Printable View
Just an experiment: I shuffled a deck of playing cards then dealt myself five. I did this about 25 times. Rarely I dealt myself more than a pair.
I play 25 hands on a video poker machine and amazingly I might get a straight or a flush, and frequently two pair.
It makes me wonder. Try it yourself before commenting.
The same with teaching VP programs you can download on your computer. I once drew a high pair w/3 to the royal. When I chose 3/royal a warning screen flashed to let me know that wasn't the mathematical best choice. I overrode the program and hit the royal! I have never forgotten that event, and playing in the real casino world has convinced me it's a pseudo random generator controlled place. I don't care what the ap'ers say on this forum- math cannot replace luck.
Odds of all dealt hands here:Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewG
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poke...rd_poker_hands
Slingshot, you are 1000% correct. Luck trumps skill. Skill keeps you in the game and gives you a much better chance but no amount of skill will replace the luck involved in drawing or hitting a royal or a 4OAK. To have a winning session you absolutely must connect on a royal or have more than your fair share of 4OAK's. Grinding your way to a winning session with only flushes and full houses will not get you to the winners circle. Simply can't be done.Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
I'll ask this again. Two of us are dealt Ah, Kh, Qh, Jh, 6c. We both toss the 6 but one draws 5d and the other draws 10h. Who's luckier? Most of you will say the guy that got the 10h. But why? Just because one result pays and the other doesn't? Both cards had the exact same odds to appear.
Surely you jest. I'll take the 10h while you ponder the mysteries of the universe.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
The "luck" lies within the deal and the draw, and how they relate. Those four initial cards were lucky to get in and of itself, based on the mathematical odds of getting them on a deal. The fact that the poor slob who drew a higher mathematically probable (based on the number of remaining non-paying cards in the deck)1-in-47 non-royal card lost and the player who drew a 1-in-47 chance royal card won big, is called good luck.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
And luck cannot replace math. Eventually luck runs out, but the math never does. Luck IS just math, it's called variance.Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
When you get lucky or unlucky in any situation in life it's just variance and odds. That's why some people seem to get luckier than others over and over in life they just happen to keep putting them self in good situations. It's all a numbers game.
Everything averages out one guy gets unlucky his entire life no matter what he does, loses his job, gets hit by a car, loses a finger etc, meanwhile another guy finds A multimillion-dollar painting at the Thrift Shop, happens to meet a supermodel that likes him, invest in the right stock etc.
The dude who drew the 5d is luckier (assumes $1 denom, 5 coin 9/6 DDB)- he doesn't have to worry about management scrutiny for too much winning (i.e. getting 86'ed) nor does he have to fill out a W2G ;:).Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
I once held a pair of tens and at the instant I hit the draw button I seen the 3-Card Royal in the hand so had to live with the conequences. Out jumped ten-ten to make quads. As you can see, sling, I've never forgotten that event. I got lucky as hell on a bad move. But I still don't hold a pair of tens over a 3-Card Royal.Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
By your logic making the wrong move causes good luck and making the right move causes bad luck. The truth is you can't control luck. It just happens whether its bad or good. But you can go ahead and stick in a pin it it if you want to. Oh, and play the lottery. Just takes luck, right?
I was trying to make a point. It is that video poker games give me the appearance of not being random at all. In fact in all the years I've played cards I've never had five cards in my hand that made a royal flush but I've had my fair share of royals on machines. Likewise I've never had cards in my hand that made a straight flush, nor have I ever been dealt cards that were four to the royal. Yet, these happen in video poker.
Mr Crimm I would not hold a pair of tens which is a non paying hand when there is three to the royal. Those two other royal cards if paired would be at least a paying hand. Holding TT requires that you at least draw another T or another pair.
I play a thousand hands per hour at video poker. At a kitchen table with a live deck what are you seeing, 30 or 40 hands an hour?Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewG
I've been playing with decks of cards for forty years. I've never had a royal or even four to the royal with a deck of cards. I might get four to the royal two or three times during a casino trip.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmI play a thousand hands per hour at video poker. At a kitchen table with a live deck what are you seeing, 30 or 40 hands an hour?Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewG
You're not really giving us enough information. 40 years is meaningless it's important to know how many hours. How many hours per week do you play poker on what game are you playing? If you put in enough time over that 40 years it seems highly unlikely you've never gotten 4 to the royal. As Mickey pointed out already the number of hands you are playing with cards versus a video poker machine are significant. One hour of video poker play equals over 30 hours of Live play. So it can take you thousands of hours to get a royal flush. Even if you played a hundred thousand hands with live cards very possible for you not to have gotten a royal flush. Video poker machines are even more random than a hand Shuffle.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewGI've been playing with decks of cards for forty years. I've never had a royal or even four to the royal with a deck of cards. I might get four to the royal two or three times during a casino trip.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmI play a thousand hands per hour at video poker. At a kitchen table with a live deck what are you seeing, 30 or 40 hands an hour?Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewG
That's NOT my logic. I've studied the holds, practiced with the programs before. Three to the royal has a chance to make 14 hands. A high card with a suited 10 has the possibility of quads with either card-Ive hit 4 10s before.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmI once held a pair of tens and at the instant I hit the draw button I seen the 3-Card Royal in the hand so had to live with the conequences. Out jumped ten-ten to make quads. As you can see, sling, I've never forgotten that event. I got lucky as hell on a bad move. But I still don't hold a pair of tens over a 3-Card Royal.Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
By your logic making the wrong move causes good luck and making the right move causes bad luck. The truth is you can't control luck. It just happens whether its bad or good. But you can go ahead and stick in a pin it it if you want to. Oh, and play the lottery. Just takes luck, right?
I've played multi-millions of hands of video poker. I've hit quads the same way you have more than one time. Twice I've hit 3 royals within four hours. I've gone a quarter million hands without a royal. I've hit royals every way you can, including throwing the whole hand away and making a royal. I once made 4 deuces and on the very next hand made 4 deuces again. I've gone 4400 games between quads.Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshotThat's NOT my logic. I've studied the holds, practiced with the programs before. Three to the royal has a chance to make 14 hands. A high card with a suited 10 has the possibility of quads with either card-Ive hit 4 10s before.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmI once held a pair of tens and at the instant I hit the draw button I seen the 3-Card Royal in the hand so had to live with the conequences. Out jumped ten-ten to make quads. As you can see, sling, I've never forgotten that event. I got lucky as hell on a bad move. But I still don't hold a pair of tens over a 3-Card Royal.Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
By your logic making the wrong move causes good luck and making the right move causes bad luck. The truth is you can't control luck. It just happens whether its bad or good. But you can go ahead and stick in a pin it it if you want to. Oh, and play the lottery. Just takes luck, right?
On your hand the probability of making 4 tens on the draw is 1 in 16,215. Same with making 4 aces from it. It will happen to everybody if they play long enough.
Sling, there are some forces going on in your head. Confirmation bias. Negative reinforcement. Selective memory. To name a few.
