't see what they're doing though they do tell us how great they are. Jbjb has never lost. Kewlj says he lost but it's part of his grand plan that will actually give him a profit. Mickeycrimm is raping the machines in every bar in Montana and actually has time to take photo tours of casinos around the country while stumbling on where ploppies have left low hanging fruit. And RS overnight went from am off strip craps dealer to a Seven Stars player.

Sometimes our imaginations are challenged.

Meanwhile the only expert player I know on the forum is Dan who, to the best of my knowledge, failed to cash in last year's WSOP and he hasn't questioned the remarkable success of the others.

And if anyone dares to question the APs they (we) are immediately labeled as not only anti AP but ignorant of any kind of intelligence on the casino floor.

The extremes are very extreme, don't you think?

And then along comes redietz who after being fully exposed here as a seller of sports tips and vanishes returns with a prominent post attacking several forum members while he also (quietly) posts a report on a successful contest he was in for sports pickers.

Bottom line: there's a lot of self serving posting going on here.

Calls the kettle...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Jbjb has never lost.

---

Oh, we've lost many times. Usually on the carnival games though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

You see someone with a nicer car than you, and you say to yourself, "The maintenance must cost a fortune... AND look how quickly it depreciates!!"

---

Dan, this example would have also worked with the hot girl instead of the car.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

tableplay provided a fraudulent answer to a legitimate question about his heads-up play,
after he concocted a phony scenario about only playing positive counts when heads-up.

I'll ask the same question of you, how is that possible from the beginning of the shoe?

---

This is an outright lie. I said that when the count is highly negative you could abandon the table and come back to a neutral deck (or play at a different table). Taking a bathroom break is a good excuse for this and it is unlikely to arouse suspicion if done once an hour. I never said anything about only playing positive counts. Please quote where I said you only play positive counts.

People asking for AP info.....especially for machines is unrealistic except when asking MC.
mc seems to be able to find small jackpots ready to hit. I believe him. And I skim his screen shots and it seems doable for people who know what they are doing.

But I also think.....wtf. Would a person who makes his money at the track, accept a free job discussing his picks 5 min before the race on the in house TVs. He would be screwing himself as others follow him ad the odds go downon his potential payoffs.

So what if there is a quiet AP, just lurking, waiting in the weeds, someone who snatches the MC "plays" before mc gets to the area of play. Same as the horse handicapper sharing info that will financially drain him.....MC is possibly doing the same thing. Now that doesnt mean that I think his plays are not real. I think they are very real and requires real knowledge that not many people know and I also think that in reading some of his posts, a copycat with less knowledge can undercut him.

Aps like KJ obviously are not going to share specifics that would damage their gig. However by coming to sites and talking it up....it may encourage others to come on in. And the more people entering the trade, the more casinos will focus attention on Aps. As they grow in number, the casino attention will grow.
Which also makes me wonder, .....why? Why is it important to let people know its possible to make mney and live a good life as an AP? Ok you want to help people?...there are PM features when u find a potential student to be helped. Personally I dont have the patience and discipline to be a successful AP. I guess technically when I sports bet and play poker I am APing. In that I am looking for an advantage in line setting, and I am analyzing the math of a poker hand along with other factors. However whatever info I share, doesnt taker money out of my pocket.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Let's be honest here. Our AP members have made some glorious comments about how great they are. They always invoke "the math" but we don't see what they're doing though they do tell us how great they are. Jbjb has never lost. Kewlj says he lost but it's part of his grand plan that will actually give him a profit. Mickeycrimm is raping the machines in every bar in Montana and actually has time to take photo tours of casinos around the country while stumbling on where ploppies have left low hanging fruit. And RS overnight went from am off strip craps dealer to a Seven Stars player.

Sometimes our imaginations are challenged.

Meanwhile the only expert player I know on the forum is Dan who, to the best of my knowledge, failed to cash in last year's WSOP and he hasn't questioned the remarkable success of the others.

And if anyone dares to question the APs they (we) are immediately labeled as not only anti AP but ignorant of any kind of intelligence on the casino floor.

The extremes are very extreme, don't you think?

And then along comes redietz who after being fully exposed here as a seller of sports tips and vanishes returns with a prominent post attacking several forum members while he also (quietly) posts a report on a successful contest he was in for sports pickers.

Bottom line: there's a lot of self serving posting going on here.