Ignore my comment about the many years of playing cards. Just look at my initial post.
I shuffled a deck of playing cards then dealt myself five. I did this about 25 times. Rarely I dealt myself more than a pair.
I play 25 hands on a video poker machine and amazingly I might get a straight or a flush, and frequently two pair.
Now, please get a deck of cards and shuffle and deal 25 hands. Compare that to the first 25 hands you play on a video poker machine. Report back.
This site attracts 'em. I tell you what.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewG
I have a few comments and a question:
I consider myself as having had better-than-average luck in video poker and life, and even much better-than-average luck on certain things. In short, this has contributed to my being a clear over-achiever in most things I've done or attempted to do. If you knew me as a teenager, you'd have pegged me as someone who did not have much of a future.
That all changed, of course, starting when the Govt. got their hands on me. Best thing that could've ever happen. And while the majority of the assholes I went to Jr. High and High School with have been saddled with ex-wives and miserable/failed relationships, my wife and I celebrated our 41st wedding anniversary yesterday and today.
My question: is my long and happy marriage the result of some sort of an algorithm of numbers that says "some people HAVE to make it....or is it just simple good fortune"?
In order to answer that question correctly one would have to know if your wife possesses all of her faculties or not.;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
That's fucking brutal Mickey.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
By the math it's about 50/50 you will get a pair or higher in your first five cards.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewG
Happy Anniversary! From all I read the past 10+ years, you picked a good one!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Well-my final reply to all this. I'm playing artt-5¢-50¢. I lose all three lower demons and on 50¢ I make one of these "delusional" plays and come up with "only" 2 pair or trips. So what? Well, all my previous losses are wiped out, plus I have an extra 5 credits. So what?? Well, I now have more chances to either win or prolong the game to have even more chances. ( works great on free play!). And my selective memory of previous successes causes my denial of "reality".Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmI've played multi-millions of hands of video poker. I've hit quads the same way you have more than one time. Twice I've hit 3 royals within four hours. I've gone a quarter million hands without a royal. I've hit royals every way you can, including throwing the whole hand away and making a royal. I once made 4 deuces and on the very next hand made 4 deuces again. I've gone 4400 games between quads.Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshotThat's NOT my logic. I've studied the holds, practiced with the programs before. Three to the royal has a chance to make 14 hands. A high card with a suited 10 has the possibility of quads with either card-Ive hit 4 10s before.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
On your hand the probability of making 4 tens on the draw is 1 in 16,215. Same with making 4 aces from it. It will happen to everybody if they play long enough.
Sling, there are some forces going on in your head. Confirmation bias. Negative reinforcement. Selective memory. To name a few.
That's funny max!Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPenIn order to answer that question correctly one would have to know if your wife possesses all of her faculties or not.;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
But what I'm getting at is, there are certain things in life where the odds are really stacked against happening, but because of determination and hard work, you can overcome them. And THAT is exactly what occurred with the four years I played my play strategy. It is also what would occur to anyone else who approached VP in precisely the same manner. No it can't be supported with the math, but it did occur....and given the same circumstances it would happen again. Good luck cannot be predicted, but it can be prepared for. I'm a master of that.
Great, so I guess you quit your day job and are playing VP for a living.Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshotWell-my final reply to all this. I'm playing artt-5¢-50¢. I lose all three lower demons and on 50¢ I make one of these "delusional" plays and come up with "only" 2 pair or trips. So what? Well, all my previous losses are wiped out, plus I have an extra 5 credits. So what?? Well, I now have more chances to either win or prolong the game to have even more chances. ( works great on free play!). And my selective memory of previous successes causes my denial of "reality".Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmI've played multi-millions of hands of video poker. I've hit quads the same way you have more than one time. Twice I've hit 3 royals within four hours. I've gone a quarter million hands without a royal. I've hit royals every way you can, including throwing the whole hand away and making a royal. I once made 4 deuces and on the very next hand made 4 deuces again. I've gone 4400 games between quads.Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
On your hand the probability of making 4 tens on the draw is 1 in 16,215. Same with making 4 aces from it. It will happen to everybody if they play long enough.
Sling, there are some forces going on in your head. Confirmation bias. Negative reinforcement. Selective memory. To name a few.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerThat's funny max!Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPenIn order to answer that question correctly one would have to know if your wife possesses all of her faculties or not.;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
But what I'm getting at is, there are certain things in life where the odds are really stacked against happening, but because of determination and hard work, you can overcome them. And THAT is exactly what occurred with the four years I played my play strategy. It is also what would occur to anyone else who approached VP in precisely the same manner. No it can't be supported with the math, but it did occur....and given the same circumstances it would happen again. Good luck cannot be predicted, but it can be prepared for. I'm a master of that.
Like mickey, I've seen the light. I took Rob's words above to heart, drove to Cherokee this morning, and used ARTT to make 75K in just under six hours. I didn't want anyone to notice me using a host, so I cleverly drove home, tagged my garage, and will drive back tonight.
All this time, all these years, I've been using expertise acquired over decades. I realize now that hard work (is that measured in calories or time -- should I use a fitbit or a time clock?), determination (I have oodles of that), and being prepared for good luck are what matter.
This professional gambling schtick just got a whole lot easier. I owe it all to Rob. Thanks, buddy!
I've also learned from Rob that being CIA-slick is the way to go. No W2G's (I bribed the Cherokee), no credit card gasoline or food receipts (I travel with cash), and no tax burden. No phone records. If anybody asks, I was at the library, studying football. Even my girlfriend and neighbors don't know. Plus Cherokee let me borrow a vp machine so I can practice at home for three or four months. The faster you play, the more you win.
Ummm, if anybody asks, I made all of this up because anybody doing it would be breaking a few laws (pssst, it's all really true, but I won't verify that for a couple of years - you know, statutes of limitations).
See you guys later. I'm off to...the library. Yeah, the library. That's the ticket.
Amen!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmI've played multi-millions of hands of video poker. I've hit quads the same way you have more than one time. Twice I've hit 3 royals within four hours. I've gone a quarter million hands without a royal. I've hit royals every way you can, including throwing the whole hand away and making a royal. I once made 4 deuces and on the very next hand made 4 deuces again. I've gone 4400 games between quads.Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshotThat's NOT my logic. I've studied the holds, practiced with the programs before. Three to the royal has a chance to make 14 hands. A high card with a suited 10 has the possibility of quads with either card-Ive hit 4 10s before.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
On your hand the probability of making 4 tens on the draw is 1 in 16,215. Same with making 4 aces from it. It will happen to everybody if they play long enough.
Sling, there are some forces going on in your head. Confirmation bias. Negative reinforcement. Selective memory. To name a few.
What is artt?
It's a betting progression system Ron Singer created for video poker. He can provide you with more details if he wants. He said he made $375,000 using it IIRC. Most people, including myself, are quite skeptical of this system.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewG
Redietz has a "girlfriend" at his age?
Embarrassing.
Nope. I won using the Singer Play Strategy. ARTT (advanced romp-thru-town strategy) was developed as a less complicated alternate for the many, many players who wanted something from me they could actually play (not everyone has the intellectual capacity I have).Quote:
Originally Posted by tableplayIt's a betting progression system Ron Singer created for video poker. He can provide you with more details if he wants. He said he made $375,000 using it IIRC. Most people, including myself, are quite skeptical of this system.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewG
While a statement like that might piss a few of the losers here off, I'll set them straight on another hate-filled/confused/envious reality.
Since I'm not cowardly enough to have ever hid my real name under the guise of some anonymous poster ever since I identified myself and my full life's history on my legendary site VP Truth.com in Jan. of 2000, there are plenty of lesser folk in the gambling world who would rather see me 6 feet under. Only problem is....I'll outlive most of them, even at my age.
But the day will come when I RIP...and IN PEACE it will surely be. You see, I've led a life outside the realm of the typical "professional gambler" which begins with having had a very successful professional working career BEFORE entering the world of professional gambling....and the whole ball of wax was always bolstered by an even more successful family life. You don't see this stuff every day.
As such, the extraordinary life I've had--including having devised a winning VP "system" that remains outside the comprehension limits of most common folk, and the money I made from exploiting a VP computer flaw that no one else realized until several lesser individuals showed they didn't possess the ability or understanding to follow thru on it in an intelligent manner--will only be seen as incredible and truly memorable by my family and a few very close friends who truly know me, while the rest of the outside world will mark my passing as an unremarkable event. And I am 110% OK with every bit of that.
Since when does "many many players" mean only one person? Namely Slingshot.
Seriously Rob, nobody, except for maybe the named above, is buying into your shtick. Give it up.
"-will only be seen as incredible and truly memorable by my family and a few very close friends who truly know me, while the rest of the outside world will mark my passing as an unremarkable event."
When the passing of Mr. Singer takes place, it will not be an unremarkable event not by a long shot. Descriptions of your forum life may not be flattering. Most likely things said like, that guy was an insecure AP wannabe, a real pain in the ass who told plenty of fairy tales. I guess it will be felt in the same way "but unspoken" as many conservatives do of the passing of ways and means chairman Rep Elijah Cummings this morning.
You and Mickey don't have the brains or comprehension to play the Single Play Strategy.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfAmen!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmI've played multi-millions of hands of video poker. I've hit quads the same way you have more than one time. Twice I've hit 3 royals within four hours. I've gone a quarter million hands without a royal. I've hit royals every way you can, including throwing the whole hand away and making a royal. I once made 4 deuces and on the very next hand made 4 deuces again. I've gone 4400 games between quads.Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
On your hand the probability of making 4 tens on the draw is 1 in 16,215. Same with making 4 aces from it. It will happen to everybody if they play long enough.
Sling, there are some forces going on in your head. Confirmation bias. Negative reinforcement. Selective memory. To name a few.
Elijah Cummings, who I mentioned in two post back I stated the wrong committee, that he chaired He was chairman of oversight, not the ways and means which is chaired by Richie Neal of Mass.
My brain won't allow me to trick itself into believing in a betting system that doesn't work. If his system was actually a winning system.... you better believe I could learn it, especially if it's based on the fact that the machines are not random(random in a way that no human being could possibly predict). If it's a systems based on gut feelings and speculation while using some kind of Martingale(or whatever) and duness theory I believe it would be impossible for anyone to learn it exactly like he believes it to. I guarantee you I could learn his system if there were set rules. I could even adapt to some gut feeling dueness bulshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshotYou and Mickey don't have the brains or comprehension to play the Single Play Strategy.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfAmen!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
You believe it actually works, but, if I recall correctly, Rob said you can't even completely comprehend it and you do it wrong. You should be making a bunch of f****** money if it works but from what I understand you just cock f*** around I'm small levels after all these years. If I thought something really worked as you do... I have to assume you're the one with no brains. Either A: haven't figured out it doesn't work yet, OR B: Haven't figured out how to f****** rape the casinos by now. If it works the system would allow you 24/7 access to tens of thousands of machines all over the world. And all you have to do is go sit your fat ass in a few seats all day whenever you get a hair up that ass. Not to mention, you would have virtually almost zero Heat doing this. Sure, there might be some oddball situation where some idiot manager freaks out cuz your winning too much. Big deal, just made a bunch of money you have thousands of other casinos to operate from. I'm not even going explain all the money you could make from FreePlay alone.
You must ask yourself... if Rob had a winning system why would he abandon that in search of a machine glitch that could potentially land him in jail and cause all kinds of problems and even get sued civilly, when he could have simply just continue making shit tons of money off of his system without any grief?
Until somebody can prove to me there's some kind of predictable pattern or a detectable non-randomness in the video poker games available to us there's zero chance I'll ever believe it's a winning system. I do believe it's possible to play a while using a Martingale/dueness system and come out ahead do to getting lucky on higher bets made.
Redietz, you're pulling the same bullshit as KJ. I've never endorsed Rob's video poker system which has nothing to do with the double up bug. But you and your worthless buddy, KJ keep pushing that bullshit. All you phony assholes are doing is trolling. You call others out for trolling, take offense at what they say, hold grudges because of it, but you two are front line trolls yourselves. So shove it up your ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerThat's funny max!Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPen
But what I'm getting at is, there are certain things in life where the odds are really stacked against happening, but because of determination and hard work, you can overcome them. And THAT is exactly what occurred with the four years I played my play strategy. It is also what would occur to anyone else who approached VP in precisely the same manner. No it can't be supported with the math, but it did occur....and given the same circumstances it would happen again. Good luck cannot be predicted, but it can be prepared for. I'm a master of that.
Like mickey, I've seen the light. I took Rob's words above to heart, drove to Cherokee this morning, and used ARTT to make 75K in just under six hours. I didn't want anyone to notice me using a host, so I cleverly drove home, tagged my garage, and will drive back tonight.
All this time, all these years, I've been using expertise acquired over decades. I realize now that hard work (is that measured in calories or time -- should I use a fitbit or a time clock?), determination (I have oodles of that), and being prepared for good luck are what matter.
This professional gambling schtick just got a whole lot easier. I owe it all to Rob. Thanks, buddy!
I've also learned from Rob that being CIA-slick is the way to go. No W2G's (I bribed the Cherokee), no credit card gasoline or food receipts (I travel with cash), and no tax burden. No phone records. If anybody asks, I was at the library, studying football. Even my girlfriend and neighbors don't know. Plus Cherokee let me borrow a vp machine so I can practice at home for three or four months. The faster you play, the more you win.
Ummm, if anybody asks, I made all of this up because anybody doing it would be breaking a few laws (pssst, it's all really true, but I won't verify that for a couple of years - you know, statutes of limitations).
See you guys later. I'm off to...the library. Yeah, the library. That's the ticket.