---

Mr. Mendelson, you'd be correct except for the fact you're wrong. As usual. I'm "fully exposed as a seller of sports tips," eh? Good point, except I haven't done that, as I stated in a previous post, for more than a decade. I don't "sell sports picks." Of course, that was been made clear in the final McCusker Report (mid-90's), which was sent to you and you did not read.

See, the problem with Mr. Mendelson is he thinks "professional" means "selling sports picks." Now I don't have a problem with him thinking this erroneously as long as he keeps his brilliance to himself, but he just has to open his big, uneducated, brain dead mouth at every opportunity. Did it occur to him to check and ask if "professional" means "selling sports picks?" Of course not, because he thinks he grasps everything and is always correct.

Talk about self-serving. I'm not selling anything to anybody here. Mr. Mendelson is constantly promoting his attitudes and "expertise" regarding things he knows nothing about. He doesn't bother to ask if he's correct. He doesn't bother to check with anybody. He just assumes.

Redietz you know that I know nothing about sports. I told you that. Why did you send your "package" to me? Why didn't you send it to Dan or anyone else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Please quote where I said you only play positive counts.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

Do you continue to play heads-up if the count is negative or marginal?

---

No, you go answer a call of nature whether you actually have to answer one or not.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

I don't "sell sports picks."

---

What do your clients purchase from you?

he is an investment advisor as per one web description calling sports betting "investments". He is involved in "investments"....so I guess he sells investment advice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LarryS

I guess he sells investment advice.

---

What kind of investments is he selling advice about?

I had only been on this site a few days before it became crystal clear there was an anti-AP contingent lead by Alan and Singer (at the time). Dan Druff, who I think we all recognize as a level headed and objective person, confirmed that today.

Now each time I have stated that Alan is anti-AP, Alan denies it. And a few members insinuate that I am being overly sensitive. To those people I say just read Alan's quote below. He is no longer even able to hide his contempt for the AP members of this site. It is exactly as Dan Druff described. This is a bitter man, bitter at his years of losing at the hands of the casinos and he resents people that are able to make a profit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Let's be honest here. Our AP members have made some glorious comments about how great they are. They always invoke "the math" but we don't see what they're doing though they do tell us how great they are. Jbjb has never lost. Kewlj says he lost but it's part of his grand plan that will actually give him a profit. Mickeycrimm is raping the machines in every bar in Montana and actually has time to take photo tours of casinos around the country while stumbling on where ploppies have left low hanging fruit. And RS overnight went from am off strip craps dealer to a Seven Stars player.

---

Alan continues to lie about the entire redeitz matter. He now asks "why did redeitz send the information package to Alan? The answer is because Alan asked him to and provided a mailing address. It had nothing to do with Alan's knowledge (or lack of) of sports. I was quite simply that Alan's 'partner in crime' Rob Singer, was challenging who redietz was. Alan volunteered to act as referee. Redeitz took Alan up on his offer, and Alan failed to be neutral and objective as promised.

When it became clear that redietz was who he said, to protect his buddy Singer, Alan wouldn't even acknowledge seeing the information, per the whole shyster, tap dance where he didn't go to the office from once a week until never. At the end he didn't even have a key to his own office was the excuse this shyster came up with to protect Singer. Shame on you Alan Mendelson!

And now Alan has decided to put the spin on it that redietz is one of those handicappers selling picks and tried to use Alan. COMPLETE BULLSHIT by the resident shyster, Alan Mendelson! Show us one single time redietz ever used this forum to attempt to sell anything. This is just YET another attempt by Alan the shyster, to discredit an AP. THAT is Alan's agenda and has been since the day I joined this site. Even Dan Druff now recognizes and acknowledges this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LarryS

he is an investment advisor as per one web description calling sports betting "investments". He is involved in "investments"....so I guess he sells investment advice.

---

Why, LarryS, as such a cogent and honest guy, I'd expect you to explain that you stumbled onto that particular line while checking the IntegritySports.com website on the wayback machine from, what, 1996? A web archived address that I gave you. And, as a cogent and honest guy, you of course included all of the details from that site regarding what had been accomplished, and my offers on that site to take polygraphs to back up every word, along with the list of published results from "Tipsters or Gypsters?" stretching a dozen years. LarryS, did you fail to mention that? Why, for shame. Not very cogent and honest of you.