Redietz disdain for Rob Singer seems to have caused him to be at odds with me and you. Not once prior to all this has redietz ever said one thing remotely negative to me I don't even remember exactly what he said now I'm not even remotely bothered by it(it really wasn't anything out of line), however, I'm damn sure of the motivation and that motivation had to do with not being in the I totally hate Rob singer Club at the time.
I kind of get it, but perhaps in the opposite way, I don't like when people say bad things about people I like.
Actually, mickey, you did (briefly) expound on the idea that the free play garnered using "Singer's" style of play could push a player into the black. I had no qualms with you saying that, especially since I basically posted similar comments a couple of years prior to you joining this forum. There are definite advantages to playing like a martingale madman in terms of garnering comp attention. The voodoo style, in years past, may have boosted certain offers and created a helpful profile.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmRedietz, you're pulling the same bullshit as KJ. I've never endorsed Rob's video poker system which has nothing to do with the double up bug. But you and your worthless buddy, KJ keep pushing that bullshit. All you phony assholes are doing is trolling. You call others out for trolling, take offense at what they say, hold grudges because of it, but you two are front line trolls yourselves. So shove it up your ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Like mickey, I've seen the light. I took Rob's words above to heart, drove to Cherokee this morning, and used ARTT to make 75K in just under six hours. I didn't want anyone to notice me using a host, so I cleverly drove home, tagged my garage, and will drive back tonight.
All this time, all these years, I've been using expertise acquired over decades. I realize now that hard work (is that measured in calories or time -- should I use a fitbit or a time clock?), determination (I have oodles of that), and being prepared for good luck are what matter.
This professional gambling schtick just got a whole lot easier. I owe it all to Rob. Thanks, buddy!
I've also learned from Rob that being CIA-slick is the way to go. No W2G's (I bribed the Cherokee), no credit card gasoline or food receipts (I travel with cash), and no tax burden. No phone records. If anybody asks, I was at the library, studying football. Even my girlfriend and neighbors don't know. Plus Cherokee let me borrow a vp machine so I can practice at home for three or four months. The faster you play, the more you win.
Ummm, if anybody asks, I made all of this up because anybody doing it would be breaking a few laws (pssst, it's all really true, but I won't verify that for a couple of years - you know, statutes of limitations).
See you guys later. I'm off to...the library. Yeah, the library. That's the ticket.
The problem I have with your current style of commentary is that you, as you said, "don't endorse" the various voodoo systems. But you don't shoot them down, either. You stay low key and quiet regarding the voodoo these days, whereas a couple of years ago you would have addressed every nonsensical "Singer" post, like the one I just commented about.
The striking thing isn't that I bothered to comment on the "Singer" post about luck, determination, and all that. The striking thing, if you were to survey all the years and thousands of posts on this forum, is that mickey crimm did not.
Axel, I don't think I ever laid into you regarding much of anything. Sometimes people conflate my posts with some of kewlJ's. The only disagreement I remember with you was regarding people like Shackleford or Ferguson (Wong) not only publicizing sports betting plays, but acting as if they discovered them. You think it's okay; I think they should have their hands cut off. I don't really use angles like that, so it doesn't affect me much, but it does affect other people. Other than that, I think it's a little ironic or weird that you technically claim that you don't aspire to be on the prow of a public ship, but you have about 30,000 posts floating around the gambling ether. Not a big deal. To each his own.
I'm not going to go back and rehash the specific post because that would probably entail mentioning other members names I wish not too. I'm not the only one that notice something different and made a correlation. Perhaps it was all just coincidental I'll chalk it up to that and move on.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzActually, mickey, you did (briefly) expound on the idea that the free play garnered using "Singer's" style of play could push a player into the black. I had no qualms with you saying that, especially since I basically posted similar comments a couple of years prior to you joining this forum. There are definite advantages to playing like a martingale madman in terms of garnering comp attention. The voodoo style, in years past, may have boosted certain offers and created a helpful profile.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmRedietz, you're pulling the same bullshit as KJ. I've never endorsed Rob's video poker system which has nothing to do with the double up bug. But you and your worthless buddy, KJ keep pushing that bullshit. All you phony assholes are doing is trolling. You call others out for trolling, take offense at what they say, hold grudges because of it, but you two are front line trolls yourselves. So shove it up your ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
The problem I have with your current style of commentary is that you, as you said, "don't endorse" the various voodoo systems. But you don't shoot them down, either. You stay low key and quiet regarding the voodoo these days, whereas a couple of years ago you would have addressed every nonsensical "Singer" post, like the one I just commented about.
The striking thing isn't that I bothered to comment on the "Singer" post about luck, determination, and all that. The striking thing, if you were to survey all the years and thousands of posts on this forum, is that mickey crimm did not.
Axel, I don't think I ever laid into you regarding much of anything. Sometimes people conflate my posts with some of kewlJ's. The only disagreement I remember with you was regarding people like Shackleford or Ferguson (Wong) not only publicizing sports betting plays, but acting as if they discovered them. You think it's okay; I think they should have their hands cut off. I don't really use angles like that, so it doesn't affect me much, but it does affect other people. Other than that, I think it's a little ironic or weird that you technically claim that you don't aspire to be on the prow of a public ship, but you have about 30,000 posts floating around the gambling ether. Not a big deal. To each his own.
If you go back and read some of my posts, I too said Mike didn't discover various techniques, specifically the half-point parlay method. I was betting on those long before I ever knew Mike. I also don't like when anyone posts up TMI. I went on and on about killing the Golden Goose/ loose lips sink ships/ over on Wizard of Vegas and here. I'm probably more outspoken about that than anybody else on the forms I visit. I've been bitching about this stuff since Skip Hughes page came out in the 90s(now VPfree). I have specifically blamed Mike for indirectly helping kill certain plays by exposing them on a site both publicly and privately.
That's 30,000 post over many years. As I said before, I've met a lot of good people from these forums I made some good friends some who I suspect I'll know I'll be friends with for the rest of my life. It's also been beneficial for me and others financially. It's also a form of fun, entertainment and information. An approach to do various public things and I have turned all of them down. I don't have a blog, website, Instagram, Facebook what's a moniker of AW talking about Advantage play or trying to get my name out there. So I don't know how anyone can accuse me of "being on the prow of a public ship".