This is why it's pointless to deal with these people. LarryS unveils some sarcasm regarding a 25-year-old website line, fails to mention anything else about what's on the site, fails to mention that I gave everyone that website address, and decides his definition of "investment" supersedes a dictionary definition. Moreover, he doesn't explain the origin of the line because people might read everything on the archived site and discover something more impressive than LarryS.

The site is available via the wayback machine. It's IntegritySports.com. I stand by every single word on that site, and I'll still take a polygraph to back it all up.

Quote:

---

COMPLETE BULLSHIT by the resident shyster, Alan Mendelson! ... another attempt by Alan the shyster

---

Point of order, KJ.

I note you are calling Alan a "shyster."

Please refrain from doing so, as the word "shyster" is typically a term of opprobrium applied to attorneys, not to disgruntled, seemingly brain-addled internet peddlers.

Might I suggest a substitute?

Try "troll."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Quote:

---

COMPLETE BULLSHIT by the resident shyster, Alan Mendelson! ... another attempt by Alan the shyster

---

Point of order, KJ.

I note you are calling Alan a "shyster."

Please refrain from doing so, as the word "shyster" is typically a term of opprobrium applied to attorneys, not to disgruntled, seemingly brain-addled internet peddlers.

Might I suggest a substitute?

Try "troll."

---

No...wrong, counselor. I looked up Shyster, when I began using it.

Shyster: a person, especially a lawyer, who uses unscrupulous, fraudulent, or deceptive methods

Merrian-Webster has a shorter definition: A dishonest person. followed by a picture of Alan Mendelson.

I think your confusion lies in that many in your profession, fall into this category. But that doesn't give you lawyers the exclusive right to the word. :p

Plus with Alan there is that 'snake oil salesman' aspect. That goes hand in hand with "shyster". And a guy peddling product and services as some sort of "best buy" when in fact these 'selected values' are paid for, comes across as dishonest to me. Thus, "shyster" again applies. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Druff

These are truths. That's why I don't begrudge casual gamblers. If they want to play -EV games because it's fun, then great. AP isn't for eveyone.

---

Unless we look at the lottery and other big, big games. How many poker players never hit the big pay day? For that matter, how many sports athletes? One big lottery win amounts to the sum total of every sports and casino AP in the history of mankind. Fred who plays the same numbers once a week, or Ralph who played what came into his head for the first time. Nobody says the anti-system people are the way they are because of that. Count the dollars, not the shavings of pennies who think they are king crap. Look at the overall picture. Most of it is hindsight of being in the right place at the right time with the right stupid idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

I stand by every single word on that site, and I'll still take a polygraph to back it all up.

---

I'd like to witness this. Is this something that can be reasonably accomplished? What are your conditions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

Let's be honest here. Our AP members have made some glorious comments about how great they are. They always invoke "the math" but we don't see what they're doing though they do tell us how great they are. Jbjb has never lost. Kewlj says he lost but it's part of his grand plan that will actually give him a profit. Mickeycrimm is raping the machines in every bar in Montana and actually has time to take photo tours of casinos around the country while stumbling on where ploppies have left low hanging fruit. And RS overnight went from am off strip craps dealer to a Seven Stars player.

Sometimes our imaginations are challenged.

Meanwhile the only expert player I know on the forum is Dan who, to the best of my knowledge, failed to cash in last year's WSOP and he hasn't questioned the remarkable success of the others.

And if anyone dares to question the APs they (we) are immediately labeled as not only anti AP but ignorant of any kind of intelligence on the casino floor.

The extremes are very extreme, don't you think?

And then along comes redietz who after being fully exposed here as a seller of sports tips and vanishes returns with a prominent post attacking several forum members while he also (quietly) posts a report on a successful contest he was in for sports pickers.

Bottom line: there's a lot of self serving posting going on here.

---

Mr. Mendelson, you'd be correct except for the fact you're wrong. As usual. I'm "fully exposed as a seller of sports tips," eh? Good point, except I haven't done that, as I stated in a previous post, for more than a decade. I don't "sell sports picks." Of course, that was been made clear in the final McCusker Report (mid-90's), which was sent to you and you did not read.

See, the problem with Mr. Mendelson is he thinks "professional" means "selling sports picks." Now I don't have a problem with him thinking this erroneously as long as he keeps his brilliance to himself, but he just has to open his big, uneducated, brain dead mouth at every opportunity. Did it occur to him to check and ask if "professional" means "selling sports picks?" Of course not, because he thinks he grasps everything and is always correct.

Talk about self-serving. I'm not selling anything to anybody here. Mr. Mendelson is constantly promoting his attitudes and "expertise" regarding things he knows nothing about. He doesn't bother to ask if he's correct. He doesn't bother to check with anybody. He just assumes.

---

You have been very veg about your sport's business and how you make money from it.

I have asked before, however I get the confidentiality speech or whatever you want to call it.

I have yet to ever find ANY legitimate sports service, to be fair, I haven't looked that hard. I know many others that have looked at many without any success.

Perhaps you do have the keys needed to beat spots, I have no clue. How does one find out?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MisterV

Quote:

---

COMPLETE BULLSHIT by the resident shyster, Alan Mendelson! ... another attempt by Alan the shyster

---

Point of order, KJ.

I note you are calling Alan a "shyster."

Please refrain from doing so, as the word "shyster" is typically a term of opprobrium applied to attorneys, not to disgruntled, seemingly brain-addled internet peddlers.

Might I suggest a substitute?

Try "troll."

---

No...wrong, counselor. I looked up Shyster, when I began using it.

Shyster: a person, especially a lawyer, who uses unscrupulous, fraudulent, or deceptive methods

Merrian-Webster has a shorter definition: A dishonest person. followed by a picture of Alan Mendelson.

I think your confusion lies in that many in your profession, fall into this category. But that doesn't give you lawyers the exclusive right to the word. :p

Plus with Alan there is that 'snake oil salesman' aspect. That goes hand in hand with "shyster". And a guy peddling product and services as some sort of "best buy" when in fact these 'selected values' are paid for, comes across as dishonest to me. Thus, "shyster" again applies. :)

---

It is most commonly used for lawyers. Anyway, below is a pretty good lawyer "joke"

"If you think lawyers don't have heart, read the best lawyer story of all time...

The Salvation Army realized that it had never received a donation from the city's
most successful lawyer.

So a volunteer paid the lawyer a visit in his lavish office.

The volunteer opened the meeting by saying, 'Our research shows that even though
your annual income is over two million dollars, you don't give a penny to charity.

Wouldn't you like to give something back to your community?

The lawyer thinks for a minute and says, 'First, did your research also show you that
my mother is dying after a long painful illness, and she has huge medical bills that
are far beyond her ability to pay?'

Embarrassed, the rep mumbles, 'Uh... No, I didn't know that.'

'Secondly,' says the lawyer, 'did it show that my brother, a disabled Veteran,
is blind and confined to a wheelchair and is unable to support his wife and six children?

The stricken rep begins to stammer an apology, but is cut off again.

'Thirdly, did your research also show you that my sister's husband died in a
dreadful car accident, leaving her penniless with a mortgage and three children,
one of whom is disabled and another that has learning disabilities requiring an array
of private tutors?'

The humiliated rep, completely beaten, says, 'I'm so sorry. I had no idea.’

And the lawyer says, 'So, if I didn't give any money to them, what makes you think
I'd give any to you?’

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

Do you continue to play heads-up if the count is negative or marginal?

---

No, you go answer a call of nature whether you actually have to answer one or not.

---

---

So in other words, there is no where, where I stated " you only play positive counts". Also answering "no" to the question "do you continue to play heads up if the count is negative or marginal" means you may have started to play negative counts and then discontinued if the count became heavily negative. Answering "no" to this question does not necessarily mean you are not to play marginal counts (the "no" is applied to discontinuing to play negative counts"). Reading comprehension is obviously not your strong suit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

I stand by every single word on that site, and I'll still take a polygraph to back it all up.

---

I'd like to witness this. Is this something that can be reasonably accomplished? What are your conditions?

---

Penn and Teller have gone on record as saying polygraphs are bullshit, basically fake science, but primarily because they create false positives, not false negatives. In other words, people test out as guilty when innocent a lot more than innocent when guilty. But since everything on the site is true, I don't mind taking a crack at it because it's not likely to engender stress.

We'd need a randomly chosen polygraph operator giving three sets of identical tests throughout a day, or three randomly chosen polygraph operators giving the same test three times one day. This would be an effort to take initial stress or variance out of the equation. Since I'm the one being challenged, if I fail, I reimburse the challenger for the polygraph costs. If I pass, I do not.