Redietz lost all credibility with his continual manufacturing of "facts" on the Gay Thread at WoV. That was a real eye opener. Redietz has no problem making up his own facts and pushing it as the truth. He holds it against Singer for all the mud thrown at him. But he has thrown just as much mud at Singer. He's exposed himself as just another troll getting his jollies off trolling others.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
Yes, I have made many a post against Singer's video poker system. Am I going to do it in perpetuity to placate you? No. The one thing about KJ's continual bashing of Singer that tired me was the redundancy of it. Over and over and over and over and....saying the same thing over and over again. Hey! Get a life, dammit.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzActually, mickey, you did (briefly) expound on the idea that the free play garnered using "Singer's" style of play could push a player into the black. I had no qualms with you saying that, especially since I basically posted similar comments a couple of years prior to you joining this forum. There are definite advantages to playing like a martingale madman in terms of garnering comp attention. The voodoo style, in years past, may have boosted certain offers and created a helpful profile.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmRedietz, you're pulling the same bullshit as KJ. I've never endorsed Rob's video poker system which has nothing to do with the double up bug. But you and your worthless buddy, KJ keep pushing that bullshit. All you phony assholes are doing is trolling. You call others out for trolling, take offense at what they say, hold grudges because of it, but you two are front line trolls yourselves. So shove it up your ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
The problem I have with your current style of commentary is that you, as you said, "don't endorse" the various voodoo systems. But you don't shoot them down, either. You stay low key and quiet regarding the voodoo these days, whereas a couple of years ago you would have addressed every nonsensical "Singer" post, like the one I just commented about.
The striking thing isn't that I bothered to comment on the "Singer" post about luck, determination, and all that. The striking thing, if you were to survey all the years and thousands of posts on this forum, is that mickey crimm did not.
Axel, I don't think I ever laid into you regarding much of anything. Sometimes people conflate my posts with some of kewlJ's. The only disagreement I remember with you was regarding people like Shackleford or Ferguson (Wong) not only publicizing sports betting plays, but acting as if they discovered them. You think it's okay; I think they should have their hands cut off. I don't really use angles like that, so it doesn't affect me much, but it does affect other people. Other than that, I think it's a little ironic or weird that you technically claim that you don't aspire to be on the prow of a public ship, but you have about 30,000 posts floating around the gambling ether. Not a big deal. To each his own.
KJ started trolling me because of my opinion that it's highly likely Rob put down the double up play. That was despicable. You backed him up and trolled me too. You are trolling me now. And you think I'm supposed to go after Singer? You and your buddy KJ are the assclowns now.
I'll chime in and say that, without a doubt, if axel wanted to learn my complicated play strategy, I believe he is one who absolutely could. This fact is one of the reasons why I wanted to explain how I exploited the double-up flaw to him first. I've never had any communication with him over the years outside of insults and mocking both ways. But it was during this time along with my reading many of his posts over time, that pointed me in his direction. It's not hard when you clear away all the nonsense.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfMy brain won't allow me to trick itself into believing in a betting system that doesn't work. If his system was actually a winning system.... you better believe I could learn it, especially if it's based on the fact that the machines are not random(random in a way that no human being could possibly predict). If it's a systems based on gut feelings and speculation while using some kind of Martingale(or whatever) and duness theory I believe it would be impossible for anyone to learn it exactly like he believes it to. I guarantee you I could learn his system if there were set rules. I could even adapt to some gut feeling dueness bulshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshotYou and Mickey don't have the brains or comprehension to play the Single Play Strategy.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
You believe it actually works, but, if I recall correctly, Rob said you can't even completely comprehend it and you do it wrong. You should be making a bunch of f****** money if it works but from what I understand you just cock f*** around I'm small levels after all these years. If I thought something really worked as you do... I have to assume you're the one with no brains. Either A: haven't figured out it doesn't work yet, OR B: Haven't figured out how to f****** rape the casinos by now. If it works the system would allow you 24/7 access to tens of thousands of machines all over the world. And all you have to do is go sit your fat ass in a few seats all day whenever you get a hair up that ass. Not to mention, you would have virtually almost zero Heat doing this. Sure, there might be some oddball situation where some idiot manager freaks out cuz your winning too much. Big deal, just made a bunch of money you have thousands of other casinos to operate from. I'm not even going explain all the money you could make from FreePlay alone.
You must ask yourself... if Rob had a winning system why would he abandon that in search of a machine glitch that could potentially land him in jail and cause all kinds of problems and even get sued civilly, when he could have simply just continue making shit tons of money off of his system without any grief?
Until somebody can prove to me there's some kind of predictable pattern or a detectable non-randomness in the video poker games available to us there's zero chance I'll ever believe it's a winning system. I do believe it's possible to play a while using a Martingale/dueness system and come out ahead do to getting lucky on higher bets made.
For clarity: I did not give up on playing SPS in favor of looking for some kind of vp machine bug. I searched for any such anomaly weekly as soon as each session ended, starting in Jan. 2000.
I also believe, and have always believed, that Nevada machines are on the up & up...at least as far as we're allowed to know. There would be no reason for me to have played my strategy for four years, or to be playing any method in subsequent years since 2009, if I really believed the machines were gaffed. And like others, I don't really know about other states' casinos or anywhere else, but my confidence lowers when it comes to Indian casinos and cruise ships.
After all the bashing how could you not say "Gay" Assclowns???Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
This thread is Gay.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmYes, I have made many a post against Singer's video poker system. Am I going to do it in perpetuity to placate you? No. The one thing about KJ's continual bashing of Singer that tired me was the redundancy of it. Over and over and over and over and....saying the same thing over and over again. Hey! Get a life, dammit.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzActually, mickey, you did (briefly) expound on the idea that the free play garnered using "Singer's" style of play could push a player into the black. I had no qualms with you saying that, especially since I basically posted similar comments a couple of years prior to you joining this forum. There are definite advantages to playing like a martingale madman in terms of garnering comp attention. The voodoo style, in years past, may have boosted certain offers and created a helpful profile.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
The problem I have with your current style of commentary is that you, as you said, "don't endorse" the various voodoo systems. But you don't shoot them down, either. You stay low key and quiet regarding the voodoo these days, whereas a couple of years ago you would have addressed every nonsensical "Singer" post, like the one I just commented about.
The striking thing isn't that I bothered to comment on the "Singer" post about luck, determination, and all that. The striking thing, if you were to survey all the years and thousands of posts on this forum, is that mickey crimm did not.
Axel, I don't think I ever laid into you regarding much of anything. Sometimes people conflate my posts with some of kewlJ's. The only disagreement I remember with you was regarding people like Shackleford or Ferguson (Wong) not only publicizing sports betting plays, but acting as if they discovered them. You think it's okay; I think they should have their hands cut off. I don't really use angles like that, so it doesn't affect me much, but it does affect other people. Other than that, I think it's a little ironic or weird that you technically claim that you don't aspire to be on the prow of a public ship, but you have about 30,000 posts floating around the gambling ether. Not a big deal. To each his own.
KJ started trolling me because of my opinion that it's highly likely Rob put down the double up play. That was despicable. You backed him up and trolled me too. You are trolling me now. And you think I'm supposed to go after Singer? You and your buddy KJ are the assclowns now.
No, I did not back him up. I was rooting for it to be true. I just think it's odds-against right now, given the historical posts with "Singer" discussing how illegal he thought it was. And the lack of any corroboration. If GWAE and Shackleford have zero interest, that may tell you something about the quality of the corroboration.
I get a kick out of your use of the word "trolling," as in "the bad man trolled me."