You are wasting your time, tableplay. These guys read what they want to read, NOT what is written. Coach belly is a master at twisting everything around trying to create a "gottch ya" moment. He is a mater at baiting people....a 'masterbater'. :rolleyes:

For what it's worth, while I am not answering for tableplay, I do things a little differently when it comes to heads up play.

First, heads up play is not my favorite thing, despite the benefits. It also has some negatives in my book. A couple are, that the profile of a card counter is that they prefer heads-up, and third bases. So I like to avoid these. Second and probably more important is that I do exit aggressively on negative counts. Wong out. When you do this playing heads up, the game comes to a complete halt, as there is no one left to play. That draws attention, which I try to avoid. As you exit, you can feel the dealer and sometimes pit, watching you walk away. If there is a least one other person this aggressive exit is less conspicuous. The game goes on. Your exit draws less attention.

However there are benefits to heads up. Everyone knows that heads up means a faster game, more rounds per hour and that translates to more money. But there is a benefit that is even more important to me. I call it "exposure time". A card counter is most exposed when the count goes positive and he starts betting bigger. That is when the scrambling starts...both in the pit and surveillance room. The race is on to evaluate the players and make a determination as to whether he is playing with an advantage and what to do about it.

So when the count rises and the counter starts betting bigger, this is the "danger zone" (Danger, danger Will Robinson!). And in a regular game this is when the card counter is exposed, sitting there with his max (or bigger bet) out....exposed for all to see. Those 30-40 seconds exposed for each round (up to a minute with crowded tables) aren't doing the counter any favors, as the clock runs in this "race". But playing heads up the player can wiz through these rounds, 10 seconds per round or faster, getting through the favorable shoe, and out the door quicker. Less exposure time. :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Also answering "no" to the question "do you continue to play heads up if the count is negative or marginal" means you may have started to play negative counts and then discontinued if the count became heavily negative. Answering "no" to this question does not necessarily mean you are not to play marginal counts (the "no" is applied to discontinuing to play negative counts"). Reading comprehension is obviously not your strong suit.

---

Nobody can comprehend the explanation you wrote above.

Just to be clear, when I asked "Do you continue to play negative or marginal counts", and you answered "No",
you didn't rule out playing all negative counts?

Oh so as I gave a little insight into my view on heads up (above), I forgot to state what I really set out to say. Because of the benefits mentioned, when I am playing heads up, I will play into the neutral and negative counts a little bit further than I normally would. My exit is a little less aggressive on negative counts. I am not going to play through a whole shoe of negative counts, but I will give it a couple extra rounds to see if the count flips.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

You are wasting your time, tableplay. These guys read what they want to read, NOT what is written. Coach belly is a master at twisting everything around trying to create a "gottch ya" moment. He is a mater at baiting people....a 'masterbater'. :rolleyes:

For what it's worth, while I am not answering for tableplay, I do things a little differently when it comes to heads up play.

Second and probably more important is that I do exit aggressively on negative counts. Wong out.

---

Agreed, I am going to ignore him from now on. thanks for the advice. Of course you exit aggressively on negative counts. Only coach belly thinks a player should sit through big negative counts and lose their money (and that people that don't are frauds).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

We'd need a randomly chosen polygraph operator giving three sets of identical tests throughout a day, or three randomly chosen polygraph operators giving the same test three times one day. This would be an effort to take initial stress or variance out of the equation. Since I'm the one being challenged, if I fail, I reimburse the challenger for the polygraph costs. If I pass, I do not.

---

I'll need access to the information to formulate the questions.

I haven't been able to access the site, but there's time to figure that out. Is there a direct link?

In the meantime, we should be able to work out the city, date and times. What city, date and time do you require?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Only coach belly thinks a player should sit through big negative counts and lose their money (and that people that don't are frauds).

---

There's the lie. I never said that or anything like that, I've made few or no statements regarding playing strategy.

I've asked questions about heads-up strategy, some of which you deliberately answered fraudulently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kewlJ

Second and probably more important is that I do exit aggressively on negative counts. Wong out. When you do this playing heads up, the game comes to a complete halt, as there is no one left to play. That draws attention, which I try to avoid. As you exit, you can feel the dealer and sometimes pit, watching you walk away.