Your not going after Singer in your current incarnation is probably irrelevant, given the influx of WoVers on this site who can shoot him down and who don't really buy into his schtick. That's why I don't feel obliged to counter every dumbass post of "Singer's," whereas I did when he and Alan were waxing eloquent as part of your "confederacy of dunces" and there were no WoVers here. Mickey crimm staying silent on the voodoo isn't likely to result in much novice player damage these days. Five years ago, when it was Alan and "Singer" with stop losses and non-random machines and so on, that may not have been the case. That's where arci came in. Then me, after it was clear "Singer" had no blessed idea regarding sports betting, but seemed intent on pretending he did.
You do what you want, mickey. It's your legacy in print forever and a day. These posts will exist three hundred year from now.
This is what I don't like about you and KJ. You are now lobbying me to break an agreement I made with Rob on trolling each other. Hey, it would make you happy but I would look like shit for breaking an agreement. I've already stated that I do not endorse the Singer video poker system. Repeat, so you will get it thru your thick head, I do not endorse the Singer video poker system. His video poker system has nothing to do with the double up bug. Repeat, so you will get it thru your thick head, his video poker system has nothing to do with the double up bug.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmYes, I have made many a post against Singer's video poker system. Am I going to do it in perpetuity to placate you? No. The one thing about KJ's continual bashing of Singer that tired me was the redundancy of it. Over and over and over and over and....saying the same thing over and over again. Hey! Get a life, dammit.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
KJ started trolling me because of my opinion that it's highly likely Rob put down the double up play. That was despicable. You backed him up and trolled me too. You are trolling me now. And you think I'm supposed to go after Singer? You and your buddy KJ are the assclowns now.
No, I did not back him up. I was rooting for it to be true. I just think it's odds-against right now, given the historical posts with "Singer" discussing how illegal he thought it was. And the lack of any corroboration. If GWAE and Shackleford have zero interest, that may tell you something about the quality of the corroboration.
I get a kick out of your use of the word "trolling," as in "the bad man trolled me."
Your not going after Singer in your current incarnation is probably irrelevant, given the influx of WoVers on this site who can shoot him down and who don't really buy into his schtick. That's why I don't feel obliged to counter every dumbass post of "Singer's," whereas I did when he and Alan were waxing eloquent as part of your "confederacy of dunces" and there were no WoVers here. Mickey crimm staying silent on the voodoo isn't likely to result in much novice player damage these days. Five years ago, when it was Alan and "Singer" with stop losses and non-random machines and so on, that may not have been the case. That's where arci came in. Then me, after it was clear "Singer" had no blessed idea regarding sports betting, but seemed intent on pretending he did.
You do what you want, mickey. It's your legacy in print forever and a day. These posts will exist three hundred year from now.
The confederacy of dunces thing, and a lot of other things I said, was all about being in a troll war. I took it and dished it out. But I'm no longer in a troll war with Rob no matter how badly you want to see it again. As long as Rob holds up his end I will hold up my end. At least I can say I'm a man of my word.
Redietz, you are wasting your internet time trying to get me to break an agreement.
You're a liar redietz. You say you don't feel "obliged" to respond to what I post, but you in fact can't help yourself by doing exactly that. And my exposing you for soliciting me for money for your stupid "locks" did not change that a bit. When you started hating me years ago, it has never left your sleeve.
Yet....now that you see mickey has been able to think for himself and reason things out regarding one separate thing about me, you've decided the best way forward for your continuing hate is to attack him for that. You're also bolstered by the foolishness of kew. That shows pathetic weakness, which is viewed by many as disgusting. How much business do you expect to get around here when you act so childish?
Finally--your inexperience in REAL life is on exhibit by your making up the assertion that my posting regarding Kane and Nestor 5-6 years ago was "illegal activity" means I could not have done what I said. When someone's in the midst of covering something up and it suddenly appears as a topic in front of them, any surprised but astute individual immediately tries to steer the conversation in another direction as it pertains to him. You do what makes you feel comfortable.
Oh....guess where I learned that.
When someone finds the need to repeat their "supposed" credentials on a weekly basis ad nauseum, they are either trying to convince themselves or the people they keep repeating it to (including anonymous strangers)....in either case, it`s most likely bullshitQuote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Sounds like you're a miserable divorcee. Would've been tough to guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by KeystoneWhen someone finds the need to repeat their "supposed" credentials on a weekly basis ad nauseum, they are either trying to convince themselves or the people they keep repeating it to (including anonymous strangers)....in either case, it`s most likely bullshitQuote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
Sure Robby, sureQuote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerSounds like you're a miserable divorcee. Would've been tough to guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by KeystoneWhen someone finds the need to repeat their "supposed" credentials on a weekly basis ad nauseum, they are either trying to convince themselves or the people they keep repeating it to (including anonymous strangers)....in either case, it`s most likely bullshitQuote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
In Nov. 2020 Trump will Make Liberals Cry Again!
Maybe that'll help choke up the few that are on here.
I don't pay much attention to politics unless it's in my face. From what I have noticed, I have no idea who can beat him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
My wife isn't that political either, but what I have noticed at the beginning she really didn't have an opinion either way about Trump as president, she probably thought it was okay as a reality star/ whomever he was prior to being president, but some of the shows she watches like The View, news and whatever she reads in the papers or whatever magazines she might read has definitely swayed her into not liking him. Basically she thinks he's a douchebag not fit to be president.
But I have enough brains that I never had a losing year at video poker. How about you?Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshotYou and Mickey don't have the brains or comprehension to play the Single Play Strategy.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfAmen!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I was pulled out of losing at vp by two things: 4 royals and a decision to leave a certain casino. I didn't want to believe the numerous VP machines there were gaffed- that it was me. I then tried the experiment f playing 1 credit a hand and the results proved my suspicions.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmBut I have enough brains that I never had a losing year at video poker. How about you?Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshotYou and Mickey don't have the brains or comprehension to play the Single Play Strategy.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
Lets get real. You aren't a winner at VP, even by your own admissions!Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshotI was pulled out of losing at vp by two things: 4 royals and a decision to leave a certain casino. I didn't want to believe the numerous VP machines there were gaffed- that it was me. I then tried the experiment f playing 1 credit a hand and the results proved my suspicions.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmBut I have enough brains that I never had a losing year at video poker. How about you?Quote:
Originally Posted by slingshot
That's exactly what the TV liberals always try to do with their biases--get those who aren't much into politics to occasionally watch them spew their lies and twisted logic, then hope it's all they can remember come voting day. Same policy with college students, who almost never use their spare time to watch TV.Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfI don't pay much attention to politics unless it's in my face. From what I have noticed, I have no idea who can beat him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
My wife isn't that political either, but what I have noticed at the beginning she really didn't have an opinion either way about Trump as president, she probably thought it was okay as a reality star/ whomever he was prior to being president, but some of the shows she watches like The View, news and whatever she reads in the papers or whatever magazines she might read has definitely swayed her into not liking him. Basically she thinks he's a douchebag not fit to be president.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfI don't pay much attention to politics unless it's in my face. From what I have noticed, I have no idea who can beat him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
My wife isn't that political either, but what I have noticed at the beginning she really didn't have an opinion either way about Trump as president, she probably thought it was okay as a reality star/ whomever he was prior to being president, but some of the shows she watches like The View, news and whatever she reads in the papers or whatever magazines she might read has definitely swayed her into not liking him. Basically she thinks he's a douchebag not fit to be president.
The following is the best summary I've read by someone who was a lifelong Republican and is an international expert in the fields wherein Trump's financial murkiness lies. Note that this was before Syria and quid-pro-quo and all of the latest issues.
https://usatoday.com/story/opinion/2...mn/2013614001/
Also note: the comical part will come when some posters will attempt to impugn Tom Nichols expertise or American loyalties. And then likely claim to know more, citing their sources of Fox opinion broadcasts or some right wing blogs, than Nichols.
Great post, Red. The only problem is you posted it on a forum that uses the same "bully" techniques, half truths, etc., to exclude those who don't agree. We used to have a saying on our football team that applies to Trump: "His ass is grass!"Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfI don't pay much attention to politics unless it's in my face. From what I have noticed, I have no idea who can beat him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
My wife isn't that political either, but what I have noticed at the beginning she really didn't have an opinion either way about Trump as president, she probably thought it was okay as a reality star/ whomever he was prior to being president, but some of the shows she watches like The View, news and whatever she reads in the papers or whatever magazines she might read has definitely swayed her into not liking him. Basically she thinks he's a douchebag not fit to be president.
The following is the best summary I've read by someone who was a lifelong Republican and is an international expert in the fields wherein Trump's financial murkiness lies. Note that this was before Syria and quid-pro-quo and all of the latest issues.
https://usatoday.com/story/opinion/2...mn/2013614001/
Also note: the comical part will come when some posters will attempt to impugn Tom Nichols expertise or American loyalties. And then likely claim to know more, citing their sources of Fox opinion broadcasts or some right wing blogs, than Nichols.
2020: Make Liberals Cry Again
Only then will they come to realize and accept, similar to how the 2016 election made everyone understand the corruption of Hillary along with the sexual perversion of her moron husband and was a full and total rebuke to the racist policies of Obama, that Trump has been lied about more times than true Americans want.
Brace yourselves, libtards! You're running out of snowflake-infested safe spaces. And idiot Elija Cummings isn't now buried for no reason.....
The comical part is you posting up this bullshit, redietz. Nichols doesn't have an original thought but is definitely a student of the press. The article is typical lame brain idiocy from an anti-Trumper. Let's just take this one paragraph:Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolfI don't pay much attention to politics unless it's in my face. From what I have noticed, I have no idea who can beat him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.Singer
My wife isn't that political either, but what I have noticed at the beginning she really didn't have an opinion either way about Trump as president, she probably thought it was okay as a reality star/ whomever he was prior to being president, but some of the shows she watches like The View, news and whatever she reads in the papers or whatever magazines she might read has definitely swayed her into not liking him. Basically she thinks he's a douchebag not fit to be president.
The following is the best summary I've read by someone who was a lifelong Republican and is an international expert in the fields wherein Trump's financial murkiness lies. Note that this was before Syria and quid-pro-quo and all of the latest issues.
https://usatoday.com/story/opinion/2...mn/2013614001/
Also note: the comical part will come when some posters will attempt to impugn Tom Nichols expertise or American loyalties. And then likely claim to know more, citing their sources of Fox opinion broadcasts or some right wing blogs, than Nichols.
"Compulsive lying, fantastic and easily refuted claims, base insults and bizarre public meltdowns, however, are indeed signs of serious emotional problems. DONALD TRUMP has never been a reasonable man, but for two years he has gotten worse. He literally cannot tell the truth from a lie, he often seems completely unable to comprehend even basic information, and he flies off the handle in ways that would make most of us take our children to a pediatrician for evaluation."
And let's change it to this:
"Compulsive lying, fantastic and easily refuted claims, base insults and bizarre public meltdowns, however, are indeed signs of serious emotional problems. GEORGE WASHINGTON has never been a reasonable man, but for two years, he has gotten worse. He literally cannot tell the truth from a lie, he often seems completely unable to comprehend even basic information, and he flies off the handle in ways that would make most of us take our children to a pediatrician for evaluation."
Or you could insert ABRAHAM LINCOLN'S name or FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT'S name there, or any other president's name for that matter, instead of DONALD TRUMP OR GEORGE WASHINGTON. Because, although we remember them as great presidents today, when they were in office this kind of trash was also written about them. Lincoln even jailed journalists for writing this kind of trash about him. Of course you can't do that today.
Redietz, you and Sling are just showing yourselves for the simpletons you are.
Note: When republicans gained control of Congress in the early fifties they quickly passed term limits on the Presidency. They didn't want to run into a Roosevelt situation again. If not for that event Donald Trump would be a 4 term president.
Whaddya say, redietz/sling? Do you think Trump will hold on to the 75% of uranium we have left after Hillary sold off the 25% to the Russians? Do you think Hillary will ever be investigated for colluding with the Russians on the Steele dossier? How about this latest news that at Hillary’s request the Ukrainians tried to sabotage the 2016 Trump campaign. Do you think that is collusion with a foreign power?
The best thing I give Trump credit for is the Jerusalem/ Israel restoration- which is HUGE but is another subject. I don't think anyone else would have done that. The other is his trash slinging brought out other trashers which is where the Nichols report seems viable. There is NO offering out there. To me it means that though the libitards are horrible, Trump is coming down to their level. WHO is out there to bring America together again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmThe comical part is you posting up this bullshit, redietz. Nichols doesn't have an original thought but is definitely a student of the press. The article is typical lame brain idiocy from an anti-Trumper. Let's just take this one paragraph:Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by AxelWolf
The following is the best summary I've read by someone who was a lifelong Republican and is an international expert in the fields wherein Trump's financial murkiness lies. Note that this was before Syria and quid-pro-quo and all of the latest issues.
https://usatoday.com/story/opinion/2...mn/2013614001/
Also note: the comical part will come when some posters will attempt to impugn Tom Nichols expertise or American loyalties. And then likely claim to know more, citing their sources of Fox opinion broadcasts or some right wing blogs, than Nichols.
"Compulsive lying, fantastic and easily refuted claims, base insults and bizarre public meltdowns, however, are indeed signs of serious emotional problems. DONALD TRUMP has never been a reasonable man, but for two years he has gotten worse. He literally cannot tell the truth from a lie, he often seems completely unable to comprehend even basic information, and he flies off the handle in ways that would make most of us take our children to a pediatrician for evaluation."
And let's change it to this:
"Compulsive lying, fantastic and easily refuted claims, base insults and bizarre public meltdowns, however, are indeed signs of serious emotional problems. GEORGE WASHINGTON has never been a reasonable man, but for two years, he has gotten worse. He literally cannot tell the truth from a lie, he often seems completely unable to comprehend even basic information, and he flies off the handle in ways that would make most of us take our children to a pediatrician for evaluation."