---

This was explained earlier, and is a scenario that I understand.

I followed up with the question...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

How many times can you walk away from negative counts, only to return to play heads-up with a new shoe...without getting made, backed-off or flat-betted?

---

This was the answer...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

36

---

Isn't that a deliberately fraudulent answer?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

We'd need a randomly chosen polygraph operator giving three sets of identical tests throughout a day, or three randomly chosen polygraph operators giving the same test three times one day. This would be an effort to take initial stress or variance out of the equation. Since I'm the one being challenged, if I fail, I reimburse the challenger for the polygraph costs. If I pass, I do not.

---

I'll need access to the information to formulate the questions.

I haven't been able to access the site, but there's time to figure that out. Is there a direct link?

In the meantime, we should be able to work out the city, date and times. What city, date and time do you require?

---

I would suggest Los Angeles, as there should be enough operators, and Dan could be present so as to make it a party. Probably film the event while we're at it. Washington D.C. would be a reasonable second choice, since operators should be plentiful.

Will this be an officially licensed polygraph examiner? If so there is a problem. California does not license polygraph examiners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

I would suggest Los Angeles, as there should be enough operators, and Dan could be present so as to make it a party. Probably film the event while we're at it. Washington D.C. would be a reasonable second choice, since operators should be plentiful.

---

I asked for requirements, you gave suggestions.

I'll suggest the obvious...how about Vegas? I think that will be a better party. Any objection?

Polygraph examiners are licensed in Nevada.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by coach belly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

I would suggest Los Angeles, as there should be enough operators, and Dan could be present so as to make it a party. Probably film the event while we're at it. Washington D.C. would be a reasonable second choice, since operators should be plentiful.

---

I asked for requirements, you gave suggestions.

I'll suggest the obvious...how about Vegas? I think that will be a better party. Any objection?

---

My concern is that Washington D.C. has a larger pool from which to randomly draw examiners. California probably doesn't license them because it's the most scientifically progressive state and considers it junk science. Same as why they're not admissible in court.

Check and see how many operators are in Nevada versus D.C. I'd rather go with the higher quality pool of operators, which I suspect is in D.C. Also, questions will obviously be limited to what is specifically claimed on the www.IntegritySports archived site, claimed on this forum, or general, such as "Are you ahead lifetime gambling?" or "Are you ahead lifetime sports gambling?"

Obviously, I'm not going to discuss other people, with the exception of the "Did you work for Billy Walters?" That was mentioned on this forum and is fair game.

Actually Nevada uses polygraph for all sorts of reasons including police and parental and abuse cases. Since you travel frequently to Vegas and there are plenty of polygraph companies here I am sure a test in Vegas will be easily accessible. I also think the costs will be lower in Vegas. Redietz just how often are you in Washington? More often than I go to Tony's office which is now some 250 miles from where I live?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

I'd rather go with the higher quality pool of operators, which I suspect is in D.C.

---

I'm not concerned with the quality pool of operators, you should do fine in any location.

I'm more interested in the pool of witnesses that would attend, so LV would be my choice. Do you object?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Also, questions will obviously be limited to what is specifically claimed on the www.IntegritySports archived site, claimed on this forum, or general, such as "Are you ahead lifetime gambling?" or "Are you ahead lifetime sports gambling?"

Obviously, I'm not going to discuss other people, with the exception of the "Did you work for Billy Walters?" That was mentioned on this forum and is fair game.

---

Agreed...but I'll need a link to the website to see what was claimed. I haven't been able to access the site through the wayback machine.

Can you help with any links?

I prefer Washington D.C. for two reasons. First, if any city is going to have polygraph operators vulnerable to the vagaries of casino execs, it would be Las Vegas. And at 35K a year or less (the average salary for an operator), anyone with cash can influence an operator. So I'd rather step outside the bounds of Nevada. Second, D.C. has the Library of Congress, and I need to try to track down a copy of the 1984 Who's Who in Sports Gambling to at least photograph the cover and my page. I think a stop there would be helpful.

So I'm going to stick with Washington D.C. as the locale. It will be a pain for me to get there, and it won't be cheap, but it sidesteps the Nevada anti-AP issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redietz

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LarryS

he is an investment advisor as per one web description calling sports betting "investments". He is involved in "investments"....so I guess he sells investment advice.

---

Why, LarryS, as such a cogent and honest guy, I'd expect you to explain that you stumbled onto that particular line while checking the IntegritySports.com website on the wayback machine from, what, 1996? A web archived address that I gave you. And, as a cogent and honest guy, you of course included all of the details from that site regarding what had been accomplished, and my offers on that site to take polygraphs to back up every word, along with the list of published results from "Tipsters or Gypsters?" stretching a dozen years. LarryS, did you fail to mention that? Why, for shame. Not very cogent and honest of you.

This is why it's pointless to deal with these people. LarryS unveils some sarcasm regarding a 25-year-old website line, fails to mention anything else about what's on the site, fails to mention that I gave everyone that website address, and decides his definition of "investment" supersedes a dictionary definition. Moreover, he doesn't explain the origin of the line because people might read everything on the archived site and discover something more impressive than LarryS.

The site is available via the wayback machine. It's IntegritySports.com. I stand by every single word on that site, and I'll still take a polygraph to back it all up.

---

wow how many times can you remind us about some publication tipsters or gypsters.
I totally believe that you and others have good 3-6 month stretches...even amazing 3-6 month stretches over a period of 20-30 years.

I amsure you can provide articles or contest wins postings . And I am sure you arent going to provide data from the extended periods where you lost money.

the true elite of sports gambling quietly make their money and dont sell picks. Billy walters accumulated his wealth without being an "investment councilor" And they certainly dont come to websites and tryto convince nameless faceless people that they are living a good life from betting sports. They dont give a shit.

So I have no doubt you can pass a polygraph regarding some good or great stretches in your betting life.

can you pass a poly that asks if 90percent of your net worth is from betting sports? 80 percent,? 70 percent? 30 percent?

But a few articles and a few contest wins do not make me think that strictly from sports bets you have supported a family, and have a 401k for your retirement large enough to live on for 20 years.

And if you do, I have no idea what part of that came from any day job you might have had. And selling sports picks at one point in your life could have created some wealth. Or from other day jobs.

I believe there are articles about you....but articles are a snapshot in time.

The McCusker Report (aka "Tipsters or Gypsters?") published multi-year records, so you could check the back page and find someone's five-year (or more) records.

And I guess I get to mention again that I worked for Billy Walters, so I think I know a bit more about him than you do.

You guys are all the same. You retreat to "do you have a 401K to support you for 20 years?" when you're faced with someone who actually wins. Alan thumbs his nose at kewlJ's income with his pension comments. This isn't about having a 401K. This is about winning. Winning at gambling. Any idiot from a wealthy family can jam their way into pharmacy school or law school and have a 401K. Standard of living is no arbiter of knowing what you're talking about. To me, knowing what you're talking about is "living a good life." And telling the truth. And putting your actual name to what you say.

The sum total of what LarryS said: no records, no polygraphs, no industry reputation is good enough to be convincing to LarryS. LOL. So what? We all knew that. We were just hoping you'd baldly spell it out for the civilians in the audience.

I don't thumb my nose at kewlj's income. I just have to point out that my full time career was a lot more lucrative than his full time career.

By the way I am very concerned about how corporations replaced pensions with 401ks because soon a generation of 401k retirees will start to realize that those $200,000 and $300,000 accounts won't last very long. We are going to face a retiree income crisis ten years from now.

I've been active in my union since 1972 and for a short time I was a union local president in NYC. I dread what's coming and American workers will soon regret that they left the union movement in droves during the 1980s.

I'm also grateful that I've been part of AFTRA and now SAG-AFTRA for all these years.

A question about IntegritySports.Com -- WHY did you take it down?

You won't find my original site moredeals.Com because me and my partners sold it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan Mendelson

I don't thumb my nose at kewlj's income. I just have to point out that my full time career was a lot more lucrative than his full time career.

By the way I am very concerned about how corporations replaced pensions with 401ks because soon a generation of 401k retirees will start to realize that those $200,000 and $300,000 accounts won't last very long. We are going to face a retiree income crisis ten years from now.

I've been active in my union since 1972 and for a short time I was a union local president in NYC. I dread what's coming and American workers will soon regret that they left the union movement in droves during the 1980s.

I'm also grateful that I've been part of AFTRA and now SAG-AFTRA for all these years.

---

I agree with you on this one—my generation simply doesn’t have enough retirement savings, and people will wind up working until they are 75.