Or you could insert ABRAHAM LINCOLN'S name or FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT'S name there, or any other president's name for that matter, instead of DONALD TRUMP OR GEORGE WASHINGTON. Because, although we remember them as great presidents today, when they were in office this kind of trash was also written about them. Lincoln even jailed journalists for writing this kind of trash about him. Of course you can't do that today.
Redietz, you and Sling are just showing yourselves for the simpletons you are.
Note: When republicans gained control of Congress in the early fifties they quickly passed term limits on the Presidency. They didn't want to run into a Roosevelt situation again. If not for that event Donald Trump would be a 4 term president.
I think it says a lot about mickey crimm that he thinks he knows more about Trump and Russia than Tom Nichols. If mickey crimm really believes that, more power to him, and God bless him.
Nichols is an extremely biased academic never Trumper 'foreign policy expert'. He actively encouraged the Iraq War that killed 4000 American Soldiers, wounded 35,000 American Soldiers, killed as many as 600,000 Iraqis, and it cost over 3 Trillion Dollars. And it's still costing us.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmThe comical part is you posting up this bullshit, redietz. Nichols doesn't have an original thought but is definitely a student of the press. The article is typical lame brain idiocy from an anti-Trumper. Let's just take this one paragraph:Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
"Compulsive lying, fantastic and easily refuted claims, base insults and bizarre public meltdowns, however, are indeed signs of serious emotional problems. DONALD TRUMP has never been a reasonable man, but for two years he has gotten worse. He literally cannot tell the truth from a lie, he often seems completely unable to comprehend even basic information, and he flies off the handle in ways that would make most of us take our children to a pediatrician for evaluation."
And let's change it to this:
"Compulsive lying, fantastic and easily refuted claims, base insults and bizarre public meltdowns, however, are indeed signs of serious emotional problems. GEORGE WASHINGTON has never been a reasonable man, but for two years, he has gotten worse. He literally cannot tell the truth from a lie, he often seems completely unable to comprehend even basic information, and he flies off the handle in ways that would make most of us take our children to a pediatrician for evaluation."
Or you could insert ABRAHAM LINCOLN'S name or FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT'S name there, or any other president's name for that matter, instead of DONALD TRUMP OR GEORGE WASHINGTON. Because, although we remember them as great presidents today, when they were in office this kind of trash was also written about them. Lincoln even jailed journalists for writing this kind of trash about him. Of course you can't do that today.
Redietz, you and Sling are just showing yourselves for the simpletons you are.
Note: When republicans gained control of Congress in the early fifties they quickly passed term limits on the Presidency. They didn't want to run into a Roosevelt situation again. If not for that event Donald Trump would be a 4 term president.
I think it says a lot about mickey crimm that he thinks he knows more about Trump and Russia than Tom Nichols. If mickey crimm really believes that, more power to him, and God bless him.
So if Tom Nichols was so wrong on Iraq maybe he's wrong on Trump too. Maybe Mickey Crimm does know more about Trump and Russia than him. Sometimes common sense trumps academics. But to just point to an opinion hit piece in an appeal to authority doesn't really advance the argument. My opinion....but I need to stay out of political discussions. Never very productive. Just gets mean. Sorry.
I figure Nichols knows more about Hillary and Russia than me. He probably knows a ton about the 145 million dollars that Russia sent to the Clinton Foundation. He knows about the Steele Dossier that Hillary paid 11 million for. He knows all about Hillary selling 25% of our uranium supply to Russia. He knows about Hillary getting the Ukrainians to sabotage the 2016 Trump campaign too. And you know who else knows about Hillary’s dealings with the Russians, redietz? Guess who that is, Mr. Lefty. THE RUSSIANS!!!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by redietzQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmThe comical part is you posting up this bullshit, redietz. Nichols doesn't have an original thought but is definitely a student of the press. The article is typical lame brain idiocy from an anti-Trumper. Let's just take this one paragraph:Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
"Compulsive lying, fantastic and easily refuted claims, base insults and bizarre public meltdowns, however, are indeed signs of serious emotional problems. DONALD TRUMP has never been a reasonable man, but for two years he has gotten worse. He literally cannot tell the truth from a lie, he often seems completely unable to comprehend even basic information, and he flies off the handle in ways that would make most of us take our children to a pediatrician for evaluation."
And let's change it to this:
"Compulsive lying, fantastic and easily refuted claims, base insults and bizarre public meltdowns, however, are indeed signs of serious emotional problems. GEORGE WASHINGTON has never been a reasonable man, but for two years, he has gotten worse. He literally cannot tell the truth from a lie, he often seems completely unable to comprehend even basic information, and he flies off the handle in ways that would make most of us take our children to a pediatrician for evaluation."
Or you could insert ABRAHAM LINCOLN'S name or FRANKLIN DELANO ROOSEVELT'S name there, or any other president's name for that matter, instead of DONALD TRUMP OR GEORGE WASHINGTON. Because, although we remember them as great presidents today, when they were in office this kind of trash was also written about them. Lincoln even jailed journalists for writing this kind of trash about him. Of course you can't do that today.
Redietz, you and Sling are just showing yourselves for the simpletons you are.
Note: When republicans gained control of Congress in the early fifties they quickly passed term limits on the Presidency. They didn't want to run into a Roosevelt situation again. If not for that event Donald Trump would be a 4 term president.
I think it says a lot about mickey crimm that he thinks he knows more about Trump and Russia than Tom Nichols. If mickey crimm really believes that, more power to him, and God bless him.
The Russians have all kinds of secrets about Hillary that they didn’t get to blackmail her with because she lost the election. So they are sitting on it for now. Damn, you lefties are either stupid or diabolical.
What evidence of Trump/Russia collusion has Nichols ever put up? Zilch. Zero. Nada. Hard to say if I know more about it than him. He is either stupid or diabolical because there was no Trump/Russia collusion. The Russians don't have anything on Trump. It's just a false narrative that liberals/never Trumper's push.Quote:
Originally Posted by redietz
A lot of people sweating bullets now that the investigation into the origins of the Russia Hoax has turned into a criminal investigation. This could only happen because Durham/Horowitz have seen evidence implicating people in criminal activity. Brennen, Clapper, Comey, McCabe, Strozk, Page and a host of others are are now shitting watermelon seeds over this investigation. They are now all lawyering up. The lawyers will get everything they have. LOL! Serves them right after all the misery they put other people through.
There are going to be indictments. Which one do you think will flip first to try and save their own skin?
Redietz, there is only two explanations for your pushing this false narrative by Tom Nicholls.
1. You stupidly believe all that Trump/Russia collusion bullshit which is going to be shown to be totally false and conjured up by anti-Trumpers.
2. You are diabolical and pushing the false narrative for political purposes.
Which one is it?